OFVP Firearm Violence Research Group Meeting Minutes, December 11, 2024

Date: Tuesday, December 11, 2024

Time: 9:30 am

Meeting Minutes

1.  Welcome/Roll Call/Approval of Minutes
   • Meeting Called to order @ 9:30am
   • FVRG Members Present: Joe Hoereth, Kim Smith, Maryann Mason, David Olson
   • FVRG Members Absent: Andrew Papachristos, Timothy Lavery, Soledad McGrath
   • Other Attendees: Quiwana Bell, Stephanie Jones, Kevin Brown, Fernando Constabile, Ana Genkova, Jessica Cortez
   • Notetaker: Jessica Cortez
   • Meeting minutes were approved by consensus for September 17, 2024
2. Public Comment - No public comments received
3. Discussion and Work Items
   1. Quick Recap
      • The firearms violence research group discussed the distribution of funds based on the number of victims within community areas and clusters, with a focus on equitable distribution and community needs. The team also explored the potential impact of environmental wellness and public health interventions in reducing gun violence, with examples of successful initiatives in Philadelphia and New York City. The conversation ended with plans to continue the discussion in the next meeting and to share a memo with the meeting's recommendations.
4. Action items
   1. Facilitator Hoereth to send a memo with the recommendation on Victims Flex Fund distribution to OFVP by tomorrow.
   2. OFVP staff to work on determining regional coordinators for fund distribution based on the recommended framework.
   3. FVRG Member Smith to share the New York City Street lighting study with Facilitator Hoereth.
   4. OFVP to explore further research on how the built environment changes behavior around violence.
   5. FVRG members to prepare for discussion on life stability assessment models at the next meeting.
   6. OFVP to continue developing the policy for the Victims Flex Fund, including maximum amounts for different types of victimization.
   7. Jessica to schedule the next FVRG meeting.
   8. FVRG members to complete all required training before the end of the year.
   9. Stephanie Jones to follow up with FVRG Member Mason regarding training credit for the FVRG board.
5. Summary
   1. Firearms Violence Research Group Meeting
      • Facilitator Hoereth convened a meeting of the firearms violence research group, which was postponed from its original date due to a lack of quorum. The meeting was attended by members including FVRG Member Smith, FVRG Member Olson, FVRG Member Mason, and Facilitator Hoereth himself. The minutes from the previous meeting were reviewed and approved. No public comments were received. LeShae, a new member, was welcomed to the group.
   2. Intergovernmental Partnerships and Office Updates
      • LeShae, from Jodi Township government, introduced herself as the Violence Prevention Council Coordinator. Facilitator Hoereth then handed over to Stephanie for updates and reminders, emphasizing the completion of required training. Maryann raised a question about the completion of training for different boards, to which Stephanie responded that it should be good for both. Facilitator Hoereth then thanked Stephanie and handed over to Quiwana from the Office of Violence Prevention (OVP) for updates. Quiwana expressed gratitude for the group's time and thought partnership, and discussed the office's focus on sustainability, coordination with intergovernmental partners, and community connection and collaboration. She also mentioned the establishment of a victim service fund and the exploration of environmental wellness. Kevin echoed Quiwana' s sentiments and thanked the group for their contributions. Facilitator Hoereth then opened the floor for questions and discussion.
   3. Distributing Funds Based on Victims
      • Facilitator Hoereth discussed the process of distributing funds based on the number of victims within community areas and clusters. He proposed a framework that would distribute funds equally across the community areas and clusters into 12 parts, with 10 parts from the original eligible areas and 2 from discretionary selections. The aim was to make the pots as equitable as possible while also being proportional to their share of victims. Facilitator Hoereth also mentioned the importance of considering contiguity and not creating a huge cluster that would violate their range. He ended the conversation by stepping out of the presentation to share a spreadsheet that was used for discussions around eligibility.
   4. Community Areas Share Determination Process
      • Facilitator Hoereth discussed the process of determining the share of community areas in a project. He explained that the share is based on the absolute numbers and the total across all eligible areas, including discretionary ones. He also mentioned the use of maps to visualize the community areas and their relationships. Facilitator Hoereth proposed a clustering system for some smaller share community areas, considering their contiguity and proximity to other areas. He presented a table showing the community areas for the purpose of the Victims Flex Fund distribution, clustered into various groups.
   5. Clarifying Fund Vision and Support
