Attach B - EFSGV REIA Framework — San Jose City Council, August 15, 2022

In partnership with:

Racial Equity
Framework
for Gun Violence Prevention
Attachment B

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
2 About this Report
About the Authoring Organizations
– Founded in 1978, the Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence (Ed Fund) seeks to make gun violence rare and abnormal. The Ed Fund uses public health and equity lenses to identify and implement evidence-based policy solutions and programs to reduce gun violence in all its forms. – DC Justice Lab develops smarter safety solutions that are evidence-driven, community-rooted, and racially just. It aims to fully transform the District of Columbia’s approach to public safety and make it a national leader in justice reform.
– Cities United supports a national network of mayors who are committed to reducing the epidemic of homicides and shootings among young Black men and boys ages 14 to 24 by 50%. – Born out of a tragic school shooting, March For Our Lives is a courageous youth-led movement dedicated to promoting civic engagement, education, and direct action by youth to eliminate the epidemic of gun violence.
– Community Justice Action Fund addresses the gun violence epidemic as a public health issue with a direct policy agenda. CJAF provides training and guidance related to asset-framed communication strategies for communities of color and advocates for the redirection of public safety funding to address the intersectional causes of gun violence. – The Consortium for Risk-Based Firearm Policy comprises experts committed to advancing evidence-based gun violence prevention policies. The group includes the nation’s leading researchers and academics with expertise at the intersections of gun violence prevention and public health, law, behavioral health, medicine, criminology, and related fields. – For more than 30 years, the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Prevention and Policy has used public health principles and performed rigorous scientific studies to understand complex policy issues related to gun violence prevention. The Center engages in original scholarly research, policy analysis, and agenda-setting public discourse. The Center serves as an objective, informative resource for the news media and is committed to serving the public by providing accessible learning opportunities.

Support from the Joyce Foundation
We would like to thank the Joyce Foundation for supplying core support for this report.

How to Cite this Report
Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence, DC Justice Lab, Cities United, March for Our Lives, Community Justice Action Fund, Consortium for Risk-Based Firearm Policy, and Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Prevention and Policy. (2022). Racial Equity Framework for Gun Violence Prevention. Available: www.efsgv.org.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
3 Acknowledgments
The Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence (EFSGV), DC Justice Lab, Cities United, March for Our Lives, Community Justice Action Fund, Consortium for Risk-Based Firearm Policy, and the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Prevention and Policy would like to acknowledge:

Silvia Villarreal, Vicka Chaplin, and Lauren Footman of EFSGV , and Patrice Sulton of DC Justice Lab for leading the project, convenings, outreach, drafting, and editing of this report. Further, this work would not be possible without our dedicated project team: Tim Carey, Rose Kim, Janel Cubbage, Ari Davis, Kami Chavis, Kelly Roskam, and Cierra Hinkson of EFSGV; Bethany Young of DC Justice Lab; Maya White and Synethia White of Cities United; Zeenat Yahya and Max Markham of March for Our Lives; Greg Jackson and Sawyeh Maghsoodloo of Community Justice Action Fund; Daniel Webster and Rebecca Williams of John Hopkins Center for Gun Violence Prevention and Policy; Jeffrey Swanson, Shannon Frattaroli, and Richard Bonnie from the Consortium for Risk-based Firearm Policy, all of whom contributed to drafting and editing this report. Our thanks to Kimberly T orres of the University of Pennsylvania for consultation, and Rachel Perrone for copy editing and feedback. Last but certainly not least, many thanks to Josh Horwitz of EFSGV for consistent vision, expertise, guidance, and feedback throughout the project.

This report would not be possible without the contributions of the many people who shared their time and expertise with our project team. Our stakeholder convenings in June, July, and November 2021 were thought-provoking, and every guidance offered by attendees helped to shape the recommendations in this report. The authors would like to thank the following individuals for sharing their time and expertise in the report development process:

Paul Appelbaum from Columbia University, Kris Arroyo from New York Justice League, Whitney Austin from Whitney/Strong, Elizabeth Banach from Marylanders to Prevent Gun Violence, Amy Barnhorst from University of California, Davis, Alex Barrio from Center for American Progress, Tshaka Barrows from Haywood Burns Institute, J. Sandy Bartlett, Maryland State Delegate, T emi Bennett from if, A Foundation for Radical Possibility, Jeri Bonavia from Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort Educational Fund, Richard Bonnie from University of Virginia, Shani Buggs from University of California, Davis, Becky Ceartas from North Carolinians Against Gun Violence, Charles Cheek from Hampton Roads Christian Community Development Local Network, Melvin Clayton from District of Columbia Council, Office of Racial Equity, Kina Collins from the Chicago Neighborhood Alliance, Cassandra Crifasi from Johns Hopkins University, Adam Garber from CeaseFirePA, Tiffany Garner from Giffords, Deja Garner from Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort Educational Fund, Becky George from Everytown for Gun Safety, Janel George from Georgetown University, Liza Gold from Georgetown University, Brent Hamlet from Centers for New Horizons, Linda K.

Harllee Harper from the Government of the District of Columbia, Shaina Harrison from New Yorkers Against Gun Violence, Luis Hernandez from Youth Over Guns New York, T alib Hudson from The New Hood, T ara Huffman from Open Society Institute, Mia Ives-Rublee from Center for American Progress, Odis Johnson from Johns Hopkins University, Vanya Jones from Johns Hopkins University, Rose Kagawa from University of California, Davis, Liz Komar from Fair and Just Prosecution, Maura LaMendola from Everytown for Gun Safety, Chantay Love from Every Murder is Real Healing Center, Brian Malte from Hope & Heal Fund, Eileen McCarron from Colorado Ceasefire, Alex McCourt from Johns Hopkins University, Tracey Meares from Yale University, Darrell Miller from Duke University, Reggie Moore from Medical College of Wisconsin, Traci Murphy from Delaware Coalition Against Gun Violence, Po Murray from Newtown Action Alliance, Tina Nappi from the Health Alliance for Violence Intervention, Alicia Nichols from Battered Women’s Justice Project, Mike O’Bryan fromThe Lindy Institute for Urban Innovation, Lisa Fujie

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
4 Parks from Prevention Institute, DeJuan Patterson from City of Baltimore Mayor’s Office, Marc Philpart from PolicyLink, Joseph Richardson, Jr. from University of Maryland, Cuco Rodriguez from Hope and Heal Fund Heidi Rose from Wisconsin Anti-Violence Effort Educational Fund, Kelly Sampson from Brady: United Against Gun Violence, Shannon Scully from National Alliance on Mental Illness, Nneka T apia from Chicago Beyond, Nina Vinik from Joyce Foundation, T atiana Washington from March for Our Lives, Monique Williams from Louisville Metro Government, Office for Safe and Healthy Neighborhoods, Quintin Williams from Joyce Foundation, Garen Wintemute from University of California, Davis, Stephen Xenakis, Brigadier General (Ret)from US Army, April Zeoli from Michigan State University, and Darcy Ziegler from Colorado Ceasefire

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
5 Contents
Executive Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 Developing a Framework for Racial Equity in Gun Violence Prevention . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 Racial Equity Impact Assessment for Gun Violence Prevention Policy ........................... 10 Gun Policy and Race . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 Racial Disparities in Gun Violence and the Criminal Legal System ............................... 16 Racial Equity Impact Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 Analysis of Foundational Assessments ........................................................... 19 How to Use the REIA .............................................................................. 20 Explanation of the Racial Equity Impact Assessment Questions ................................. 20 Building a More Equitable Gun Violence Prevention Movement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26 Center and Invest in BIPOC-led Gun Violence Prevention Organizations ....................... 26 Recommendations for a More Equitable Gun Violence Prevention Movement .................. 27 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 Appendix 1: Themes from June Stakeholder Convenings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 Appendix 2: Themes from July Stakeholder Convenings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 Appendix 3: Themes from November Stakeholder Convenings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 Appendix 4: Analyses of Foundational Racial Equity Impact Assessments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 Appendix 5: Application of the REIA: Colorado’s Extreme Risk Protection Order Statute . . . . . 44 Appendix 6: Analyses of Foundational Collaboration Frameworks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 Appendix 7: Glossary of T erms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
6 Executive Summary
This report urges us to think carefully about the relationship between gun violence prevention and racial equity. Racial equity impact assessments (REIAs), such as the assessment proposed in this report, guide advocates, policy makers, and researchers through a thorough examination of policies with an equity lens to anticipate the potential outcomes and mitigate foreseeable risks. It requires one to ask fundamental questions about when to justify involvement with the criminal legal system, identify the costs and benefits of engagement, and think about alternatives to minimize harm. This framework acknowledges that solutions to gun violence, however well intentioned they may be, can exacerbate or compound upon the harms suffered by impacted communities if they are made without careful analysis and the input of those directly affected by it.

Gun violence affects everyone. It inflicts an enormous burden upon our country, particularly within under-resourced Black and Latino/Hispanic communities.1 The politics of guns and race have long been intertwined, but racial equity only recently became a focal point of discussions among gun violence prevention groups, catalyzed by the advocacy of community-based and BIPOC2-led organizations.3,4,5
In partnership with many stakeholders across the gun violence prevention movement, this racial equity framework is a resource that can be used by policymakers, researchers, and organizations working in gun violence prevention. Representatives from the six authoring organizations comprised a small working group to plan development of the report and convened a series of conversations to share proposals and review feedback from expert contributors. In addition to advancing racial equity, the core values of inclusion, collaboration, and consensus-building guided the project from early stages through completion.

Building upon existing racial equity work and guidance, this report is informed by the public health model of social determinants of health and has been tailored to the specific needs of gun violence prevention. The tools and recommendations proposed in this report are derived from relevant academic literature, racial equity impact assessments, and frameworks for building more equitable social movements.

The racial equity framework for gun violence prevention is divided into three main sections:

The first section introduces the most relevant considerations about gun policy and race. It helps contextualize the issue of racial disparities in gun violence and the role of the criminal legal system.

The second section is the racial equity impact assessment tool (REIA) for gun violence prevention policy. It includes the analysis of the foundational assessments that were considered to develop the tool and a practical explanation of each of the questions that comprise the REIA. The third section provides resources to build a more equitable gun violence prevention movement. It describes the need to center and invest in BIPOC-led organizations and presents a set of recommendations for developing and sustaining a more equitable gun violence prevention movement. 1 EFSGV (2021) Community Gun Violence. https://efsgv.org/learn/type-of-gun-violence/community-gun-violence/ 2 Black, Indigenous and other people of color
3 Goodwin, A. & Tillmon, C. (2020). Police kill 1,000 people a year with guns. White anti-gun violence advocates never addressed it. NBC News. https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinion/police-kill-1-000-people-year-guns-white-anti-gun-ncna1227536 4 Weiss, B. (2015). Gun Violence Prevention Movement Focuses On Who’s At The T able. Generation Progress. https://genprogress.org/gun-violence- prevention-movement-focuses-on-whos-at-the-table/
5 Beckett, L. (2015). How the Gun Control Debate Ignores Black Lives. ProPublica. https://www.propublica.org/article/how-the-gun-control- debate-ignores-black-lives

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
7 Gun Policy and Race
Understanding the complex historical context of the Second Amendment, gun policy, and race is essential to advancing both public health and racial justice.6 Laws have been passed with explicit racialized intentions, while others may have had unconscious disparate impacts. Regardless, the disparate impact of gun violence on BIPOC communities is far too large to justify inaction. Black Americans are disproportionately affected by homicides.7 The reality is pressing, as the firearm homicide victimization rate for Black people is 11 times higher than for white people. Among American Indian/Alaskan Native people the rate is 3.4 times higher, and among Latinos/Hispanics the rate is 2 times higher.8 However, the total number of Latino/Hispanic victims is likely higher than what data suggests due to most government agencies reporting data on race but not on ethnic origin.9 The impact of gun violence on the lives of BIPOC communities is devastating, but so too is the over-reliance on a heavily punitive criminal legal system to address violence.10 Black men are stopped by police,11 arrested,12 denied bail,13 convicted14 and wrongfully convicted,15 and issued long sentences16 at much higher rates than their white counterparts. As a result, nearly half of all Black men will be arrested before the age of 23.17 Racial and ethnic disparities in the criminal legal system also disproportionately impact Latinos/ Hispanics, American Indians, and Alaskan Natives.18, 19, 20 Though racial disparities in the criminal legal system stem from many sources, overly punitive gun violence prevention policies can play a role in perpetuating the larger issue. Beyond laws that only focus on firearms, the policy agenda of gun violence prevention should work in tandem with other advocacy initiatives addressing racial inequalities in housing, education, transportation, and the criminal legal system, which all contribute to gun violence.
6 See generally, Miller, D. (2021) Conservatives sound like anti-racists — when the cause is gun rights. Washington Post. https://www. washingtonpost.com/outlook/2021/10/27/gun-rights-anti-racism-bruen-conservative-hypocrisy/ 7 The Violence Policy Center (2021) Black Homicide Victimization in the United States: An Analysis of 2018 Homicide Data. https://vpc.org/ revealing-the-impacts-of-gun-violence/black-homicide-victimization/ 8 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Health Statistics. Firearm Deaths and Rates. WONDER Online Database, 2016-2020. https://wonder.cdc.gov/ucd-icd10.html
9 The Violence Policy Center (2021). Hispanic Victims of Lethal Firearms Violence in the United States. https://vpc.org/studies/hispanic21.pdf 10 Balko, R. (2020). There’s overwhelming evidence that the criminal justice system is racist. Here’s the proof. Washington Post. www.washingtonpost. com/graphics/2020/opinions/systemic-racism-police-evidence-criminal-justice-system/ 11 Weatherspoon, F. D. (2004). Racial profiling of African-American males: Stopped, searched, and stripped of constitutional protection. J.

