By Yongjae (David) Nam, Travis Carter, Scott Wolfe, Allison Rojek, Spencer G. Lawson

The City of Saginaw (MI) was financially crippled by the lengthy national recession and steady
deterioration of the domestic automobile industry. Once home to five automobile production
plants, four of those sites now sit uninhabited. Several other major manufacturers have closed
plants or drastically reduced the number of employees. These losses dramatically increased
unemployment and devastated the city’s tax base. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics,
unemployment in Saginaw peaked in July 2009, standing at 23.5%. The 2018 American Community
Survey indicates that the unemployment rate for Saginaw was 14.9%. This rate is higher compared
to a national unemployment rate of 5.9% and a rate of 6.5% for Michigan. The 2010 Census reports
that Saginaw’s median household income was $29,809 and per capita income was a mere $16,153,
both nearly half the state of Michigan and U.S. averages. About 33.6% of the total population lives
below the poverty line, more than double the state of Michigan average (14.2%) and nearly triple
the U.S. average (12.3%). Census reports show the population of Saginaw decreased by nearly
13,000 people (20.7%) from 2000 to 2018 (from 61,799 to 48,997 people). Saginaw’s population
decline, deteriorating property values, shrinking income tax collections, and drastically reduced
state revenue sharing continue to severely impact the city’s ability to provide basic public services,
creating quality of life issues and high violent crime rates. Despite a high incidence of crime, poor
economic conditions forced the city to make the inevitable decision to reduce the size of its police
department from 160 police officers in 1997 to its current level of 54 officers (66.3% decrease).
From 2016 to 2018, 42 homicides were committed in Saginaw. Most were committed with a
firearm, and more than three-fourths were drug and/or gang-related. Additionally, there were
another 138 victims of non-fatal shootings. In 2018, Saginaw’s violent crime rate per 100,000
residents (1,621) was more than four times the national average (381) and more than three times
Michigan’s average (449). In addition, Saginaw’s homicide rate (22.8) was over four times both the
national average (5.0) and Michigan’s average (5.5). Moreover, data reveal that Saginaw's overall
crime rates are 64% higher than Michigan’s average and are 34% higher than the nation's average.
The Saginaw Violent Gang and Gun Crime Reduction Program (hereafter, Saginaw PSN) was
aimed at addressing these problems. Table 1 provides an overview of the goals, objectives, and
outcomes of the Saginaw PSN program

East Lansing, MI: School of Criminal Justice, Michigan State University., 2022. 53p.

2021 Durham Community Gang Assessment

By Michelle Young

Beginning in 2021, the Durham Gang Reduction Strategy Steering Committee (GRSSC) commissioned an updated community gang assessment for Durham. The GRSSC community gang assessment used the OJJDP Comprehensive Gang Model Guide to Assessing Your Community’s Youth Gang Problem (Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention, 2009). This report presents five key findings and related recommendations arising from that exercise. Key finding 1: What is the most acute problem related to gangs/violence in Durham and where is it most acute? At least 12 census tracts/neighborhoods in Durham are currently affected by extremely high rates of violent person incidents (aggravated assault and homicide) that are up to 7.5 times higher than Durham’s overall rate per capita of these crimes. Eight of these census tracts have experienced high rates of violence since the last community gang assessment was conducted in Durham. Violence exposure in these areas is exacerbated by extreme poverty and exposure to other social vulnerabilities that have remained mostly unchanged since 2014. Key finding 2: Why are youth in Durham joining gangs? What risk factors locally must be addressed to keep youth out of gangs? Young people in Durham experience an elevated level of exposure to risk factors for gang involvement, including substance use, delinquency, the presence of gangs in their neighborhood and at school, family gang involvement, victimization, and exposure to violence. This level of risk exposure is higher for youth who enter the juvenile justice system and highest for gang involved individuals. Key finding 3: What is keeping young people in gangs? What must be addressed to help gang-involved individuals exit gangs? Research indicates that young people who join gangs become disconnected from mainstream pursuits. Gang involved individuals in Durham have difficulty exiting gangs because of high rates of school dropout, unemployment/underemployment, substance use, gang activity in the neighborhood, and a need to replace the social and emotional needs currently met by their gang. Key finding 4: How is this issue affecting the wider community? What should motivate policymakers to address the problem? People who live and work in Durham experience the gang issue very differently depending on their role and location. In some neighborhoods, gangs are deeply imbedded in the neighborhood’s culture which plays a key role in the decision to join a gang in Durham. Other neighborhoods experience gang issues indirectly. However, surveys across constituency groups indicates that the widespread nature of gang activity and community violence in Durham reduces quality of life for residents across the community. Key finding 5: How well is the current response to gangs working? What should be done differently in the future? All constituency groups that participated in this study described low levels of satisfaction with the current response to gangs and identified specific deficits that have caused this dissatisfaction. These issues include a failure to address the underlying conditions that give rise to gangs, a lack of awareness about the current responses to gangs across constituency groups, lack of information about the results of current strategies, and concerns about criminal justice policies. Recommendations Recommendation 1: Implement intensive, place-based strategies to address underlying social conditions that increase the vulnerability of children and youth in the most violence affected census tracts to gang involvement Recommendation 2: Implement comprehensive, intensive, and neighborhood-based service delivery specifically for gang-involved individuals in the highest violence neighborhoods. Recommendation 3: Because of the elevated level of gang exposure/involvement and youth risk exposure locally, Durham policymakers should expand available gang prevention and intervention programming, localize these services in the most violence/gang affected census tracts, and prioritize these services for children and youth who are at the highest level of risk of involvement in violence and gangs Recommendation 4: More regularly collect and report data that reflects the progress of the community’s gang violence reduction efforts. Recommendation 5: Institute standardized performance measures to track reductions in violence and improve existing criminogenic social conditions at the census tract level and more regularly report the outcomes attained by gang prevention, intervention and desistance strategies to policymakers and the community at the census tract level.

Wake Forest, NC: Michelle Young Consulting, 2022. 257p.