      • In the meeting, FVRG Member Smith sought clarification on the vision for the fund, specifically the size of the pot and how funds would be used. Quiwana explained that the total amount of resources had not been fully determined, but they were considering funding up to 42 convener grants. The funds would be used to supplement existing emergency victim funds and would be distributed equitably across regions. The maximum amount per person was estimated to be around $5,000. FVRG Member Olson asked about the types of support the money was intended to provide and how it differed from the Attorney General's crime victim's compensation program. Quiwana and Kevin explained that the new fund would provide more flexibility and immediate cash assistance for relocation and other needs, unlike the Attorney General's fund which is reimbursable and has a longer process. Facilitator Hoereth added that this was a recurring theme in their surveys and focus groups with providers.
   6. Resource Distribution and Community Impact
      • The meeting focused on the formation of clusters for resource distribution and the potential impact on communities. Quiwana emphasized the need to build social cohesion and collective efficacy among the groups involved. Facilitator Hoereth clarified that the group would be voting on a framework, not specific clusters, and that there is flexibility in the final breakdown and choice. FVRG Member Smith suggested considering the trade-off between inclusiveness and resource distribution. Maryann raised concerns about the potential diffusion of impact in severely impacted communities. Facilitator Hoereth responded by showing the impact of adding discretionary funding and the challenge of setting a threshold. FVRG Member Olson suggested that the funds should be made available across all sites and that the allocation should be equitable. The team agreed to consider these factors in their decision-making process.
   7. Eligibility and Resource Distribution Discussion
      • Facilitator Hoereth discussed the process of determining eligibility and the distribution of resources in the city. He explained that the current process selects areas that collectively represent 73% of the city's victimization, and this could be extended to 87% when including discretionary areas. Facilitator Hoereth also mentioned that the clustering of areas was initially arbitrary but could be adjusted based on community needs. Quiwana suggested that funds could be allocated to specific areas and that the number of coordinators could be determined later. Facilitator Hoereth proposed a statement for voting, which included parameters for the number of funding pots and the minimum share of the largest community area. Maryann suggested that the statement should allow for flexibility in creating clusters and that the lower limit should be set at 7%. FVRG Member Smith raised a concern about community areas with less than 7% and Facilitator Hoereth acknowledged that some areas, like Humboldt Park, might need to be adjusted. The team agreed to consider changing the minimum share to 6% to accommodate areas like Humboldt Park.
   8. New Fund Distribution Approach Adopted
      • Facilitator Hoereth proposed a new approach to distribute funds based on the proportion of firearm victimizations in each area. Quiwana agreed with this approach, suggesting it could also be applied to greater Illinois communities. The team decided to tackle the greater Illinois issue separately. There was no distinction made between funds for non-fatal victimizations and homicides, as the analysis combined both. FVRG Member Olson suggested adding a reference to the Victims Flex Fund to clarify the focus on firearm victimization. The team then voted to adopt the recommendation, with all members in favor. Facilitator Hoereth agreed to send the approved recommendation to OFVP, along with the data used for the decision.
   9. Environmental Wellness and Gun Violence
      • Facilitator Hoereth initiated a discussion about the potential of environmental wellness and public health interventions in reducing gun violence. He highlighted two articles, one from the Brookings Institution and another from the American Journal of Public Health, which suggested that improvements in the built environment could have a significant impact on reducing gun violence. Maryann and FVRG Member Smith shared their knowledge of similar work done in Philadelphia and New York City, respectively. Quiwana shared her experience with a project called Pop Corps, which aimed to transform negative loitering into positive loitering by landscaping and community engagement. The team agreed on the importance of community input and data-driven decision-making in such initiatives.
   10. Transforming Spaces to Reduce Violence
       • In the meeting, Quiwana discussed the transformation of notorious corners in Philadelphia into positive loitering spaces, which led to a significant reduction in violence. She expressed interest in studying how the built environment changes behavior around violence and the impact of such changes. FVRG Member Smith suggested the presence of trees could have an impact on gun violence, and Maryann mentioned a study on shade, cover, and violence. LeShae shared her experience working in North Philadelphia, where they implemented the Safe Streets Initiative, which led to a significant drop in homicides. She suggested replicating this model in Chicago. Facilitator Hoereth proposed discussing life stability assessment models in the next meeting. The team agreed to continue the discussion at the next meeting and to share a memo with the meeting's recommendations.
6. Proposed Next Meeting Date/Time: Tuesday, March 18, 2025, 9:30am
7. Meeting Adjourned @ 11:00am