Marshall L. Rev., 38, 439. https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview/vol38/iss2/2/ 12 Welch, K. (2007). Black criminal stereotypes and racial profiling. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 23(3), 276-288. https://doi. org/10.1177/1043986207306870
13 Free, M. D. (2001). Racial bias and the American criminal justice system: Race and presentencing revisited. Critical Criminology, 10(3), 195- 223. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015796321587
14 Berdejó, C. (2018). Criminalizing Race: Racial Disparities in Plea-Bargaining. BCL Rev., 59, 1187. https://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/ viewcontent.cgi?article=3659&context=bclr
15 Gross, S. R., Possley, M., & Stephens, K. (2017). Race and wrongful convictions in the United States. http://www.law.umich.edu/special/ exoneration/Documents/Race_and_Wrongful_Convictions.pdf 16 Mustard, D. B. (2001). Racial, ethnic, and gender disparities in sentencing: Evidence from the US federal courts. The Journal of Law and Economics, 44(1), 285-314. https://doi.org/10.1086/320276 17 Brame, R., Bushway, S. D., Paternoster, R., & Turner, M. G. (2014). Demographic Patterns of Cumulative Arrest Prevalence By Ages 18 and 23.

Crime and Delinquency, 60(3), 471–486. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128713514801 18 Nellis, A. (2016). The color of justice: Racial and ethnic disparity in state prisons. Sentencing Project.https://www.sentencingproject.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/06/The-Color-of-Justice-Racial-and-Ethnic-Disparity-in-State-Prisons.pdf 19 Harris, C. T., Steffensmeier, D., Ulmer, J. T., & Painter-Davis, N. (2009). Are Blacks and Hispanics Disproportionately Incarcerated Relative to Their Arrests? Racial and Ethnic Disproportionality Between Arrest and Incarceration. Race and Social Problems, 1(4), 187–199. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12552-009-9019-x
20 Rovner, A. (2021) Native Disparities in Youth Incarceration. The Sentencing Project. https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/native- disparities-youth-incarceration/
Black men are stopped by
police, arrested, denied bail,
convicted and wrongfully
convicted, and issued long
sentences at much higher
rates than their white
counterparts. As a result,
nearly half of all Black men
will be arrested before the
age of 23.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
8 The Racial Equity Impact Assessment
The main component of this racial equity framework is the Racial Equity Impact Assessment (REIA) for gun violence prevention policy. The REIA is a tool that identifies and assesses factors bearing on racial equity that should be considered before a policy is implemented. These factors may be evaluated to promote racial equity, reduce victimization, and minimize arrests and incarceration. If a policy already exists, this REIA tool can help guide ongoing implementation and/or amendments to that policy to address equity concerns that are identified.

Ideally, using this tool should be a collaborative process within and beyond the organization.

Throughout the assessment, each answer helps guide organizations as they decide whether to move forward, support, change, or advocate for a policy while also considering the risk of inaction.

The REIA requires careful consideration of nine questions. The questions are open-ended and require deliberation and more detailed responses than “yes/no. ” The REIA should be considered as a guide, and not be reduced to a checklist.

REIA
What are the stated objectives of the gun violence prevention policy? What is the context of racial inequity that informs the issue being addressed? What types of racial disparities could potentially result from the policy’s design and implementation?
Who are the specific communities that will be impacted by the policy? What, if any, data can be used to measure whether racial inequities could be reduced, perpetuated, or exacerbated by the policy?
Can any potential racial inequities be avoided or mitigated without compromising the stated objective?
Does the policy remedy existing racial inequities?
Is the proposed solution to mitigate gun violence viable and sustainable? What methodologies can be utilized to evaluate the implementation, progress toward stated objectives, and any racialized impacts of the policy? 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
9 A More Equitable Gun Violence Prevention Movement
Racial equity impact assessments provide a necessary foundation for a more equitable policy analysis within the gun violence prevention movement. When organizations decide to prioritize equitable advocacy and capacity-building, they can draw on the existing assets of communities of color.

With the guidance of diverse stakeholders, we developed a set of recommendations to support every organization in meeting their responsibility to make this space inclusive, equitable, and trauma-informed. These recommendations are designed to develop and sustain a more equitable gun violence prevention movement. These are the topline recommendations:

Identify and engage diverse members in the collective, routinely asking who is missing and inviting them to join .

Identify the collective interest and allow for all stakeholders to provide ongoing input in developing a shared vision and goal(s) .

Establish roles and responsibilities that share power with impacted communities .

Commit to personal and collective growth and healing .

Identify and prioritize policies, programs, and strategies that address interests of all communities represented .

Identify stakeholders, their resources, and their influence to more effectively reach key policy decision-makers .

Engage in ongoing evaluation that is inclusive of all members .

Make equitable collaboration sustainable .

Celebrate the victories and acknowledge the inevitable setbacks that are part of violence prevention advocacy .
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
10 Developing a Framework for Racial
Equity in Gun Violence Prevention
Gun violence prevention organizations should strive to advance racial equity and the distribution of resources in all systems to address the root causes of gun violence. Policies and strategies must acknowledge the intricacies of how gun violence and gun laws impacts Black, Latino/Hispanic and other communities of color differently.

Gun violence destroys families and communities. We seek to reduce both the physical and psychological effects of this violence. In the pursuit of this goal, we are proposing a racial equity framework that challenges us to think critically about the relationship between gun violence prevention and structural racism so that we can authentically engage impacted communities to craft solutions that minimize collateral harm and prioritize racial justice.

Developed in partnership with many stakeholders across the gun violence prevention movement, this racial equity framework is centered in a Racial Equity Impact Assessment (REIA) that can be used by policymakers, researchers, and organizations working to prevent gun violence.

Ideally, using this tool should be a collaborative process within and beyond the organization. Throughout the assessment, each answer helps guide organizations as they decide whether to move forward, support, change, or advocate for a policy while also considering the risk of inaction.

Racial Equity Impact Assessment for Gun Violence Prevention Policy The REIA is a tool that identifies and assesses factors bearing on racial equity that should be considered before a policy is implemented. These factors may be evaluated to promote racial equity, reduce victimization, and minimize arrests and incarceration. If a policy already exists, this REIA tool can help guide ongoing implementation and or amendments to that policy to address equity concerns that are identified.

The REIA requires careful consideration of nine questions. The questions are open-ended and require deliberation and more detailed responses than “yes/no. ” The REIA should not be reduced to a checklist, and should instead generate new points of discussion, tailored to each specific proposal and community. Written beneath each question are additional considerations that may provide additional context and serve as a starting point for dialogue.

Developed in partnership
with many stakeholders
across the gun violence
prevention movement, this
racial equity framework
is centered in a Racial
Equity Impact Assessment
(REIA) that can be used by
policymakers, researchers,
and organizations working to
prevent gun violence.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
11 RACIAL EQUITY IMPACT ASSESSMENT
What are the stated objectives of the
gun violence prevention policy?
– What are the implicit objectives of the
policy?
– What strategies are employed to achieve
those objectives?
What is the context of racial inequity
that informs the issue being addressed?
– What is the historical and contemporary
racial context of the issue this policy
addresses?
– What are the nuances related to the
jurisdiction (national, state, or local) where
the policy will be implemented?
– How might the policy impact different
forms of inequity, including victimization,
arrest, and incarceration?
What types of racial disparities could
potentially result from the policy’s
design and implementation?
– How could the policy reduce, perpetuate, or
exacerbate racial inequity?
– How could disparities in implementation
and impact differ between and within
impacted communities?
Who are the specific communities that
will be impacted by the policy?
– Is the policy based on needs and goals
expressed by impacted communities?
– Have drafters of the policy identified and
engaged impacted communities at every
step of the process?
What, if any, data can be used to
measure whether racial inequities
could be reduced, perpetuated, or
exacerbated by the policy?
– Does the policy rely on a variety of data
sources and types to understand relevant
equity issues?
– What are the gaps in the data?
– How could the data be improved?
Can any potential racial inequities
be avoided or mitigated without
compromising the stated objective?
– Is the policy designed to effectively address
the stated objectives without exacerbating
potential racial inequities?
– Could other options achieve the same
goals while also achieving more equitable
outcomes?
Does the policy remedy existing racial
inequities?
– Can the policy be drafted to ensure anti-
racism, anti-violence, harm reduction, and
decarceration?
Is the proposed solution to mitigate gun
violence viable and sustainable?
– Are there adequate resources to promote
short and long-term success?
– Is there authentic and informed community
support for the policy?
– Is the policy or the review process designed
to evolve as circumstances change over
time?
What methodologies can be utilized to
evaluate the implementation, progress
toward stated objectives, and any
racialized impacts of the policy?
– How do impacted communities define
relevant outcomes, and how can they be
measured?
– How will data be collected, analyzed, and
reported?
– Are evaluation processes transparent and
iterative?
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION 11

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
12 A REIA tool, however, is not to be used in a vacuum, nor can racial equity be achieved through policy analysis alone. This is especially true when such analysis is not inclusive of impacted communities.

Organizations should be intentionally inclusive when working in partnerships with other organizations, and continually assess and improve their practices to ensure they are creating a just and inclusive movement.

Core Values
This report is guided by core values identified during stakeholder convenings:

Gun violence takes many forms and impacts communities in different ways. T o end gun violence in all its forms, there must be multiple and varying solutions.

Race is a human-developed construct that assigns differential value to groups of people that is not based in biology.

No racial group is inherently more violent than other racial groups.

Lived experience can bring valuable knowledge that is just as important to gun violence prevention as scholarship and credentials. All expertise is valuable and necessary to prevent gun violence.

The development of racially equitable policy cannot occur without confronting systemic racism.

Laws intended to reduce gun violence can cause racialized collateral harm. For example, harsh mandatory minimum prison sentences for illegal gun possession can exacerbate racial disparities in arrests and incarceration while doing nothing to reduce the burden of gun violence in BIPOC communities.21 Even when policies and interventions are based on evidence, outcomes related to racial equity need to be more comprehensively measured, reported, and incorporated into the development of gun violence prevention policies. Another contributing factor is the lack of stakeholder engagement in the development of these policies. The communities that most suffer from gun violence are often excluded from the policy process in favor of other stakeholders with greater influence and power.

We seek to correct and avoid this injustice believing that reconciliation with communities of color must be an explicit part of equitable advocacy and policy development.

