The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.

By Sukia O. Akiba

Violence is often framed as a criminal justice issue, but those of us working on the ground know that it’s much deeper than that. It’s a public health crisis  one that demands policy solutions rooted not in punishment, but in prevention, healing and equity.

A community-centered, trauma-informed approach can interrupt cycles of violence more effectively than traditional law enforcement strategies alone. And I’m not alone in this perspective  public health professionals, community organizers and even federal agencies are increasingly aligned in the call to reframe violence prevention as a matter of public policy, not just public safety.

The data supports this shift. According to the CDC, more than 24,000 people died by homicide in the United States in 2022. Among young people aged 15–19, homicide is the second leading cause of death. These aren’t just numbers they represent lives cut short, families shattered and communities traumatized. Yet the policy response has too often been reactive rather than proactive, centered on arrests and incarceration rather than intervention and prevention.

We know that violence, much like disease, is contagious. It spreads through exposure, trauma and untreated pain. If we accept that premise, then our response must also follow the principles of public health: identify root causes, implement prevention strategies, invest in community-based solutions and evaluate outcomes.

In Boston, we’ve begun to do just that. Through local partnerships with organizations like Teen Empowerment, Project RIGHT, Madison Park Development Corporation, Boston Project Ministries, and the Mattapan Teen Center  trusted groups that know their neighborhoods and the challenges residents face  we provide wraparound support: mentorship for youth, job readiness programs, mental health care and family stabilization services. Our approach doesn’t just treat the symptoms it addresses the underlying conditions that allow violence to take hold.

Boston has also emerged as a national leader in public safety. According to recent data, Boston is the safest metropolitan city in the country, and that’s not by coincidence. Mayor Michelle Wu has done an outstanding job of investing in long-term, systemic solutions from affordable housing and youth programming to climate resilience and public health infrastructure all of which contribute to a healthier, safer city.

Policy plays a critical role here. For example, Boston utilized American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding to expand community-based violence prevention programs  a policy choice that sends a clear message: Public health and public safety are not mutually exclusive. In fact, they’re deeply intertwined.

But we need to go further. Across the country, public health departments receive a relatively small portion of municipal budgets typically under 5%, though exact figures vary by city. Meanwhile, policing can account for 25–40 percent or more of city budgets, depending on the locality. These disparities highlight the urgent need to rebalance our investments toward prevention, care and community well-being. Imagine what could happen if we rebalanced those scales if we treated housing stability, youth engagement and trauma recovery as public safety strategies.

We also can’t talk about violence without addressing the disproportionate impact it has on Black and Brown communities. Structural racism has created deep inequities in health, housing and education  all of which are upstream drivers of violence. Any effective policy solution must confront these disparities head-on and center racial equity in funding decisions, program design and implementation.

We must also shift the way we measure success. Beyond crime stats, we should be tracking reductions in emergency room visits, school suspensions and community trauma. We should invest in qualitative metrics that tell the full story of safety  stories of increased trust, community cohesion and hope. These are the kinds of outcomes that signal real, lasting change.

At the federal level, initiatives like the Biden-Harris Administration’s Community Violence Intervention (CVI) Collaborative, supported through the Office of Justice Programs, are promising examples of how national policy can align with this public health approach. By funding evidence-based, community-led programs, the federal government is setting a precedent for state and local governments to follow.

However, there are growing concerns that recent shifts in federal priorities may threaten the sustainability of these efforts. Pullbacks in funding and a renewed focus on punitive strategies risk undoing the progress made under earlier initiatives. Now more than ever, state and local policymakers must lead the charge in preserving and expanding these public health models.

This is not a call to eliminate policing. It’s a call to redefine what safety looks like, and to invest in solutions that have been proven to work. Cities like Oakland, Richmond and Minneapolis have piloted public health approaches to violence, and many have seen double-digit reductions in homicides and shootings. The common denominator? Community leadership, cross-sector collaboration and policy decisions that prioritize healing over handcuffs.

As public administrators, we have the tools and the responsibility to shape this shift. That means drafting legislation that funds community-based interventions, embedding trauma-informed practices in our schools and health systems and using data to drive equitable investment. It means listening to residents, valuing lived experience and moving beyond band-aid solutions.

Violence doesn’t start with a crime. It starts with unmet needs. If our policies continue to ignore that, we’ll never truly build safe, thriving communities. It’s time to reframe the conversation and with the right policy choices, we can do exactly that.

Read the entire article as it originally appeared in PA Times here.