How Denver’s Northeast Park Hill community reduced youth violence by 75%

Northeast Park Hill, a Denver neighborhood, has a long history of violence^[1]. During Denver’s summer of violence in the early 1990s^[2], it was considered ground zero for gang conflict.

From the late 1990s through 2014, violent crime in Northeast Park Hill declined from its peak in the early ’90s but remained persistently higher than city averages. In 2016, Northeast Park Hill recorded 1,086 youth arrests per 100,000 young people^[3]. The arrest rate for the combination of the other 76 Denver neighborhoods was 513.

With a population of approximately 9,600, 19% of families in the neighborhood lived below the federal poverty line^[4], 39% of residents identified as Black, and 27% identified as Hispanic^[5].

Yet, Northeast Park Hill is also a community defined by collective action. In 2013, residents started organizing in response to a series of violent events^[6]. They laid the foundation for an emerging movement committed to rebuilding community safety.

Building on these community strengths, researchers at the University of Colorado Boulder’s Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence^[7] partnered with local leaders to implement Communities That Care^[8] in 2016. The program is a science-based prevention process designed to help communities use data, evidence and collective action to reduce youth violence.

As a sociologist and director of the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence^[9], my work examines the root causes of youth violence. I study how community-led, data-driven prevention efforts can reduce risk and build supports^[10] that help young people stay safe and connected. Working alongside leaders and residents in Northeast Park Hill, I’ve seen firsthand what’s possible and what their remarkable success can teach all of us.

A welcome change

After just five years, the youth arrest rate in Northeast Park Hill fell to 276 per 100,000 – a 75% reduction^[11].

This drop in youth arrests reflects a decades-long nationwide trend. Across the country as a whole, juvenile arrests peaked in 1996^[12] and then began a steady decline.

But not all neighborhoods benefited equally. To measure the impact of local prevention work in Northeast Park Hill, we compared its arrest rate to a carefully constructed “look-alike” community^[13] made up of similar Denver neighborhoods that did not receive the intervention. We found Northeast Park Hill saw a sharper and earlier decline than its comparison community – pointing to an impact beyond national trends and tied to the local interventions.

Impacts of youth violence

Youth violence is a major cause of harm.

This is especially true for urban communities^[14] that have endured decades of chronic disinvestment. That includes neglected infrastructure, deteriorating housing and long-standing environmental and health inequities. Such environments often lack the opportunities, resources and support^[15] that are essential for healthy youth development.

Young people in these neighborhoods are more likely to face increased exposure to violence and daily challenges associated with navigating violent communities^[16], such as witnessing shootings near their homes and schools. They also face ongoing experiences of marginalization and discrimination^[17]. Many young people move through daily life in a constant state of vigilance. Some youth withdraw, carry weapons for protection or turn to substances to cope with chronic anxiety.

Building a prevention infrastructure

As part of Communities That Care, the community formed a prevention coalition of approximately 25 members, known as Park Hill Strong^[18], to guide the work.

Three Black leaders, Troy Grimes^[19], Jonathan McMillan^[20] and Dane Washington Sr.^[21], who grew up in the neighborhood and experienced the violence of the 1990s firsthand, chaired the coalition.

Following the Communities That Care^[22] model, they began by creating a community profile. They used local data, including youth and parent surveys, and neighborhood indicators, such as access to safe parks, after-school programs and healthy foods. The data helped the coalition identify the biggest sources of risk and what protective supports were available in the community.

That data pointed to several factors that increase the likelihood of youth violence. Many youth felt disconnected from their community and had limited supervision or inconsistent support at home. The data also highlighted early and persistent problem behaviors among youth, including aggression and defiance, which can place young people on a pathway toward later violence.

The data also revealed protective supports to build on. It showed that opportunities for young people to participate in positive activities were limited. Community recognition of youths’ healthy and constructive contributions was also low — highlighting important areas for improvement.

Once the profile was complete, the coalition developed a community action plan describing the community prevention strategies^[23] the coalition would use to address their prioritized risk and protective factors.

Community-level prevention strategies

The coalition selected three community-level prevention strategies.

First, a youth-led media campaign called the Power of One (PO1)^[24] addressed the risk factor of low neighborhood attachment. The campaign challenged the idea that young people themselves are the cause of violence, instead highlighting how decades of redlining, concentrated poverty and limited access to quality schools and jobs have shaped the conditions they are navigating. The campaign also highlighted positive stories about young people and their communities. The Power of One has reached more than 3,000 youth and adults through social media and hosted six community block parties^[25].