In the pursuit of racial justice, we agreed that:
• A race-neutral approach is insufficient at best and harmful at worst. Policy development, advocacy, violence prevention, and assessing disparate impacts must be inclusive of impacted communities.
• The movement and interventions should address the root causes of gun violence, including systemic racism, in a culturally appropriate and trauma-informed manner. 21 Siegler, A. (2021) End Mandatory Minimums. Brennan Center for Justice https://www.brennancenter.org/our-work/analysis-opinion/end- mandatory-minimums
T o read more of
the stakeholder
convenings’ themes,
see Appendix 1.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
13 The tools and recommendations in this report are informed by theories focused on equity:
• The public health concept of social determinants of health informs the understanding of the structural causes of violence. Social determinants of health are defined as the conditions in which people “are born, grow, live, work, and age” and how those conditions impact access to “economic and social resources and opportunities that influence an individual’s access to health-promoting living and working conditions and to healthy choices” and make real and lasting individual and intergenerational effects on health.22,23,24 Racism, racial segregation, and poverty are social determinants of health that can have intergenerational effects on health. Research has shown that the wealth gap, level of citizens’ trust in institutions, economic opportunity, and public welfare spending are all related to firearm homicide rates in the United States.25

22 Kim D. (2019). Social determinants of health in relation to firearm-related homicides in the United States: A nationwide multilevel cross- sectional study. PLoS Medicine, 16(12) https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002978 23 Braveman, P ., Egerter, S., & Williams, D. R. (2011). The social determinants of health: coming of age. Annual review of public health, 32, 381–398. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-031210-101218 24 Massey, D. S. (2004). “Segregation And Stratification: A Biosocial Perspective. ” Du Bois Review: Social Science Research on Race 1(01):7–25. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1742058X04040032
25 Kim, D. (2019). Social determinants of health in relation to firearm-related homicides in the United States: a nationwide multilevel cross- sectional study. PLoS Medicine, 16(12). https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1002978

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
14 Gun Policy and Race
Understanding the complex historical context of the Second Amendment, gun policy, and race is essential to advancing both public health and racial justice.26 Laws have been passed with explicit racialized intentions, while others may have had unconscious disparate impacts. Yet, the disparate impact of gun violence on BIPOC communities is far too large to justify inaction. For example, the firearm homicide victimization rate for Black people is 11 times higher than for white people.

Among American Indian/Alaskan Native people the rate is 3.4 times higher, and among Latino/ Hispanic people the rate is 2 times higher.27 However, the total number of Latino/Hispanic victims is likely higher than what data suggests due to most government agencies reporting data on race but not on ethnic origin.28
The origins of the Second Amendment in the early United States remains a topic of ongoing debate. The Founders’ distrust of unaccountable standing armies29 and the empowerment of states to create their own armed militias for protection30 have been theorized as potential inspirations for the Second Amendment.

Fears from southern states that federal control of state militias could neutralize their slave patrols,31 which were overseen by, or had become synonymous with, state militias in some southern colonies, is another.32 Given the Second Amendment’s reference to “militias, ” many early laws limiting the usage of firearms were grounded in the notion of militia service and public safety.33, 34 T exas, for example, generally prohibited the public carrying of firearms in 1871 in response to “widely publicized racial violence against Black people in Madison County, T exas. ”35 However, there were also racially discriminatory laws preventing enslaved and formerly enslaved people from possessing firearms, contributing to a broader legal agenda to justify and solidify slavery throughout the states.36
26 Miller, D. (2021). Conservatives sound like anti-racists — when the cause is gun rights. Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost.com/ outlook/2021/10/27/gun-rights-anti-racism-bruen-conservative-hypocrisy/ 27 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Center for Health Statistics. Firearm Deaths and Rates. WONDER Online Database, 2016-2020. Available: https://wonder.cdc.gov/ucd-icd10.html 28 The Violence Policy Center (2021). Hispanic Victims of Lethal Firearms Violence in the United States. https://vpc.org/studies/hispanic21.pdf 29 See Perpich v. Department of Defense, 496 U.S. 334, 340 (1990), where the Supreme Court of the United States reasoned that the Second Amendment originated from the competing considerations that “[o]n the one hand, there was a widespread fear that a national standing Army posed an intolerable threat to individual liberty and to the sovereignty of the separate States, while, on the other hand, there was a recognition of the danger of relying on inadequately trained soldiers as the primary means of providing for the common defense. Thus, Congress was authorized both to raise and support a national Army and also to organize ‘the Militia. ’” See also, Richard Kohn, Eagle and Sword: The Federalists and the Creation of the Military Establishment in America, 1783-1802, 3-9 (1975) observing how experiences with British armies created a distrust in professional militaries among colonial Americans. 30 Cornell, S., & DeDino, N. (2004). A Well Regulated Right: The Early American Origins of Gun Control, 73 Fordham L. Rev. 487. https://ir.lawnet. fordham.edu/flr/vol73/iss2/3
31 Bogus, C. T. (1998). The Hidden History of the Second Amendment, 31 U.C. Davis L. Rev. 309. https://docs.rwu.edu/cgi/viewcontent. cgi?article=1316&context=law_fac_fs
32 Anderson, C. (2021). Second: Race and Guns in a Fatally Unequal America. Bloomsbury. 33 See US Const. amend. II (“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed. ”)
34 Spitzer, R. (2017). Gun Law History in the United States and Second Amendment Rights, 80 Law and Contemporary Problems 55-83, 58. http:// scholarship.law.duke.edu/lcp/vol80/iss2/3
35 Id.
36 See Thomas Eddlem, The Racist Origin of America’s Gun Control Laws, 30 New American 18 35-39 (2014), recounting “slave codes” in the 17th -19th centuries that barred slaves and freedmen from owning weapons, though the ratification of the 14th Amendment made these laws categorically unconstitutional.

Understanding the complex
historical context of the
Second Amendment, gun
policy, and race is essential to
advancing both public health
and racial justice.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
15 In the United States, people have been entitled to equal protection of the laws since the ratification of the 14th Amendment in 1868, though that has not been every
person’s experience.37 Laws based explicitly on race must be narrowly tailored to further a compelling government interest, which is a high burden for the government to meet.38 Thus, the majority of laws, including gun laws, from the post-Reconstruction period to present, make no mention
of race. Instead, many gun laws focus on a person’s conduct (e.g., carrying, possessing with intent to commit a crime, possessing during a crime) or a person’s status (e.g., having a prior conviction).39 However, being facially neutral does not necessarily mean a law lacked racist intent or that it avoided creating racially disparate impacts. Discretion at every level of the application of laws can lead to inequities, whether intentional or not.40, 41 This does not mean that the existing gun laws should be eliminated, however. In their brief for New Y ork Pistol & Rifle Association, Inc. v. Bruen, a pending Second Amendment case before the Supreme Court, the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund and the
National Urban League noted that the toll of gun violence falls disproportionately on BIPOC communities and that
firearm regulation plays an important role in protecting those communities.42
Firearm policies have often relied on the criminal legal system to address gun violence, and in doing so have failed to truly engage with those communities most affected by gun violence. These impacted communities may have different approaches and insights that have been neglected in broader gun violence prevention discourse. Yet, no advocate can adequately represent the interests of communities if they do not directly engage with members of the community in defining and addressing the issues that matter. This notion is especially true in the intersection of policy and racial equity, given how BIPOC communities have historically been excluded from the policymaking process.43
Though research has shown that certain firearm policies can enhance community safety, substantial investments also
need to be made in initiatives that address violence beyond 37 U.S. Const. amend. XIV, § 1, stating that“[n]o State shall make or enforce any law which shall… deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. ”
38 Adarand Constructors, Inc. v. Pena, 515 U.S. 200, 235(1995). 39 18 U.SC. § 922(g)(1).
40 Brief of the Black Attorneys of Legal Aid, the Bronx Defenders, the Brooklyn Defenders Services, et al. as Amici Curiae Supporting Petitioners New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. et al., v. Bruen, (No. 20-843), 2021 WL 4173477. 41 Zick, T. (2020). Framing the Second Amendment: Gun Rights, Civil Rights and Civil Liberties, 106 Iowa L. Rev. 229 https://ilr.law.uiowa.edu/ assets/Uploads/ILR-106-1-Zick.pdf
42 Brief for the NAACP Legal Defense & Educational Fund, Inc. and the National Urban League as Amici Curiae Supporting Respondents pg. 14- 19, New York State Rifle & Pistol Association, Inc. et al., v. Bruen, (No. 20-843), 2021 WL 4173477. (U.S.). 43 See Appendix 1
44 Kerner, O. (1968). Report of the National Advisory Commission on Civil Disorders. For sale by the Supt. of Docs., U.S. Govt. Print. Off. 45 George, A. (2018). The 1968 Kerner Commission Got it Right, But Nobody Listened. Smithsonian Magazine. https://www.smithsonianmag.com/ smithsonian-institution/1968-kerner-commission-got-it-right-nobody-listened-180968318/ The historic overreliance on
the criminal legal system left
a gap in addressing root causes
of gun violence, another
significant issue contributing
to modern cycles of violence
and related racial inequities.

More than 50 years ago, the
Kerner Commission found that
poverty and institutional racism
were driving inner-city violence.44
Summarizing the Commission’s
findings, analysts have noted
how “bad policing practices, a
flawed justice system, unscrupulous
consumer credit practices, poor
or inadequate housing, high
unemployment, voter suppression,
and other culturally embedded
forms of racial discrimination all
converged to propel violent upheaval
on the streets of African-American
neighborhoods in America.”45
In spite of the commission’s
1968 recommendations to
address systemic racism-fueled
root causes of violence, the
federal government, and many
organizations deliberately took a
law and order approach, missing
the opportunity to address the
root causes of violence.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
16 policies focusing only on firearms, such as community violence intervention programs, crisis management systems, and trauma-informed initiatives, to more effectively reduce gun violence in BIPOC communities. Beyond laws that only focus on firearms, the policy agenda of gun violence prevention should work in tandem with other advocacy initiatives addressing racial inequalities in housing, education, transportation, and the criminal legal system, which all contribute to community violence. In recent years, activists in the gun violence prevention space have begun to incorporate these upstream factors into their gun violence prevention platforms, but more work is needed to adopt a comprehensive approach to reduce gun violence and promote racial equity.46 Racial Disparities in Gun Violence and the Criminal Legal System Research is clear in asserting that no racial group is inherently more violent than any other. Thus, it is crucial to look for identifiable causes when disparities in violence do occur. Disparities in violent crime along racial lines are symptomatic of other underlying issues.47 Where you live,48 exposure to trauma early in life,49 and a host of other factors can contribute to the likeness of experiencing or committing violent acts.

The CDC has also issued a list of individual, family, community, and social risk factors for violent crime, none of which involve race or ethnicity.50 Because of the systemic inequities BIPOC communities face, they are more likely to be exposed to the environmental and social risk factors for violence, like housing instability, high rates of unemployment, inadequate social services, and poverty. Consequently, BIPOC individuals are disproportionately impacted by interpersonal gun violence. For example, according to analysis of data from the CDC, in 2019 Black men were 14 times more likely to die by firearm homicide compared to white men, a disparity that jumps to a 20-fold difference among young people (ages 15-34).51 Indeed, firearm homicides were the leading cause of death for young Black males, who make up only 2% of the U.S. population but accounted for 37% of all gun homicides.52 Black, American Indian/Alaska Native and Latino/Hispanic people also died by firearm homicide at much higher rates than their white counterparts.53 Intersectionality between other demographic categories can exacerbate the likelihood of experiencing gun violence even further. For example, though men were over five times more likely to die from firearms than women in 2019, the impact of firearm violence on women differed greatly along racial lines.54
46 See Appendix 1
47 Savage, J. (2006). Interpreting “Percent Black”: An Analysis of Race and Violent Crime in Washington D.C. Journal of Ethnicity in Criminal Justice, 4(1/2), 29–63. https://doi.org/10.1300/J222v04n01_02. 48 Legewie, J. (2018). Living on the Edge: Neighborhood Boundaries and the Spatial Dynamics of Violent Crime. Demography, 55(5), 1957–1977. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-018-0708-1
49 Liu J. (2011). Early Health Risk Factors for Violence: Conceptualization, Review of the Evidence, and Implications. Aggression and violent behavior, 16(1), 63–73. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.avb.2010.12.003. 50 The Center for Disease Control. (2020). Risk and protective factors | violence prevention. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/youthviolence/riskprotectivefactors.html. 51 Educational Fund to Stop Gun Violence and Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. (2021). A Public Health Crisis Decades in the Making: A Review of 2019 CDC Gun Mortality Data. http://efsgv.org/2019CDCdata 52 Id.
53 Id
54 Id

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
17 The impact of gun violence on the lives of BIPOC
communities is devastating, but so too is the over-
reliance on a heavily punitive criminal legal system
to address violence.57 Black males are stopped by
police,58 arrested,59 denied bail,60 convicted61 and
wrongfully convicted,62 and issued long sentences63
at much higher rates than their white counterparts.

As a result, nearly half of all Black men will be
arrested before the age of 23,64 and one out of every
three Black men has a felony conviction.65 Similarly,
Black women are imprisoned at a rate nearly twice
that of white women.66 Black Americans make up
13% of the U.S. population, yet account for 40%
of the country’s total incarcerated population
and a third of state and federal prisoners.67, 68
Racial and ethnic disparities in the criminal legal
system also disproportionately impact Latinos/
Hispanics, American Indians, and Alaskan Natives.69,
70, 71 Though racial disparities in the criminal legal
system stem from many sources, overly punitive
gun violence prevention policies can play a role in
perpetuating the larger issue. Given the limited
degree to which the criminal justice system is able
to apprehend and sanction those who commit
violent crimes with a firearm, it focuses instead
on those who may be illegally possessing firearms.

