Operation Ceasefire is a problem-oriented policing intervention aimed at reducing youth homicide and youth firearms violence in Boston. It represented an innovative partnership between researchers and practitioners to assess the city's youth homicide problem and implement an intervention designed to have a substantial near-term impact on the problem. Operation Ceasefire was based on the “pulling levers” deterrence strategy that focused criminal justice attention on a small number of chronically offending gang-involved youth responsible for much of Boston's youth homicide problem. Our impact evaluation suggests that the Ceasefire intervention was associated with significant reductions in youth homicide victimization, shots-fired calls for service, and gun assault incidents in Boston. A comparative analysis of youth homicide trends in Boston relative to youth homicide trends in other major U.S. and New England cities also supports a unique program effect associated with the Ceasefire intervention.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Aldrich, John
and Forrest Nelson. 1984. Linear Probability, Logit, and Probit Models. Paper Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.
2.
Ball, Richard
and G. David Curry. 1995. “The Logic of Definition in Criminology: Purposes and Methods for Defining `Gangs.' ”Criminology33:225-246.
3.
Beha, James A.1977. “ `And Nobody Can Get You Out': The Impact of a Mandatory Prison Sentence for the Illegal Carrying of a Firearm on the Use of Firearms and on the Administration of Criminal Justice in Boston-Part I.”Boston University Law Review57:96-146.
4.
Blumstein, Alfred
, Jacqueline Cohen, and Daniel Nagin, eds. 1978. Deterrence and Incapacitation: Estimating the Effects of Criminal Sanctions on Crime Rates. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences.
5.
Blumstein, Alfred
and Richard Rosenfeld. 1998. “Explaining Recent Trends in U.S. Homicide Rates.”Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology88:1175-1216.
6.
Braga, Anthony A.
, Anne M. Piehl, and David M. Kennedy. 1999. “Youth Homicide in Boston: An Assessment of Supplementary Homicide Report Data.”Homicide Studies3:277-299.
7.
Braga, Anthony A.
, David L. Weisburd, Elin J. Waring, Lorraine Green Mazerolle, William Spelman, and Francis Gajewski. 1999. “Problem-Oriented Policing in Violent Crime Places: A Randomized Controlled Experiment.”Criminology37:541-580.
8.
Butterfield, Fox
. 1996. “In Boston, Nothing Is Something.”New York Times, November 21, p. A20.
9.
Cameron, Samuel
. 1988. “The Economics of Crime Deterrence: A Survey of Theory and Evidence.”Kyklos41:301-323.
10.
Campbell, Donald T.
and Julian Stanley. 1966. Experimental and Quasi-Experimental Designs for Research. Chicago: Rand McNally.
11.
Clarke, Ronald V.
, ed. 1992. Situational Crime Prevention: Successful Case Studies. New York: Harrow and Heston.
12.
Coleman, Veronica
, Walter C. Holton, Kristine Olson, Stephen Robinson, and Judith Stewart. 1999. “Using Knowledge and Teamwork to Reduce Crime.”National Institute of Justice Journal, October:16-23.
13.
Cook, Philip J.1977. “Punishment and Crime: A Critique of Current Findings Concerning the Preventive Effects of Punishment.”Law and Contemporary Problems41:164-204.
14.
Cook, Philip J.
1980. “Research in Criminal Deterrence: Laying the Groundwork for the Second Decade.” Pp. 211-268 in Crime and Justice: An Annual Review of Research, Vol. 2, edited by Norval Morris and Michael Tonry. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
15.
Cook, Philip J.
and John H. Laub. 1998. “The Unprecedented Epidemic in Youth Violence.” Pp. 27-64 in Youth Violence, edited by Michael Tonry and Mark H. Moore. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
16.
Cook, Thomas
and Donald Campbell. 1979. Quasi-Experimentation: Design and Analysis Issues for Field Settings. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
17.
Curry, G. David
, Richard Ball, and Richard Fox. 1994. Gang Crime and Law Enforcement Record Keeping (NCJ 148345). Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
18.
Dobson, Annette
. 1990. An Introduction to Generalized Linear Models. New York: Chapman and Hall.
19.
Eck, John E.
and William Spelman. 1987. Problem-Solving: Problem-Oriented Policing in Newport News. Washington, DC: National Institute of Justice.
20.
Ekblom, Paul
and Ken Pease. 1995, “Evaluating Crime Prevention.” Pp. 585-662 in Building a Safer Society: Crime and Justice, Vol. 19, edited by Michael Tonry and David Farrington. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
21.
Fox, James Alan
. 1996. Trends in Juvenile Violence. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Statistics.
22.
Gibbs, Jack P.
1975. Crime, Punishment, and Deterrence. New York: Elsevier.
23.
Goldstein, Herman
. 1979. “Improving Policing: A Problem-Oriented Approach.”Crime & Delinquency25:236-258.