Second, the coalition selected Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies, known as PATHS^[26]. This evidence-based program aims to reduce early and persistent problem behaviors. It was implemented in all three of the elementary schools in Northeast Park Hill. PATHS helps students learn social and emotional skills, including managing strong emotions by recognizing when they are feeling angry and using calming strategies before reacting. Strengthening these competencies is associated with lower rates of aggression^[27].

Third, pediatric health care providers identified youth at risk for carrying out future serious violence through the violence, injury protection and risk screening tool^[28]. Youth identified as high or medium risk after completing a 14-item screening tool that assesses violence and victimization history and other risk factors are referred to appropriate services. A total of 222 youth ages 10 to 14 were screened between 2016 and 2021.

Funding is in jeopardy

For more than two decades, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention has funded the National Academic Centers of Excellence in Youth Violence Prevention^[29], which includes programs like ours. But recent CDC funding cuts^[30] threaten the continuation of this work.

Since 2000, these efforts have contributed to reductions in violence in communities across the nation, including Chicago^[31]; Denver^[32]; Flint, Michigan^[33]; Richmond, Virginia^[34]; and Youngstown, Ohio^[35].

In Flint, community groups mowed and removed trash from vacant lots between 2009 and 2013. The surrounding areas saw 40% fewer assaults and violent crimes^[36] between the months of May and September compared to areas surrounding unmaintained lots.

Likewise, in Youngstown, during the summer months from 2016 to 2018, violent crime fell at twice the rate^[37] on streets surrounding vacant lots transformed into gardens and play spaces by community residents than on streets where professional mowers did the greening.

Funding for programs like these is critical for neighborhoods where resources are already scarce and the burden of violence has been concentrated for generations. Without continued investment, communities risk losing hard-won gains and the capacity to create safe and supportive environments for young people.

Read more of our stories about Colorado^[38].

References

1. ^{^} long history of violence (www.thehollybook.com)
2. ^{^} summer of violence in the early 1990s (digitalcommons.du.edu)
3. ^{^} 1,086 youth arrests per 100,000 young people (doi.org)
4. ^{^} 19% of families in the neighborhood lived below the federal poverty line (data.census.gov)
5. ^{^} 39% of residents identified as Black, and 27% identified as Hispanic (data.census.gov)
6. ^{^} response to a series of violent events (www.amazon.com)
7. ^{^} University of Colorado Boulder’s Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence (cspv.colorado.edu)
8. ^{^} Communities That Care (doi.org)
9. ^{^} director of the Center for the Study and Prevention of Violence (cspv.colorado.edu)
10. ^{^} efforts can reduce risk and build supports (ajph.aphapublications.org)
11. ^{^} 75% reduction (doi.org)
12. ^{^} in 1996 (counciloncj.org)
13. ^{^} carefully constructed “look-alike” community (link.springer.com)
14. ^{^} urban communities (doi.org)
15. ^{^} opportunities, resources and support (doi.org)
16. ^{^} navigating violent communities (www.tc.columbia.edu)
17. ^{^} marginalization and discrimination (doi.org)
18. ^{^} Park Hill Strong (dmcimpact.org)
19. ^{^} Troy Grimes (phps-co.org)
20. ^{^} Jonathan McMillan (incrediblemessenger.com)
21. ^{^} Dane Washington Sr. (voyagedenver.com)
22. ^{^} Communities That Care (doi.org)
23. ^{^} community prevention strategies (doi.org)
24. ^{^} Power of One (PO1) (www.thepowerofone5280.org)
25. ^{^} six community block parties (ktonecaresfoundation.org)
26. ^{^} Promoting Alternative Thinking Strategies, known as PATHS (www.blueprintsprograms.org)
27. ^{^} lower rates of aggression (www.ijcv.org)
28. ^{^} violence, injury protection and risk screening tool (doi.org)
29. ^{^} National Academic Centers of Excellence in Youth Violence Prevention (www.cdc.gov)
30. ^{^} CDC funding cuts (doi.org)
31. ^{^} Chicago (doi.org)
32. ^{^} Denver (doi.org)
33. ^{^} Flint, Michigan (doi.org)
34. ^{^} Richmond, Virginia (doi.org)
35. ^{^} Youngstown, Ohio (doi.org)
36. ^{^} 40% fewer assaults and violent crimes (onlinelibrary.wiley.com)
37. ^{^} violent crime fell at twice the rate (doi.org)
38. ^{^} Colorado (theconversation.com)