Police often identify people illegally possessing
firearms by using approaches such as hot-spot
55 Gardner, J. W., & Sanborn, J. S. (1990). Years of potential life lost (YPLL)—what does it measure?. Epidemiology, 322-329. https://doi. org/10.1097/00001648-199007000-00012
56 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control. Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS). Y ears of Potential Life Lost (YPLL) Report, 1981-2019. https://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/ypll.html 57 Balko, R. (2020). There’s overwhelming evidence that the criminal justice system is racist. Here’s the proof. Washington Post. www.washingtonpost. com/graphics/2020/opinions/systemic-racism-police-evidence-criminal-justice-system/ 58 Weatherspoon, F. D. (2004). Racial profiling of African-American males: Stopped, searched, and stripped of constitutional protection. J.

Marshall L. Rev., 38, 439. https://repository.law.uic.edu/lawreview/vol38/iss2/2/ 59 Welch, K. (2007). Black criminal stereotypes and racial profiling. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice, 23(3), 276-288. https://doi. org/10.1177/1043986207306870
60 Free, M. D. (2001). Racial bias and the American criminal justice system: Race and presentencing revisited. Critical Criminology, 10(3), 195- 223. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1015796321587
61 Berdejó, C. (2018). Criminalizing Race: Racial Disparities in Plea-Bargaining. BCL Rev., 59, 1187. https://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/cgi/ viewcontent.cgi?article=3659&context=bclr
62 Gross, S. R., Possley, M. & Stephens, K. (2017). Race and wrongful convictions in the United States. http://www.law.umich.edu/special/ exoneration/Documents/Race_and_Wrongful_Convictions.pdf 63 Mustard, D. B. (2001). Racial, ethnic, and gender disparities in sentencing: Evidence from the US federal courts. The Journal of Law and Economics, 44(1), 285-314. https://doi.org/10.1086/320276 64 Brame, R., Bushway, S. D., Paternoster, R., & Turner, M. G. (2014). Demographic Patterns of Cumulative Arrest Prevalence By Ages 18 and 23.

Crime and delinquency, 60(3), 471–486. https://doi.org/10.1177/0011128713514801 65 Shannon, S., Uggen, C., Schnittker, J., Thompson, M., Wakefield, S., & Massoglia, M. (2017). The Growth, Scope, and Spatial Distribution of People With Felony Records in the United States, 1948-2010. Demography, 54 (5), 1795–1818. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13524-017-0611-1 66 Bronson, J. & Carson, E. A. (2019). Prisoners in 2017. Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=6546. 67 Sawyer, W. & Wagner, P . (2019). Mass incarceration: The whole pie 2019. Prison Policy Initiative. https://www.prisonpolicy.org/reports/pie2019. html.
68 Bronson, J. & Carson, E. A. (2019). Prisoners in 2017. Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbdetail&iid=6546. 69 Nellis, A. (2016). The color of justice: Racial and ethnic disparity in state prisons. Sentencing Project.https://www.sentencingproject.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/06/The-Color-of-Justice-Racial-and-Ethnic-Disparity-in-State-Prisons.pdf 70 Harris, C. T., Steffensmeier, D., Ulmer, J. T., & Painter-Davis, N. (2009). Are Blacks and Hispanics Disproportionately Incarcerated Relative to Their Arrests? Racial and Ethnic Disproportionality Between Arrest and Incarceration. Race and Social Problems, 1(4), 187–199. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12552-009-9019-x
71 Rovner, A. (2021) Native Disparities in Youth Incarceration. The Sentencing Project. https://www.sentencingproject.org/publications/native- disparities-youth-incarceration/
In studying the impact of gun violence
and homicide, public health researchers
often refer to “years of potential life lost, ”
an estimate that helps quantify social and
economic loss due to premature death.55
Because firearm homicide affects younger
people – particularly young Black men and
boys at higher rates, years can easily stretch
to decades of potential life lost by victims,
their families, and their communities. In
2019, gun homicide of Black men accounted
for more years of potential life lost before
the age of 65 than cancer, diabetes, stroke,
pneumonia, and HIV combined.56 While often
ignored in the discussion of health disparities,
gun violence has an enormous impact on the
health and well-being of Black men, and it is
a primary driver in the gap in life expectancy
between white and Black Americans.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
18 policing, traffic stops, and stop-and-frisk practices in communities with high rates of gun violence.72 As a result, it is no coincidence that in 2019, 42% of all people arrested for weapon offenses in the United States were Black.73
Blacks, Latinos/Hispanics, and other people of color are also more likely to experience police brutality than their white counterparts. Research suggests that gun owners, including law enforcement officers, are more likely than unarmed individuals “to be more vigilant toward people of color because of stereotypical assumptions that racial and ethnic minorities are more likely to be involved with crime. ”74 As a result, seemingly innocuous interactions can escalate quickly. Black adults are almost five times more likely to report having been unfairly stopped by police than white adults,75 and when combined with armed and racist hypervigilance, these patterns and biases can have deadly consequences. Black men and women, American Indian and Alaskan Native men and women, and Latino/Hispanic men are all more likely to be killed by police than white peers.76 Philando Castile, for example, was shot and killed by police while reaching for his ID during a traffic stop in 2016 after informing the officer that he was in legal possession of a firearm.77 Castile followed the law, but he was not protected by or from it.

In addition to the direct consequences of violence and
imprisonment, there are enormous collateral consequences resulting from an individual’s contacts with the criminal legal system. People who were formerly incarcerated, also known as returning citizens, are often precluded from various forms of government assistance, housing, job opportunities, and the right to vote — even after they have completed their sentences.78 The trauma associated with exclusion disproportionately impacts the health and well-being of Black Americans and other marginalized communities and contributes to ongoing health disparities. An understanding of racial disparities in the criminal legal system, including the potential overlap between how these disparities intersect with other societal inequities, is essential to developing gun violence prevention policies that correct past mistakes and prevent future harm. 72 Olson, D. (2022). Illegal Firearm Possession: A Reflection on Policies and Practices that May Miss the Mark and Exacerbate Racial Disparity in the Justice System https://firearmslaw.duke.edu/2022/01/illegal-firearm-possession-a-reflection-on-policies-and-practices-that-may-miss-the- mark-and-exacerbate-racial-disparity-in-the-justice-system/#_ftn15 73 Id
74 Gearhart, M. C., Berg, K. A., Jones, C., & Johnson, S. D. (2019). Fear of Crime, Racial Bias, and Gun Ownership. Health & Social Work, 44(4), 241–248. https://doi.org/10.1093/hsw/hlz025
75 DeSilver, D., Lipka, M.. & Fahmy, D. (2020). 10 things we know about race and policing in the U.S. Pew Research Center https://www.pewresearch. org/fact-tank/2020/06/03/10-things-we-know-about-race-and-policing-in-the-u-s/ 76 Edwards, F., Lee, H.& Esposito, M. (2019). Risk of being killed by police use of force in the United States by age, race–ethnicity, and sex. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1821204116 77 Berman, M. (2017). What the police officer who shot Philando Castile said about the shooting. The Washington Post. https://www.washingtonpost. com/news/post-nation/wp/2017/06/21/what-the-police-officer-who-shot-philando-castile-said-about-the-shooting/ 78 Pager, D. (2003). The mark of a criminal record. American Journal of Sociology 108.5: 937-975. https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/pager/files/ pager_ajs.pdf
People who were formerly
incarcerated, also known as
returning citizens, are often
precluded from various forms
of government assistance,
housing, job opportunities,
and the right to vote — even
after they have completed
their sentences.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
19 Racial Equity Impact Assessment
Racial equity impact assessments (REIAs) identify and assess factors bearing on racial equity that should be considered before a policy is implemented. These factors may be evaluated to promote racial equity, reduce victimization, and minimize arrests and incarceration. If a policy already exists, this REIA model can help guide ongoing implementation and or amendments to that policy to address equity concerns that are previously identified by facilitating a standard whereby racial considerations are intentionally assessed.

Analysis of Foundational Assessments
T o build this REIA, we compared eight racial equity impact assessment frameworks developed by the Coalition to
Stop Gun Violence (CSGV)79, the Government Alliance on
Race and Equity (GARE)80, the Greenlining Institute81, if, A Foundation for Radical Possibility82 (formerly the Consumer Health Foundation), the Institute for Intersectionality Research and Policy83, the Massachusetts Public Health Association (MPHA)84, Race Forward85, and the University of Southern California Program for Environmental and Regional Equity (USC PERE)86 to identify the core themes of racial equity analyses. These themes were then discussed during a series of convenings with diverse groups of stakeholders involved in the policy creation and implementation process, and the insights from those discussions were distilled down to create the nine questions presented below.

It is worth noting that several of these models build directly off of one another. There are seven broad categories that all of the REIAs have in common: (1) state the purpose of the policy, (2) identify and engage stakeholders impacted by the policy, (3) identify the causes of racial disparities the policy is designed to address, (4) consider potential racial disparities of the policy’s implementation, (5) assess the viability of the proposed policy solution, (6) consider if other options can achieve more equitable outcomes, and (7) specify what evaluation methods will be used to measure the impacts of the policy.

Different REIAs address these considerations differently, depending on the breadth or specificity of the policies they are designed to address. For instance, Race Forward’s REIA is meant to be applied to any policy by any entity, while the USC PERE’s REIA is intended to be applied by environmental scientists in issues concerning environmental justice. The purpose of the comparative analysis is not to discern which model is “better, ” but rather to discern which aspects of the REIAs are best-suited for gun violence prevention policy. 79 The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. (2020). Policy Impact Assessment. 80 Government Alliance on Race and Equity. (2015). Racial Equity T oolkit: An Opportunity to Operationalize Equity. https://www.racialequityalliance. org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/GARE-Racial_Equity_T oolkit.pdf 81 The Greenlining Institute. (2013). Racial Equity T oolkit: Implementing Greenlining’s Racial Equity Framework. https://greenlining.org/wp-content/ uploads/2013/07/GLI-REF-T oolkit.pdf
82 Consumer Health Foundation. (2017). Racial Equity Impact Assessment T ool. 83 Hankivsky, O., Grace, D., Hunting, G. et al. (2014). An intersectionality-based policy analysis framework: critical reflections on a methodology for advancing equity. Int J Equity Health 13, 119. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-014-0119-x 84 Massachusetts Public Health Association. (2016). Health Equity Policy Framework. https://mapublichealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/ mpha-health-equity-policy-framework-approved-11-16-201
85 Race Forward. (2009). Racial Equity Impact Assessment. https://www.raceforward.org/sites/default/files/RacialJusticeImpactAssessment_v5.pdf 86 Pastor, M., Wander, M., & Auer, M. (2012). Equity Issue Brief: Advancing Environmental Justice through Sustainability Planning. University of Southern California Program for Environmental & Regional Equity. https://dornsife.usc.edu/assets/sites/242/docs/EQUITY_ISSUE_BRIEF_Env_ Just_Full.pdf
T o read more of the Analyses of
Foundational Racial Equity Impact
Assessments, see Appendix 4
T o read more of the Convenings’
REIA discussion, see Appendix 3

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
20 1
How to Use the REIA
The REIA tool can be used by all organizations working on gun violence prevention, their partners, and allies (as well as organizations working on violence prevention in general). It is designed to enable people from multidisciplinary perspectives to identify and assess all factors bearing on the assessment. Ideally, using the REIA should be a collaborative process within and beyond the organization. It is important to connect with trusted partners, find a diversity of perspectives within the organization, and embark on this task with partners with lived experience to encourage a more holistic assessment.

Throughout the assessment, each answer helps guide organizations as they decide whether to move forward, support, change, or advocate for a policy while also considering the risk of inaction. The final answer depends on the values and goals of the particular organization. The REIA is a decision- making guide and it is not intended to produce a simple “yes/no” answer. As a decision making guide, it needs to be consulted and updated periodically as new information becomes available to incorporate changing circumstances or developing knowledge.

The REIA requires careful consideration of nine questions.

The questions are open-ended and require deliberation. The assessment should not be reduced to a checklist and should instead generate new points of discussion tailored to each specific proposal and context. Beneath each question are additional considerations that may provide additional context and serve as a starting point for dialogue.

Explanation of the Racial Equity Impact Assessment Questions What are the stated objectives of the gun violence prevention policy? – What are the implicit objectives of the policy?
– What strategies are employed to achieve those objectives? Policymakers must articulate clear objectives, desired outcomes, and clear strategies on how to achieve them. Some objectives may focus on reducing a particular type of gun violence, such as mass violence, group violence, interpersonal violence, police violence, suicide, or accidental discharge.

