Tapping into Community-Based Organizations to Close the Knowledge Gap on Hate Crimes
By Aimee McPhail, Research Associate, and Neal Palmer, Research Project Director
Local organizations are uniquely positioned to meet the needs of the communities they serve. In a new research project, CUNY ISLG is working with them to better understand the role they play in reporting and responding to hate crimes, as well as how to grow partnerships and services to support survivors and prevent future crimes.
Hate crimes are a growing problem in the United States, but remain widely underreported and unaddressed. This gap in reporting and effective response leaves many hate crime victims and their communities susceptible to further harm. Community-based organizations (CBOs) are a promising means of hate crime reduction because they offer a channel for preventing, reporting, and responding to hate crimes with a known, knowledgeable, and trusted resource. Yet, CBOs’ approaches in this work are not widely known or understood—including the strategies they use and they ways they work collaboratively to protect their communities.
To fill this knowledge gap, CUNY ISLG is partnering with the New York City Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice’s (MOCJ’s) Office for the Prevention of Hate Crime (OPHC) and seven NYC CBOs representing communities affected disproportionately by hate crimes (Black/African American, Arab/Muslim, Asian and Pacific Islander, Latine, Jewish, Trans/LGBTQ, and Sikh) to form the Collaborative for Hate-Crime Incident Research, Response & Prevention (CHIRRP).
CHIRRP is conducting a mixed-methods study to better understand the existing pathways for hate crime reporting and how community approaches—particularly CBOs and cross-agency coordination with government institutions—can help increase reporting, support survivors, and ultimately reduce hate crime perpetration.
Focused specifically on New York City, CHIRRP is conducting a mixed-methods study to better understand the existing pathways for hate crime reporting and how community approaches—particularly CBOs and cross-agency coordination with government institutions—can help increase reporting, support survivors, and ultimately reduce hate crime perpetration. Other partners include Rutgers University and Florida International University.
Community-Based Organizations’ Unique Insights and Role in Preventing Hate Crimes
Community-based organizations are nonprofits that focus on issues or concerns of a group of people or neighborhood.¹ Especially in New York City, CBOs are deeply embedded in the fabric of local communities, giving them knowledge of, legitimacy among, and strong ties to the groups they serve. They are designed to meet the needs of their culturally, ethnically, and linguistically diverse constituents.² Many of these organizations are led by people from the communities themselves, ensuring they are familiar with and share values with their neighbors.
Because of these ties, CBOs can identify and address concerns and mobilize local resources in a way larger institutions may not be able to—making it easier to provide the appropriate support to the people they serve. In doing this work, CBOs develop relationships and working partnerships with each other, collaborate with government agencies, develop networks to share knowledge and resources, and ultimately amplify their collective impact. This combination of community-specific knowledge and partnerships with NYC’s network of service providers makes them particularly poised to provide comprehensive services to individuals, families, and other members of the community targeted by hate rhetoric and violence.
Of violent hate crimes from 2015 to 2019, 42 percent were not reported to law enforcement. The most common reason that victims gave for not reporting to the police is that victimization was handled through a non-law enforcement channel (e.g., school or community organization)—highlighting the role that community institutions can play in addressing hate crimes.
For many hate crime victims, CBOs are the first place they turn to—and sometimes, the only. Of violent hate crimes from 2015 to 2019, 42 percent were not reported to law enforcement. The most common reason that victims gave for not reporting to the police is that victimization was handled through a non-law enforcement channel (e.g., school or community organization)—highlighting the role that community institutions can play in addressing hate crimes.
In recent years, CBOs and coalitions have developed third-party alternatives for reporting hate crimes directly to police, such as hotlines and online submission forms. While CBOs often provide support to communities on sensitive issues (e.g., offering victims services, restorative justice, or hate crime prevention services), they may not have the specific resources and knowledge to fully support hate crime victims. Reporting trends also show these third-party platforms are often siloed from law enforcement channels and divergent from official data. These coalitions have expressed they need clearer processes for reporting hate crimes and the required skills to respond to them.
Community Involvement and Collaboration Can Strengthen Research—And Better Prevent Hate Crimes
Partnerships have emerged as an effective way to align strategies, coordinate resources, and meaningfully address hate crimes across public, nonprofit, and other sectors. NYC, which has a relatively high volume of hate incidents given its large population, offers a rich context to study the efficacy of community-based partnerships that respond to hate crimes.
CBPR brings researchers and community stakeholders together to address social inequities facing community members,³ including community members as active partners and incorporating their perspectives in the conduct of research.
With this foundation in mind, CHIRRP employs a community-based participatory research (CBPR) approach. CBPR brings researchers and community stakeholders together to address social inequities facing community members,³ including community members as active partners and incorporating their perspectives in the conduct of research. CBPR differs from a traditional research approach in that it includes community members directly, paying careful attention to power dynamics and prioritizes that power be deliberately shared between the researchers and participants.⁴
Centering community input ensures the research is grounded in real experiences and concerns of the community, which in turn can foster trust and buy-in between the community and the researchers. By directly engaging the community, CBPR is able to produce actionable, practical insights that inspire community-driven solutions and lead to changes in policy, program, and practice that have real-life impacts.⁵
Building upon the key principles of a CBPR framework, CHIRRP’s primary research participants include survivors of hate crimes, community members, and CBO staff. Interviews with these groups will help to document survivors’ experiences, lay out the bigger picture of hate crime prevalence, and more clearly define community strategies related to hate crimes. Additionally, the CHIRRP is
Engaging a community advisory group consisting of representatives from each of the partner CBOs, which convenes regularly to offer guidance and make decisions on the research approach;
Hiring and training community researchers to help carry out research activities; and
Planning to host community discussions to translate findings into actionable recommendations.
By centering community involvement in multiple ways, CHIRRP enhances the reliability and validity of the data, while also generating new ideas for strengthening community-focused hate crime response in NYC and informing other jurisdictions who employ collaborative approaches.
To learn more about the specific CBO partners, get involved with the research, and stay up to date with the progress of the initiative, please visit our website at chirrp.nyc.com
Footnotes
Aideyan, O. A. (2018). Community-based organizations. Global Encyclopedia of Public Administration, Public Policy, and Governance, 872–875.
New York City’s Tapestry of Diversity: A Multicultural Melting Pot – The Science Survey
Janzen, R., Ochocka, J., Turner, L., Cook, T., Franklin, M., & Deichert, D. (2017). Building a community-based culture of evaluation. Evaluation and Program Planning, 65, 163-170
Baum, F., MacDougall, C., & Smith, D. (2006). Participatory action research. Journal of epidemiology and community health, 60(10), 854
Wallerstein, N., & Duran, B. (2017). The theoretical, historical and practice roots of CBPR. Community-based participatory research for health: Advancing social and health equity, 17-29.
Photo by Manuel Lardizabal on Unsplash