24.
Goldstein, Herman
. 1990. Problem-Oriented Policing. Philadelphia: Temple University Press.
25.
Kelling, George L.
and William J. Bratton. 1998. “Declining Crime Rates: Insiders' Views of the New York City Story.”Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology88:1217-1232.
26.
Kennedy, David M.1997. “Pulling Levers: Chronic Offenders, High-Crime Settings, and a Theory of Prevention.”Valparaiso University Law Review31:449-484.
27.
Kennedy, David M.1998. “Pulling Levers: Getting Deterrence Right.”National Institute of Justice Journal, July:2-8.
28.
Kennedy, David M.
and Anthony A. Braga. 1998. “Homicide in Minneapolis: Research for Problem Solving.”Homicide Studies2 (3): 263-290.
29.
Kennedy, David M.
, Anthony A. Braga, and Anne M. Piehl. 1997. “The (Un)Known Universe: Mapping Gangs and Gang Violence in Boston.” Pp. 219-262 in Crime Mapping and Crime Prevention, edited by David Weisburd and J. Thomas McEwen. New York: Criminal Justice Press.
30.
Kennedy, David M.
, Anthony A. Braga, and Anne M. Piehl. 1999. “Operation Ceasefire: Problem Solving and Youth Violence in Boston.” Unpublished report submitted to the National Institute of Justice. Available on request from authors.
31.
Kennedy, David M.
, Anne M. Piehl, and Anthony A. Braga. 1996. “Youth Violence in Boston: Gun Markets, Serious Youth Offenders, and a Use-Reduction Strategy.”Law and Contemporary Problems59:147-196.
32.
Kleck, Gary
. 1995. Targeting Guns: Firearms and Their Control. New York: Aldine de Gruyter.
33.
Klein, Malcolm
. 1993. “Attempting Gang Control by Suppression: The Misuse of Deterrence Principles.”Studies on Crime and Crime Prevention2:88-111.
34.
Littell, Ramon C.
, George A. Milliken, Walter W. Stroup, and Russell D. Wolfinger. 1996. SAS System for Mixed Models. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc.
35.
McCullagh, Peter
and John Nelder. 1989. Generalized Linear Models. 2nd ed.New York: Chapman and Hall.
36.
McDowall, David
, Richard McCleary, Errol Meidinger, and Richard Hay. 1980. Interrupted Time Series Analysis. Sage University Series on Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
37.
Paternoster, Raymond
. 1987. “The Deterrent Effect of the Perceived Certainty and Severity of Punishment: A Review of the Evidence and Issues.”Justice Quarterly4:173-217.
38.
Piehl, Anne M.
, Suzanne J. Cooper, Anthony A. Braga, and David M. Kennedy. 1999. “Testing for Structural Breaks in the Evaluation of Programs.” NBER working paper no. 7226, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA.
39.
Piehl, Anne M.
, David M. Kennedy, and Anthony A. Braga. 2000. “Problem Solving and Youth Violence: An Evaluation of the Boston Gun Project.”American Law and Economics Review2:58-106.
40.
Rossi, Peter H.
and Howard E. Freeman. 1993. Evaluation: A Systematic Approach. 5th ed.Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
41.
SAS Institute
. 1993. SAS/STAT Software: The GENMOD Procedure. Release 6.09, technical report P-243. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc.
42.
SAS Institute
. 1997. SAS/STAT Software: Changes and Enhancements through Release 6.12. Cary, NC: SAS Institute, Inc.
43.
SAS Institute
. 1998. “V6 SAS Note: PROC MIXED Can Return Incorrect DF with DDFM=SATTERTH and REPEATED.” February 18 (http://www.sas.com/service/techsup/unotes/V6/E/E660.html).
44.
Sherman, Lawrence
. 1990. “Police Crackdowns: Initial and Residual Deterrence.” Pp. 1-48 in Crime and Justice: A Review of Research, Vol. 12, edited by Michael Tonry and Norval Morris. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
45.
Sherman, Lawrence
and Richard Berk. 1984. “The Specific Deterrent Effects of Arrest for Domestic Assault.”American Sociological Review49:261-272.
46.
Sparrow, Malcolm
, Mark H. Moore, and David M. Kennedy. 1990. Beyond 911: A New Era for Policing. New York: Basic Books.
47.
Weisburd, David
, Elin J. Waring, and Ellen F. Chayet. 1995. “Specific Deterrence in a Sample of Offenders Convicted of White Collar Crimes.”Criminology33:587-607.
48.
Witkin, Gordon
. 1997. “Sixteen Silver Bullets: Smart Ideas to Fix the World.”U.S. News and World Report, December 29, p. 67.
49.
Zimring, Franklin
and Gordon Hawkins. 1973. Deterrence: The Legal Threat in Crime Control. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