Some strategies will target a specific intervention point, such as limiting the manufacture and sale of particular types of guns, prohibiting gun ownership or removing guns from people based on their history of dangerous or criminal actions, or strengthening emergency medical response systems.

Others will target root causes of violence more broadly, such as ensuring access to necessities, supports, and opportunities for advancement.

Policymakers must consider racial impact when defining objectives and include racial equity as a complementary objective. An objective that advances equity might be increasing public safety for the communities most adversely affected by gun violence. Achieving such an objective requires a clear definition of public safety that reflects the values of the most impacted communities.

Articulating a clear objective will inform the strategies deployed to achieve it. For example, if impacted communities express that the absence of meaningful employment opportunities or See Appendix 5 for an
example of the REIA applied
to Colorado’s Extreme Risk
Protection Order

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
21 2
3 displacement fueled by gentrification is driving gun violence, an effective solution may include investments in life-change programs connecting people to employment, and reliable housing. In this example, an effective and equitable solution might not prioritize investments in law enforcement as that would not address the root causes of safety deprivation.

What is the context of racial inequity that informs the issue being addressed? – What is the historical and contemporary racial context of the issue this policy addresses? – What are the nuances related to the jurisdiction (national, state, or local) where the policy will be implemented?
– How might the policy impact different forms of inequity, including victimization, arrest, and incarceration?
It is necessary at the outset of developing policy solutions to be explicit about race, racism, and racial injustice.87 Given the historical and contemporary impacts of many laws on BIPOC communities, we cannot leave it up to chance that legislation will address racial injustice without being intentional about race throughout the policy creation process. This includes discussing the history of disparity, unequal treatment, trauma, and violence specific to the jurisdiction governed by the proposed policy change (e.g., nation, state, municipality, agency, institution). At the same time, we must consider what the existing evidence says about this policy.

Relying solely on broad terminology, such as “people of color” or “impacted communities” may conflate the experiences of different groups in ways that make it difficult to identify and address each of their individual needs. Instead, it is important to recognize the past and current realities of each community that is impacted by the harm or proposed solution at issue. Ensure that the work of developing, advocating, and implementing change is grounded in truth and awareness.

It is important to think about all types of racial disparity outcomes beyond policing and the criminal legal system. Considering a broader scope that includes victimization in the forms of psychological trauma, impacts on learning, and home values can guide a more comprehensive approach to identifying racial disparities.

What types of racial disparities could potentially result from the policy’s design and implementation?
– How could the policy reduce, perpetuate, or exacerbate racial inequity? – How could disparities in implementation and impact differ between and within impacted communities?
Without careful forethought, gun violence prevention policies might be formulated or effectuated in a way that creates harmful public health and safety outcomes for a particular racial group.

Adverse impacts may result from a policy being overinclusive of people who are not at risk of violence or underinclusive of people who are at high risk. When a policy solution is under 87 Consumer Health Foundation (now if, A Foundation for Radical Possibility). (2017). “When racial equality is not consciously addressed, racial inequality is often unconsciously replicated. ” Racial Equity Impact Assessment T ool. http://www.consumerhealthfdn.org/wp-content/ uploads/2017/08/Abbreviated-racial-equity-impact-assessment-tool.pdf

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
22 4
consideration, policymakers and advocates must determine the potential for racialized outcomes and whether those consequences are helpful or harmful to each impacted community.

Not all potential harms are obvious. It is important to consider various dimensions of harm (e.g., physical, psychological, social, economic), indirect harms, long-term harms, and intersections of harm. One way of identifying blind spots is to identify who will enforce the policy, who will benefit, and how that benefit will impact anyone who is excluded or left behind. For example, in a densely populated city, could a reduction in gun violence ultimately lead to an increase in home values and displacement of long-time residents of color if it is not accompanied by an affordable housing policy? In a rural setting, will rehabilitation services be out of reach? In a state budget, will the investment in the proposed solution require divestment from another valuable program or service? Will the policy allow powerful organizations like firearm manufacturers and distributors to profit from weapon sales and avoid responsibility for prevention efforts? Who are the specific communities that will be impacted by the policy? – Is the policy based on needs and goals expressed by impacted communities? – Have drafters of the policy identified and engaged impacted communities at every step of the process?
Individuals have multiple group memberships shaping their life experience within communities, so no single community should be considered a monolith. Equitable policymaking uses an intersectional lens to recognize differences within and between communities, build coalitions, and support community leadership.

Consider the ways that intersections of identity and oppression create differential experiences of harm and violence. Which communities are most impacted by the problem? Which communities are affected by the policy? Which communities are overlooked or excluded by the policy? Identifying impacted communities will also depend on the type of harm the policy addresses – interpersonal gun violence, group violence, suicide, mass violence, police violence, etc. Consider that different forms of gun violence impact different communities to varying degrees. Evaluate the extent to which historical trends may have shifted. For example, white men account for a large portion of suicides, however, suicide rates are rising in Indigenous communities.88 These trends may differ from place to place.

Also consider the differential impacts of gun violence within communities. When identifying “impacted communities, ” identify intersections within and between groups. “Black community” or “communities of color, ” for example, are overly general. Are young Black men most impacted by the type of gun violence being addressed? Are Black trans women most impacted? Young adults transitioning out of foster care? Black and Latino/Hispanic people experiencing homelessness? Returning citizens without access to long-term mental health care or housing? There may be disparities in implementation across different intersectional identities.

Identified communities should have a meaningful role in policy development, implementation, and evaluation. Explore whether the communities agree with the policy objective, in addition to 88 Frakt, A. (2021). What Can Be Learned From Differing Rates of Suicide Among Groups. New Y ork Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/30/ upshot/suicide-demographic-differences.html

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
23 5
6 the specific strategy. Respect their agency by ensuring the policy serves their expressed interest and values. Acknowledge and support the work already underway to further those interests. A successfully designed and implemented policy should reflect the participation and address the needs of impacted communities.

What, if any, data could be used to measure whether racial inequities could be reduced, perpetuated, or exacerbated by the policy?
– Does the policy rely on a variety of data sources and types to understand relevant equity issues?
– What are the gaps in the data?
– How could the data be improved?
Use data to assess the potential impact of a gun violence prevention policy. The type and source of data should be responsive to the policy objectives identified with stakeholders, the strategies necessary to achieve the objectives, the direct or collateral consequences of those strategies, and most importantly, the outcomes that are relevant to stakeholders measured in ways that are relevant to them. Consider people’s experiences as valuable sources of data. How have the people closest to the problem experienced similar policies in the past? The data should specifically address the context where the policy will be implemented.

Consider historical data. What is known about historical root causes of inequity generally and as it relates to public safety? How might the intervention exacerbate or reduce inequity? Examine immediate and long-term outcomes, such as the impact of mass incarceration on families and communities. Appreciate the limitations of data and how bias can affect data collection, analysis, and reporting. It is important to consider how and who will collect data. When gathering data from the community it is essential for those collectors to be part of the community. Often, policymakers and even constituents place a high value on things like showing causal inference through randomized experiments or trials. Quantitative data and analysis, including data produced by law enforcement and other government agencies, are fallible. Use a critical eye and consider multiple types, – qualitative and quantitative – sources of data. Consider whether the data presentation is pathologizing to marginalized communities and contributes to blame. Also, do not be deterred by the absence of data. Rather, identify the gaps in data and adjust policy evaluation processes to address those gaps.

Whether a policy intentionally, unintentionally, or potentially causes racially disparate outcomes, it is important to determine: 1) Is that disparity necessary to achieve the policy’s stated objective? 2)

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
24 7
8 Could the resultant disparity cause more harm than the policy could successfully prevent? And 3) Are there alternative solutions or additional solutions that could achieve the same outcome without causing inequity or other harms?
T o ensure that the policy does not create harm that outweighs its positive impact, consider multiple approaches to achieve the stated objective (question 1). If a policy is the best option and still poses a risk of adverse impact, consider whether a separate policy change can quickly and effectively mitigate that risk. When a potential risk of harm is identified, develop in advance the alternatives, changes, and remedies that will address that harm.

Does the policy remedy existing racial inequities?
– Can the policy be drafted to ensure anti-racism, anti-violence, harm reduction, and decarceration?
Because racial bias – conscious or unconscious – pervades every aspect of public life, policymakers must move beyond race-neutrality, be anti-racist, and actively and aggressively promote fairness and equity for all. Before moving forward with a solution, policymakers and advocates must consider not only whether that solution will eliminate racial inequity, but also whether it will reverse unjust racialized outcomes.

After identifying the current and historical causes of inequity, it is important to map out solutions that address those causes at the root, such as investing in the infrastructure that communities need to thrive. Recognizing that factors such as aggressive policing, prosecution, and incarceration have been and continue to be weaponized against racial minorities, an anti-racist policy is one that accounts for that risk and explictly promotes anti-violence, harm reduction, and decarceration.

Is the proposed solution to mitigate gun violence viable and sustainable? – Are there adequate resources to promote short and long-term success? – Is there authentic and informed community support for the policy? – Is the policy or the review process designed to evolve as circumstances change over time? Over time, the impact of a policy change is determined by how feasibly and consistently it can be implemented, as well as the soundness and clarity of the new rule when it is drafted. Indeed, the overwhelming number of statutes make them practically impossible to enforce due to scarcity of resources, weak enforcement mechanisms, or lack of political will.89 A roadmap is needed to ensure the necessary conditions and supports exist. A viability roadmap should include planning for: 1) Community engagement, stakeholder leadership, and coalition building; 2) Adequate funding and human resources; 3) Data collection, analysis, and publication; 4) Periodic review and revision at sensible intervals; and 5) Public oversight and accountability. 89 Strazzella, J. (1998). Federalization of Criminal Law. National Criminal Justice Reference Service. U.S. Department of Justice, Office of Justice Programs. https://www.ojp.gov/ncjrs/virtual-library/abstracts/federalization-criminal-law

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
25 9
What methodologies can be utilized to evaluate the implementation, progress toward stated objectives, and any racialized impacts of the policy? – How do impacted communities define relevant outcomes, and how can they be measured? – How will data be collected, analyzed, and reported?
– Are evaluation processes transparent and iterative?
Data will both inform the development of a policy and also indicate whether the policy is successful.

Data collection is not a one-time task. Set a timeline for early and iterative evaluations. Informed by the theory of change undergirding the policy and the goals and values of the communities most impacted by the policy, identify short- and long-term markers of success. Intentional relationship building with those communities should allow for regular, candid feedback. The data collection plan should include a plan to deepen community relationships over time. Can the most impacted communities see a change in their communities? Do members of these communities feel safer as a consequence of the policy intervention? Share progress with partners and reflect together on next steps or course changes.

Publish data about successes, challenges, and lessons learned. This transparency, as well as more formal public oversight, is necessary to hold policymakers to task. Part of relationship building is demonstrating that the policy and its implementers are doing what they say – be accountable to the people most impacted by the policy. This includes taking public grievances seriously and treating them as data about the policy’s impact.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
26 Building a More Equitable Gun
Violence Prevention Movement
Center and Invest in BIPOC-led Gun Violence Prevention Organizations The issue of gun violence and its narrative, from how it is defined to the policy solutions to address it, often lacks the voices of those who are most impacted by it.90 On the other hand, when BIPOC communities are part of crafting gun violence policy and interventions to reduce gun violence, these communities have a better opportunity to engage in equitable advocacy and capacity building, resulting in more effective and sustainable solutions.

Since many BIPOC organizations have the trust and knowledge from their communities to approach gun violence,91 they play a crucial role in changing public narratives, including sharing narratives uplifting the brighter picture for BIPOC communities, which is crucial to be able to heal, dream, and grow into peaceful lives.

However, gun violence prevention work is complex, and there is no linear solution to this epidemic. Rather, it requires an all hands on deck, multifaceted approach. White-led and/or majority white organizations need to support existing community initiatives instead of only inviting BIPOC organizations into white-led spaces.

Federal, state, and private institutions must invest in capacity- building for BIPOC gun violence prevention organizations to operate in their communities, continuing the work they know how to do with national and collective support. Communities that are impacted by gun violence need a web of resources across all sectors (housing, education, food, neighborhood development, health and human services) to address gun violence. The trauma caused by gun violence in these communities perpetuates the cycle of violence and must be considered in prevention strategies.

