CASE STUDY

Community-Based
Restorative Justice

LOCATION

New York City

ACTIVE

2024-present


As part of the plan to safely shift New York City away from reliance on jails and toward a more equitable system, CUNY ISLG partnered with the Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice to create the Community-Based Restorative Justice Initiative, funding grassroots organizations to incorporate restorative justice principles into their programming.


Challenge:

Within statehouses, nonprofit organizations, and living rooms across the country, there is growing recognition that a criminal legal system that prioritizes punishment is not the answer to long-term community safety. In fact, data shows that incarceration can increase likelihood of future crimes. Momentum for a more holistic, community-based approach to resolving conflict that addresses the root causes of crime is growing in its place.

Restorative justice (RJ) is a method of addressing harm that centers accountability; it engages both the person who perpetrated the harm as well as care and accountability to the person harmed by it. By bringing the two parties together with trained practitioners, this approach seeks to heal the survivor’s wounds while also taking the reparative actions necessary to prevent future harms. RJ can also take place proactively to prevent crime, build community, and strengthen dialogue around topics concerning the community.

Many of these efforts have been successful in solving conflict in a way that promotes healing and accountability without relying solely on punitive methods. Schools in Chicago that enacted restorative practices saw a 35 percent reduction in student arrests; in California, youth participating in a RJ program who were facing serious felony charges were 44 percent less likely to recidivate compared to those who were prosecuted through the traditional juvenile justice system. However, organizations often face challenges to implementing these programs. Small and grassroots organizations often struggle with insufficient funding, staffing, and time to properly train and implement restorative justice practices. Many rely on short-term grants, making it difficult to maintain programs over time. Tensions between “tough on crime” policies and RJ also complicate implementation: while RJ focuses on healing, accountability, and community restoration, tough-on-crime policies prioritize punishment and deterrence. This ideological conflict can create public perception challenges, with RJ being inaccurately seen as “soft” on crime. 

In reality, it’s not an either/or, but a depends: RJ is not one-size-fits all. It is not suitable for all types of crime or every situation, and is less effective in cases involving power imbalances, safety concerns, or a lack of community support. Its effectiveness depends on the readiness of those involved—both the person harmed and the person who caused harm—to participate in open, honest dialogue and healing processes. It requires careful assessment and preparation to determine when and if RJ is appropriate, and trained professionals to administer it.

Approach:

Following New York City’s 2017 announcement of its plan to close the jails on Rikers Island, the De Blasio mayoral administration worked with the City Council to engage community stakeholders in the creation of a more equitable system, and solicited ideas for potential investments to make it happen. One of these investments was for a Community-Based Restorative Justice  (CBRJ) Initiative.   

An Advisory Committee, in collaboration with the Restorative Justice Initiative, released a report for City agencies and the City Council. The report outlines recommendations to help organizations strengthen or implement RJ services and activities. The primary focus was investing in small and grassroots organizations that have historically faced barriers to accessing public funding, as well as supporting specific neighborhoods disproportionately impacted by a lack of resources and high incarceration rates. Funding would go to starting or strengthening RJ practices within their services, as well as building overall organizational capacity.

Funding would go to starting or strengthening RJ practices within their services, as well as building overall organizational capacity.

The report emphasized that the procurement process should have a participatory grantmaking approach, meaning that those closest to impacted communities play a key role in decision-making during the procurement process. With this report in mind, the Mayor’s Office of Criminal Justice (MOCJ) engaged CUNY ISLG to implement an end-to-end process including solicitation and subsequent support to grantees via operational, strategic, and programmatic training and technical assistance. 

Read more about the RFP process in “Rethinking RFPs and Grant Management for Real Impact” on our blog.

Progress:

In July 2024, we completed the solicitation process by selecting 16 grantees. The recipients’ RJ proposals fell into three categories: community-based programming, training and technical assistance, and fellowships. Grant winners include established organizations, such as the East Harlem-based alternative-to-incarceration program Getting Out And Staying Out (GOSO), along with newly established ones, including Mazorca Colectiva, which draws on ancestral practices to provide grassroots community healing in Queens. For the latest updates on their work, see the Grantee Yearbook. 

These grantees embarked on a 12-month planning and implementation process. Each program is receiving up to $300,000, based on the size and scale of their program, with additional funding available to support an extension of the implementation period. Stay tuned for updates in summer 2026 on what these grantees accomplished and what’s next. 

Contact Nathalie Lebrón at nathalie.lebron@islg.cuny.edu for more information.   

Latest Updates