In gun violence prevention, BIPOC-led organizations have often experienced their voices, initiatives, and expertise being disinvested and overlooked by national organizations, research institutions, funders, and in policy conversations about gun violence prevention. Generally, BIPOC groups have to resort to collective power-building to address internal movement marginalization. Forming coalitions with other groups with similar values, interests, and goals enables members to combine their resources to establish a larger voice and collective attention to advocate for and advance holistic change in the movement at large. For example, The Black Brown Peace Consortium (formerly the Black Brown Gun Violence Prevention Consortium), formed in 2018, is a collective composed of dozens of violence prevention organizations, researchers, and practitioners that pools resources to increase reach and elevate the network of Black and brown-led gun violence prevention organizations committed to shifting systems to reduce gun violence. In this context, coalition-building is a powerful and successful tool for BIPOC groups to defend their interests, redefine the movement, and demand advocacy for more than the dominant group’s interests. 90 Joyce Foundation (2021). T oward a Fair and Just Response to Gun Violence https://assets.joycefdn.org/content/uploads/T oward-a-Fair-and-Just- Response-to-Gun-Violence.pdf?mtime=20210427121420&focal=none 91 Goodwin, A. K., & Grayson, T. (2020). Investing in the Frontlines: Why Trusting and Supporting Communities of Color Will Help Address Gun Violence. The Journal of Law, Medicine & Ethics, 48, 164–171. https://doi.org/10.1177/1073110520979418 When BIPOC communities
are part of crafting gun
violence policy and
interventions to reduce gun
violence, these communities
have a better opportunity to
engage in equitable advocacy
and capacity building,
resulting in more effective
and sustainable solutions.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
27 Recommendations for a More Equitable Gun Violence Prevention Movement Preventing gun violence requires collective work; however, engagement should be rooted in meaningful and mutually
beneficial relationships. Developing and sustaining a more equitable gun violence prevention movement requires every organization to take responsibility for making this space inclusive.

Analysis and Application of Foundational Frameworks
Few existing sources directly address how to build equitable collectives, coalitions, or movements.

Instead, we found resources on building equitable advocacy, effective coalitions, and trauma-informed coalitions, which complements the racial equity lens by encouraging organizations to be mindful of the lived experience that people may bring to their work. In this regard, the gun violence prevention movement can learn from the domestic violence prevention movement, which has integrated trauma- informed recommendations for coalition building.92
Six foundational frameworks informed this work:
• Policy Link’s Building the Base for Equity Advocacy,
• Prevention Institute’s Eight Steps to Effective Coalition Building, • Urban Institute’s Trauma-Informed Community Building Engagement, • Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault’s A Practical Guide for Creating Trauma-Informed Disability, Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Organizations, • Center for Community Health and Development at the University of Kansas’ Choosing Strategies to Promote Community Health and Development, and the
• National Center for Trauma-Informed Care’s guide to Engaging Women in Trauma-Informed Peer Support.

These frameworks highlight three key areas that collectives should consider when developing a shared space: 1) articulate a shared vision and goal(s); 2) establish infrastructure for operations; and 3) adopt shared principles and advocacy strategies.

There are historical and contemporary nuances that must be considered when adopting these recommendations to the
gun violence prevention movement. The movement must
acknowledge past harms done via policy, programs, and lack of diversity. Though it has existed for decades, it is still imperative for organizations working on gun violence prevention to complete foundational actions, such as developing the collective mission, vision, and values to ensure historic practices do not perpetuate inequity.
92 Violence Against Women with Disabilities and Deaf Women Project of Wisconsin. (2011). A Practical Guide for Creating Trauma Informed Disability, Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Organizations. https://www.communitysolutionsva.org/files/Disability_Trauma-Informed-Guide.pdf T o read more of how these
recommendations were
built from the stakeholder
convenings, see Appendix 2
T o read our detailed
analysis of each of the six
foundational frameworks,
see Appendix 6

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
28 Recommendations for A More Equitable Gun Violence Prevention Movement Identify and engage diverse members, routinely asking who is missing and inviting them to join .
– Intentionally convene stakeholders who have varied lived experiences, including survivors and historically marginalized communities, and include people who take different approaches to making change.
– Recognize that people with similar identities may have very different views and ideas. – Provide resources so the stakeholders can fully participate.

Engagement for equitable collaboration is an ongoing process that involves intentionally identifying stakeholders with varied identities and lived experiences routinely asking who is missing and being as inclusive as possible in seeking additional perspectives. Communities impacted whether by gun violence or the criminal legal system should be involved in the policymaking process. It is important to avoid tokenizing or deeming individuals as a spokesperson for an entire community, which perpetuates inequalities, places undue burden on them, and denies the variance of viewpoints and experiences of other individuals within the community.93 T o facilitate inclusive participation, the collective should consider providing incentives like financial resources94 and training95 to help reduce barriers for participation and appropriately compensate participants for their time and expertise. Another way to remove barriers to participation is by considering the time of day, location, and format96 of meetings so that most members of the collective can actively participate.

This work should be done within gun violence prevention organizations as well, such that their boards and staff are reflective of the communities they are working with to evoke change. Gun violence prevention organizations should ensure there is diversity, equity, and inclusion at all levels of the organization.

Identify the collective interest and allow for all collective members to provide ongoing input in developing a shared vision and goals . – Include all members’ voices in defining the collective interest and approaches. – Build equity culture starting from the collective’s foundational processes. – Establish consensus-building and conflict-resolution mechanisms.

A collective interest is one shared by all members of a group, by virtue of being a member of the group. In the most simple terms, the collective interest of the gun violence prevention movement is the prevention of gun violence. When a collective group forms within gun violence prevention work, their collective interest may or may not be more specific than that, but it should be clearly identified.

Members of the collective should jointly develop the vision, mission, goals, and shared values with the explicit understanding that they may evolve over time in response to new members, current events, and shifting resources.
93 Falkenburger, E., Arena, O., & Wolin, J. (2018). Trauma-Informed Community Building and Engagement. Urban Institute. www.urban.org/sites/ default/files/publication/98296/trauma-informed_community_building_and_engagement_0.pdf 94 Id.
95 Community T ool Box. (2021). Section 5. Coalition Building I: Starting a Coalition. University of Kansas. https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/ assessment/promotion-strategies/start-a-coaltion/main
96 Falkenburger, E., Arena, O., & Wolin, J. (2018). Trauma-Informed Community Building and Engagement. Urban Institute. www.urban.org/sites/ default/files/publication/98296/trauma-informed_community_building_and_engagement_0.pdf 1 2

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
29 The collective must be a safe space for members to provide input while respecting one another’s agency, values, and beliefs. It is important to establish mechanisms for developing consensus and conflict resolution. An external, culturally competent, trauma-informed facilitator could be of value in this process.

Establish roles and responsibilities that share power with impacted communities .
– Ensure stakeholders from impacted communities are in leadership and decision-making positions.
– Build authentic relationships that disrupt the historically transactional nature of the movement based on specific policy efforts.

The collective needs to consider a leadership model that allows members from impacted communities to participate. When feasible and effective, consider adopting a distributed leadership model.97
If necessary, the leadership model can include a coordination role98 to facilitate communication between members, serve as a spokesperson, or make decisions on behalf of the collective. This role can be helpful for ongoing communication to inform the culture of the collective, including assessing whether engagement practices are culturally competent and trauma-informed. Consider how the coordinators can share authority and operations responsibilities with other coalition members so all perspectives are respected.

Commit to personal and collective growth and healing .
– Acknowledge historic and existing harm in pursuit of truth and reconciliation. – Allocate time and resources to allow for ongoing learning and healing. – Recognize that everyone can perpetuate harm and systems of oppression regardless of intention.

Gun violence prevention collectives must reckon with past mistakes the movement has made and remedy them in the present. Harm includes extractive practices without authentic engagement nor acknowledgement of the material value gained from impacted communities’ insights. Reconciliation involves acknowledging these harms and compensating people for their time and expertise. Truth and reconciliation helps to form healthy partnerships and must be approached with cultural humility.

Members may enter the collective with trauma that can influence their working relationships and work experience. Working in a subject area such as gun violence can compound trauma and vicarious trauma. The collective should be prepared to respond to active trauma and provide resources and spaces for healing.99 The collective needs to understand that any individual can perpetuate harm and systems of oppression and an individual’s identity does not absolve them from inflicting harm. A core value of a healthy coalition is that all members remain committed to unlearning harmful ideologies and practices and learning healthy ways of engaging. 97 T o learn more about distributed leadership, see: Carroll, R. (2021). Need to move faster and smarter? Level up with distributed leadership. Better Up. https://www.betterup.com/blog/distributed-leadership 98 Community T ool Box. (2021). Section 5. Coalition Building I: Starting a Coalition. University of Kansas. https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/ assessment/promotion-strategies/start-a-coaltion/main
99 Falkenburger, E., Arena, O., & Wolin, J. (2018). Trauma-Informed Community Building and Engagement. Urban Institute. www.urban.org/sites/ default/files/publication/98296/trauma-informed_community_building_and_engagement_0.pdf 3 4

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
30 Prioritize inclusivity when identifying priority policies, programs, and strategies that address interests of all communities represented . – Ensure communities most impacted by violence lead discussions around solutions and advocacy efforts.
– Follow the data, and focus on gun violence that specifically affects the community.

The media, government, and national gun violence prevention movement have not provided adequate coverage or resources to address community gun violence in predominantly BIPOC communities. T o avoid perpetuating this dynamic, solutions should be sought that directly address prior policies or programs developed without input from communities or had disparate and/or unintended consequences.

The collective should be inclusive of all forms of gun violence and strategies when developing its strategic action plan, and communities most impacted by the form of gun violence being addressed should lead the conversations defining the problem and solutions, irrespective of size or resources.

Collective members should respect the agency of impacted communities without imposing their values or beliefs about defining the problem or framing the solutions.

Identify stakeholders, their resources, and influence to more effectively reach key policy decision-makers .
– Share your platform, provide resources (in-kind or financial). – Step up and step back: always assess if you are the right person to lead the advocacy effort, even when provided the opportunity.

Map and identify the individuals or groups in positions of power. In gun violence prevention, key stakeholders and elected officials exist at the federal, state, and local level who are important to build relationships with to strengthen the collective’s influence and advocacy efforts. T o do this efficiently, the collective needs to identify members’ existing relationships and resources to leverage. Mapping relationships with identified stakeholders and resources can build rapport among members, as sharing resources and assets requires trust and transparency.

Some organizations will have human capital and financial resources such as large operational budgets and/or political action committees that may increase their name recognition and influence.

This is an opportunity to engage members who may not have the same access, as organizations with resources can use them to provide training, travel stipends, or share lobbying support with organizations who could potentially benefit. However, it is important to ask and not assume the type of support that is needed and to provide non transactional support. This type of relationship- building can attune organizations to recognize when they should defer leadership or spokesperson roles to others with lived experience and/or who are closest to the topic at hand. The final goal is to build authentic, power-sharing partnerships that most equitably and effectively advance the goals of the collective.
5 6

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
31 Engage in ongoing evaluation that is inclusive of all members . – Develop an evaluation plan as part of the strategic planning process. – Focus on data and sources that are relevant to the work of the collective. – Ensure outcomes reflect participation and local needs. – Include strategies to share findings with all members and stakeholders.

Once a strategic action plan has been developed, a plan to measure success needs to be developed.

Clear and specific outcomes define aims of the strategic action plan and what to measure. When developing an evaluation plan, it is important to acknowledge the inequitable reality of research.

T o avoid the perpetuation of oppressive practices, evaluation plans must include impacted communities and individuals while defining, measuring, and analyzing success.100 Ongoing evaluation provides opportunities to understand what is and isn’t effective and make data-informed changes in a timely manner.101 The collective needs to identify data and sources that are relevant for the community and its gun violence context.

Finally, evaluation plans must include transparent strategies to share their findings. An equitable and inclusive evaluation process engages stakeholders in the analysis of data using participatory techniques,102 which helps contextualize findings leading to reasonable and relevant conclusions.103 Ideally, evaluations should also assess the experience of members’ participation. Gathering information about whether members felt represented and valued can help promote and strengthen the inclusivity of the collective.

Make equitable collaboration sustainable .
– Ensure historic power dynamics and trauma from short-term interventions are not perpetuated.
– Focus on building social capital when making a succession plan.

A common source of community disappointment is the lack of commitment and long-term sustainability of many resources, programs, or other initiatives. It is important for the collective to create social capital, as these relationships will sustain the efforts of the collective. Without this commitment, communities experience abandonment when individuals and organizations engage the community in a transactional manner.104
When succession planning in the gun violence prevention movement, members should aim to ensure their organizations are more diverse, inclusive, equitable, and intersectional over time.105 It is important to ensure that individuals with lived experiences are appropriately identified for opportunities relevant to their experience.106
100 Community T ool Box. (2021). Section 5. Coalition Building I: Starting a Coalition. University of Kansas. https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/ assessment/promotion-strategies/start-a-coaltion/main
101 Rodriguez, J., and Roman, C. (n.d.). Community Violence Intervention (CVI) Webinar Series. T emple University. https://bjatta.bja.ojp.gov/ sites/default/files/Community%20Violence%20Intervention%20%28CVI%29%20Webinar%20Series%20Part%204_Community%20 Centered%20Evaluation.pdf
102 Participatory techniques such as data parties or data placements are collaborative efforts that make evaluation inclusive. See https:// vetoviolence.cdc.gov/apps/evaluaction/framework/step6
103 Veto Violence. (2021). Use and Share Lessons Learned. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. https://vetoviolence.cdc.gov/apps/evaluaction/framework/step6 104 Falkenburger, E., Arena, O., & Wolin, J. (2018). Trauma-Informed Community Building and Engagement. Urban Institute. www.urban.org/sites/ default/files/publication/98296/trauma-informed_community_building_and_engagement_0.pdf 105 Community T ool Box. (2021). Section 5. Coalition Building I: Starting a Coalition. University of Kansas. https://ctb.ku.edu/en/table-of-contents/ assessment/promotion-strategies/start-a-coaltion/main
106 Policy Link (2014). Getting Equity Advocacy Results: Build the Base for Equity Advocacy - Equitable Development T oolkit. https://www.policylink.org/ resources-tools/gear-build-the-base
7 8

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
32 Celebrate the victories and acknowledge the inevitable setbacks . – Joy and celebration should be normalized in the collective as it is essential to support the wellbeing of advocates.
– Gun violence prevention requires sustained advocacy and will come with policy setbacks.

Working in gun violence prevention can be a lifetime commitment. Real change may require substantial time, and the movement’s polarizing political landscape can be retraumatizing to members. The collective should intentionally celebrate progress, big or small. Focusing on successes will strike a balance with the inevitable setbacks to be experienced by the collective. Not setting realistic goals or managing expectations can lead to further disappointment. It is important to provide resources so members can manage their disappointments healthily and effectively. In addition, it will help members see the collective as a source of support through the inevitable highs and lows of advocacy.107
107 Id.
9 RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
33 Conclusion
This report urges us to think carefully about the relationships between gun violence prevention and race. Racial equity impact assessments, such as the REIA proposed in this report, guide advocates through a thorough examination of policies with an equity lens to identify racial considerations in current policy, anticipate potential outcomes and mitigate foreseeable risks.

T aking into account the urgency of gun violence prevention, the REIA tool, and the framework built around it, explores fundamental questions about when to justify involvement with the criminal legal system, the costs and benefits of engagement, and alternative actions that could minimize harm. It acknowledges that solutions to gun violence, however well intentioned they may be, can exacerbate or compound upon the harms suffered by impacted communities if they are made without careful analysis and the input of those directly affected by it.

This framework facilitates a racial equity perspective that focuses on preventing gun violence instead of dealing with its aftermath.

It aims to reduce the risk of collateral damage that results from policymaking in a vacuum and highlights the importance of centering and investing in BIPOC-led organizations. By providing recommendations for a more equitable gun violence prevention movement, it builds in a strategy to be inclusive of impacted communities and promotes the support of key stakeholders. When BIPOC communities are part of crafting gun violence prevention policies and interventions to reduce gun violence, they have a better opportunity to engage in equitable advocacy and capacity building, resulting in more effective and sustainable solutions.

This framework facilitates
a racial equity perspective
that focuses on preventing
gun violence instead of
dealing with its aftermath.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
34 APPENDIX 1
Themes from June Stakeholder Convenings
In June 2021, we hosted four two-hour roundtable discussions with a total of 47 stakeholders, seeking input on an early draft of the racial equity impact assessment proposed in this report.

We also discussed the core values underlying the project, ultimately agreeing on five. While the discussions took different paths, seven themes emerged as described below. We shared these values and themes with attendees and subsequently revised them to ensure we accurately and fully distilled the sessions’ key takeaways.

Core values:

1. Gun violence takes many forms and impacts communities in different ways. T o end gun violence in all its forms, there must be multiple and varying solutions.

2. Race is a human-developed construct that assigns differential value to groups of people that is not based in biology.

3. No racial group is inherently more violent than other racial groups.

4. Lived experience can bring valuable knowledge that is just as important to gun violence prevention as scholarship and credentials. All expertise is valuable and necessary to prevent gun violence.

5. The development of racially equitable policy cannot occur without confronting systemic racism.

Themes:
1 . Identify and meaningfully engage members of impacted communities . Identify and devise a plan to overcome barriers to broad inclusivity .

No advocate can claim to represent the interests of communities without directly collaborating with community members themselves in defining the issues that matter to them and then devising a plan to address them. This notion is doubly true within the intersection of policy and racial equity, given how communities of color have historically been left out of policymaking processes. If challenges arise that prevent the meaningful engagement of community members, then it is imperative to identify the root causes of engagement barriers to create a roadmap to inclusivity.
2 . Distinguishing racial inequity and racial disparity: How are they different? Which questions should we be asking? What kind of approach?
By conflating racial inequity with racial disparities, advocates risk missing important pieces when developing policy solutions. For example, racial disparities in gun violence deaths and injuries are stark. However, limiting the “promotion of racial equity” to solely “reducing racial disparities” could itself lead to inequitable outcomes, such as the over-policing and over-incarceration of people of color. By recognizing how racial inequity and racial disparities can interact and operate independently of one another, advocates are less likely to unintentionally create new racial inequities while attempting to address racial disparities.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
35 3 . Policy development, implementation, and evaluation processes are as important as the policy itself .

An idea is only as good as its implementation. It is of paramount importance to develop a clear plan to effectively actualize the intended purpose behind the policy being advocated for. It is of similar significance to integrate evaluative measures and mechanisms into the implementation plan and the policy itself. Policy evaluation, whether penning data collection and analysis into a bill or developing an organizational timeframe to review a policy’s impact, is crucial to identify potential problems early and seek ways to address them.

4. How do we define and truly achieve safety?
Recontextualizing the traditional notion of safety is imperative in the effort to reduce gun violence while promoting racial equity. Equating “public safety” with law enforcement discounts the historical and current racialized violence of brutal policing tactics and mass incarceration.

Policy advocates must reckon with the racism embedded in existing social structures, including the criminal legal system, to determine what policy development and the path to public safety look like. Ultimately, policy advocates and impacted communities need to coalesce around a shared conception of public safety, beyond just police-provided safety, that can be a North Star for policy development.
5 . Other existing frameworks/theories/policies/elements to consider The process for reviewing the impact of policies on racial equity need not be novel to be effective. Thinkers in other fields have considered the promotion of equity in a myriad of contexts, each of which bring potentially helpful insights in the overall discourse around racial equity. Policy advocates would be remiss if they did not attempt to learn from other frameworks and theorists before deciding how to engage on matters of racial equity.

6. Specific goal and enforcement of decarceration/incarceration Given the close historical ties between gun violence prevention and mass incarceration, policy advocates should strive to promote violence reduction policies without contributing further to mass incarceration. Ideally, policy advocates should also look for opportunities to make gun violence prevention compatible with decarceration, to both promote public health in the present and correct for wrongs of the past.
7 . Data usage/application (how should it be used/collected, whether it should be used, concerns, recommendations, etc .) .

Effective data collection is critically important to effective policy evaluation. However, not all data is created equal, nor does data necessarily paint a comprehensive picture of a policy’s total impact. Policy advocates should give careful consideration to how they plan to collect and analyze data related to a policy and how much determinative weight to place on that information to mitigate the omission, or creation, of blind spots in policy evaluation.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
36 APPENDIX 2
Themes from July Stakeholder Convenings
In July 2021, we hosted two two-hour roundtable discussions with a total of 14 stakeholders, seeking input as we developed guidelines for building a more equitable gun violence prevention movement. We identified four key themes across the two sessions and, as with the June convening themes, again shared them with the attendees to verify accuracy and completeness and edited according to their feedback.
1 . Partner with and facilitate collaboration between all stakeholders, especially impacted communities, early and continually .

Policies that impact diverse populations should have early buy-in and collaborative input from representatives of those groups. Advocacy that silos different perspectives apart from one another prevents anyone from seeing the complete picture of what a policy is and can be. Bringing different groups together at the outset of devising a policy creates opportunities for comprehensive collaboration where the whole can be greater than the sum of its parts. Key points:
– Bring together stakeholders approaching gun violence prevention from varied perspectives and with varied strategies.
– Think broadly about expertise. There are professional experts that are also members of impacted communities.
– Inclusivity isn’t a casual practice; rather, it requires thoughtfulness and skill, and should be trauma-informed (see theme 3).
– As goals or strategies grow in scope or shift, you must revisit engagement strategy to ensure you have the right people at the table.
2 . Develop shared norms early to set the tone for your coalition .

Functional partnerships are grounded in shared understandings. By collaboratively setting internal norms with impacted stakeholders at the beginning of the policy creation and implementation processes, advocates can mitigate potential rifts before they arise. Key points:
– Acknowledge differences in experience, approach, communication, and capacity. – Build consensus around communication, decision making, meetings – shared agreements may help avoid conflict.
3 . Consider the trauma experienced by impacted communities in your engagement with them and incorporate healing practices .

Given the traumatic nature of gun violence, advocacy and stakeholder engagement should be done in a trauma-informed way. Trauma does not come from the same place or impact everyone in the same way. Thoughtful policy engagement must account for and be receptive to the varied nuances trauma presents in the lives of impacted people and communities. Key points:
– Use intersectional lenses to adopt trauma-informed approaches to engagement. – Consider both gun violence trauma and the varied yet traumatic effects of structural racism. – When thinking about trauma, you must think about healing and incorporate healing practices in your engagement.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
37 4 . Truth and reconciliation is a prerequisite for gun violence prevention advocates engaging with impacted communities .

Gun violence prevention advocates need to reckon with mistakes the movement has made in the past and take proactive steps to remedy them in the present. Humility and openness are essential to not only effective movement building, but also sincere and authentic movement building as well. The creation of equitable policies begins with the implementation of equitable processes. Key points:
– Harm must be acknowledged at the outset of engagement with communities who have experienced the harm.
– Harm includes extractive practices without true engagement nor acknowledgement of the material value gained from impacted communities’ insights. – Reconciliation includes acknowledging these harms and compensating people for their time.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
38 APPENDIX 3
Themes from November Stakeholder Convenings
In November 2021, we hosted two two-hour roundtable discussions with a total of 22 stakeholders, the third set of meetings on the project with invited contributors. These meetings convened representatives of community, state, and national gun violence prevention organizations as we sought reflections on the draft report and viability of our recommendations. The following three themes emerged through the two sessions, which we shared with participants and incorporated into the report. 1 . Risk of Action and Inaction
The Racial Equity Impact Assessment tool provides an opportunity to thoughtfully consider the risks of action alongside the risks of inaction. In practice, there is often an urge to focus on the effects and potential impacts of applying a particular policy or law, and that focus should be paired with an assessment of the risks of not applying said policy or law. Each of these risks should be expanded upon in the report so users can weigh both elements throughout the policy assessment process. The format of the REIA and its guiding questions is intended to facilitate discussion so its users can reach their own conclusions and decisions about how to endorse or work on a policy. Users must take into consideration that using an REIA, however important, is just a piece of the puzzle that needs to be taken into account while engaging in policy work. 2 . The inclusivity of the REIA as a tool
The REIA is designed so people from multidisciplinary backgrounds and perspectives can use it to make a racial equity assessment, not only legal teams. Using the REIA should be a collaborative effort within – and beyond – the organization. It is important to connect with trusted partners, find diversity of perspectives within the organization, and, if possible, undertake the assessment process in partnership with organizations or individuals with lived experiences to encourage a more holistic approach.
3 . Language matters
There are many concepts that are important to highlight throughout the framework. Language matters when we talk about equity and inclusivity. These concepts are important to define, but they encompass many others that we need to consider:
– Accountability: when working towards racial equity, the first people you need to hold accountable are your friends.
– Intentionality: some organizations already have great practices, but they may not be written down as a process. We are offering recommendations to help systematize the process – they should serve as a guide and are adaptable to fit organizations’ needs. – Inclusivity: beyond its concept, we need to be inclusive in practice and find a way to highlight the work of more organizations, making clear that the list we have included in the report is only a subselection.
– Reconciliation and relationship building: should exist not only within gun violence prevention or at the community level. It should extend to organizations working on other related topics such as disability justice groups.
– Authentic partnerships: require open communication in order for feedback to work – within and between members of a collective. They should address power dynamics because it allows for reconciliation between organizations and opens the door for accountability.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
39 APPENDIX 4
Analyses of Foundational Racial Equity Impact Assessments We selected eight racial equity impact assessment frameworks to use as foundational materials for the REIA for gun violence prevention policy proposed in this report. Below are our analyses of each, highlighting commonalities and variances among them.
1 . if, A Foundation for Radical Possibility
The if REIA framework is brief, consisting of three framing questions with answers followed by seven recommended considerations for assessing the racial equity impact of a proposed policy, regulation, program, practice, or budget change.108 The overview explains what REIAs are, why they are needed, and when they should be conducted.109 if recommends REIAs be implemented during the decision-making process to inform policy decisions.110 In affirming the importance of REIAs, if, reminds readers that “[w]hen racial equality is not consciously addressed, racial inequality is often unconsciously replicated. ”111
The if framework places identifying and engaging stakeholders at the forefront of its analysis, encouraging readers to explore how and why people of color may be disproportionately impacted by this issue.112 It also discourages evaluating “people of color” as a homogenous group, instead looking for potential differences between communities and organizations of color and identifying opportunities for relationship building among these communities.113 The REIA asks if stakeholders are not just involved, but also leading proposal developments when possible.114 2 . The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence
The briefest impact assessment of this collection, CSGV’s REIA begins with a statement of purpose followed by a small glossary.115 By defining “public health, ” “equity, ” and “racial equity, ” CSGV’s REIA contextualizes the REIA questions with the ideals they are meant to serve.116 The assessment portion poses questions to the reader, but does not provide overarching categories for the questions or examples of their implementation.117 This stripped-down approach is in some ways more comprehensive than other frameworks, asking, for example, whether stakeholders have been engaged in defining issues and recommendations, as opposed to only consultation, and examining both the historical and contemporary context of the issue the proposed policy is meant to address.118 CSGV’s REIA also commits its readers to evidence-based policymaking by asking, when possible, if data documenting disparate impacts can be used to inform the development of the new policy.119
What distinguishes CSGV’s REIA framework the most from other models is the addition of bill development and endorsement process explanations at the end of the assessment.120 The “Process” portion of the document explains which members of CSGV staff will provide REIA 108 Consumer Health Foundation. (2017). Racial Equity Impact Assessment T ool, 1-2. https://www.iffdn.org/ 109 Id. at 1.
110 Id.
111 Id.
112 Id. at 2.
113 Id.
114 I d.
115 The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. (2020). Policy Impact Assessment, 1-2. 116 Id. at 1.
117 Id.
118 Id.
119 Id.
120 Id. at 2.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
40 support on federal and state bill endorsement and development.121 The REIA also includes a link to an “Assessment Tracker, ” listing the growing body of REIAs that CSGV develops.122 3 . Government Alliance on Race and Equity
GARE integrated their REIA into a larger racial equity toolkit for use by local and state government staff, elected officials, and community-based organizations to promote equity in their work.123 The toolkit explains what a racial equity tool is and why the government should use one to elevate the consistency between just government values and practice, as well as accountability for elected officials.124 The REIA itself is six steps broken into a series of additional questions and considerations.125 It applies a notably quantitative, data-centric approach, with engaging communities coming after data research and analysis in the policy development process.126 Each step also comes with a thorough explanation of what each aspect of the equity assessment entails and provides examples of additional resources and follow-up questions.

A novel feature of the GARE framework is how it provides suggestions for when barriers to implementation arise.127 GARE’s toolkit acknowledges how the path toward racial equity can be anything but a straight line, citing challenges such as a lack of support from leadership, attempting to apply the REIA in isolation, and lack of support for changes that need to be brought about.128 Appendixes to the toolkit also contain sample REIA materials used in cities like Seattle, Washington and Madison, Wisconsin to better illustrate how the REIA framework can be expanded and adapted to meet the needs of governments across the nation.129 4 . The Greenlining Institute
The Greenlining Institute’s REIA framework is also contained in a larger toolkit document.130 It begins with an introduction on why racial equity is important, what a racial equity toolkit is, and how the toolkit can be used by advocates, coupled with a short glossary of key terms.131 The REIA itself consists of six categories of “guiding questions, ” each of which is followed by real- world examples from their organization’s equity efforts and recommended best practices.132 This structure candidly shows what the REIA process can look like and the challenges that come with attempting to get it right. Promoting racial equity is a dynamic process, where checking the boxes of a REIA is not likely to be sufficient to adequately address these issues on its own. Mistakes will be made, lessons will be learned, and an evolved understanding of what racial equity looks like can grow out of it.

The REIA’s guiding questions begin with the caveat that the guide is designed to be a springboard for brainstorming, as opposed to a rote list, given the pervasive and unforeseen obstacles in implementing racially equitable policies. The guiding questions work to help advocates understand the role, history, purpose, and structure of policy as they go about engaging stakeholders and transitioning their problems into remedies. The Greenlining Institute’s REIA framework does not start with a policy idea, but rather information gathering and 121 Id.
122 Id.
123 Government Alliance on Race and Equity. (2015). Racial Equity T oolkit: An Opportunity to Operationalize Equity, 1-28. https://www. racialequityalliance.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/GARE-Racial_Equity_T oolkit.pdf 124 Id. at 4-6.
125 Id. at 6-12.
126 Id.
127 Id. at 12-13.
128 Id.
129 Id. at 16-26.
130 The Greenlining Institute. (2013). Racial Equity T oolkit: Implementing Greenlining’s Racial Equity Framework, 1-18. https://greenlining.org/wp- content/uploads/2013/07/GLI-REF-T oolkit.pdf
131 Id. at 4-5.
132 Id. at 7-14.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
41 stakeholder engagement. Once community needs are identified, then advocates search for policy solutions that could be used to fill those gaps. As the toolkit cautions, “[o]ften, policy work can be very prescriptive and not informed by the challenges and realities of everyday people. ”133 Though some REIAs are intended to assess pre-existing policies for racial equity, the Greenlining Institute’s REIA framework provides important considerations for the creation and implementation of novel policy solutions directly informed by community needs. 5 . Institute for Intersectionality Research and Policy The Institute for Intersectionality Research and Policy’s (“the Institute”) REIA framework is delivered in the most expansive format on this list.134 In a lengthy document of over 200 pages, the Institute outlines their Intersectionality-Based Policy Analysis (IBPA) REIA tool and follows it with several academic health policy case studies to show how it can be applied. The IBPA REIA is not explicitly focused on racial equity, but rather an accounting of how different aspects of a person’s identity (such as gender, race and ethnicity, socio-economic status, sexuality, gender expression and age) factor into public health policy considerations.135 Succinctly put, “[i]n advancing a case for intersectionality in policy analysis [the Institute’s] goal is to bring about a paradigm shift that foregrounds the complex contexts and root causes of health and social problems. ”136 The IBPA REIA has a set of eight guiding principles and 12 questions, five “Descriptive” and seven “Transformative, ” to identify equity concerns in health policy and discern ways to solve them.137 The guiding principles, including “reflexivity, ” “power, ” and “social justice, ” are meant to inform all of the questions that follow.138 The “Descriptive” questions all focus on identifying the policy problem at hand, such as historical and contemporary analyses of the issue and differentiation between affected groups.139 The “Transformative” questions focus on identifying inequities resulting from the policy problem and devising measurable means to resolve the issue over the short, medium, and long term.140 Both sets of questions also have a self-reflective component, challenging the reader to ponder what they can bring to the policy analysis process and how implementing the IBPA REIA has impacted their way of thinking about both the targeted policy issue and the world at large.141
6 . Massachusetts Public Health Association
The MPHA’s REIA framework is focused on addressing all matters of inequity in public health, though racial equity is a central issue the model aims to address.142 Before delving into its REIA model, MPHA’s toolkit provides a historical backdrop of racism and exclusion in United States public health policy and a glossary of commonly used terms to equip readers with the context to meaningfully engage with the REIA framework.143 MPHA also lays out three overarching goals for developing a policy agenda, which include 1) combating institutional racism, 2) reducing poverty, and 3) integrating health into all policies.144 Before the REIA becomes involved, the MPHA model also encourages advocates to be race-explicit in framing the structural and historical context of the issue and to communicate hope throughout their solution-focused work.145 133 Id. at 8.
134 Hankivsky, O., Grace, D., Hunting, G. et al. (2014). An intersectionality-based policy analysis framework: critical reflections on a methodology for advancing equity. Int J Equity Health 13, 119. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12939-014-0119-x 135 Id. at 18.
136 Id. at 8.
137 Id. at 33-45.
138 Id. at 35-38.
139 Id. at 39-40.
140 Id. at 40-42.
141 Id. at 39 and 42.
142 Massachusetts Public Health Association. (2016). Health Equity Policy Framework. https://mapublichealth.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/ mpha-health-equity-policy-framework-approved-11-16-2016.pdf 143 Id. at 3-8.
144 Id. at 2.
145 Id. at 9.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
42 The REIA itself focuses on the familiar questions of community engagement, understanding the policy and its consequences, and implementing in a sustainable and evaluable way.146 However, MPHA expands beyond their REIA framework to include additional sections elaborating on what meaningful community partnerships and organizational leadership and culture can, and should, look like.147 The MPHA model strives to counter the “historic and contemporary imbalance [of power]” in health policy by engaging impacted communities at every opportunity and discerning when to lead or follow on policy campaigns.148 MPHA’s section on organizational leadership and culture provides another point of reflection for advocates, this time to see if their organization as a whole, instead of just the policies they support, further the cause of racial equity.149 7 . Race Forward
Race Forward’s REIA is succinct and effective, creating a model adapted in part by several other organizations.150 Before delving into the assessment questions, Race Forward briefly covers what REIAs are, why they’re needed, when they should be conducted, and lists examples of case studies where they are in use.151 Race Forward recommends applying REIAs early in the decision- making process to both prevent institutional racism and identify opportunities to rectify long- standing inequities.152
The questions in Race Forward’s REIA are structured by 10 criteria, starting with identifying and engaging stakeholders affected by the proposal being assessed.153 The 10 guiding criteria cover similar ground as other REIAs, such as examining the causes of racial inequities that the proposed policy may remedy, considering the adverse impacts of the proposed policy, and ensuring sustainable and measurable progress, largely because this model inspired the ones that came after it. Race Forward’s REIA framework thrives in its simplicity, hitting all of the major elements a comprehensive REIA should cover in an easily digestible and accessible format. 8 . USC Program for Environmental and Regional Equity
USC PERE stands alone from the REIA frameworks in this comparison by not actually being an REIA.154 USC PERE compiled an equity brief to promote environmental justice, which does not contain the guiding criteria or questions of traditional REIAs. Instead, the USC PERE model looks for ways to create “sustainable regions, ” as opposed to vetting particular policies, and focuses on “community impacts” instead of “racial impacts. ”155 The USC PERE model, developed by environmental scientists for environmental scientists, is notably empirical and data-driven.

Creating tools to measure the “cumulative impact” of health risk and environmental hazards is at the forefront of the equity inquiry.156 Data-gathering is the lynchpin that holds together the environmental justice framework.

The USC PERE model has three main steps: 1) discerning how to measure cumulative impacts that implicate environmental justice, 2) authentically engaging and collaborating with impacted 146 Id. at 10-11.
147 Id. at 12-14.
148 Id. at 12.
149 Id. at 15-16.
150 Race Forward. (2009). Racial Equity Impact Assessment. https://www.raceforward.org/sites/default/files/RacialJusticeImpactAssessment_ v5.pdf
151 Id. at 1.
152 Id.
153 Id. at 2.
154 Pastor, M., Wander, M., & Auer, M. (2012). Equity Issue Brief: Advancing Environmental Justice through Sustainability Planning. University of Southern California Program for Environmental & Regional Equity. https://dornsife.usc.edu/assets/sites/242/docs/EQUITY_ISSUE_BRIEF_ Env_Just_Full.pdf
155 Id. at 9 and 18.
156 Id. at 3.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
43 communities, and 3) looking forward to mitigate climate change in ways consistent with environmental justice.157 The framework goes into the most specificity in the first step, providing different strategies and resources to gauge environmental health.158 Step two emphasizes the need to build community trust and provide resources to participate in the environmental justice discussion.159 The model focuses on the idea of “ground truthing for goodwill, ” which involves using direct community engagement during the data collection process to ensure that the data analysis is directly related to the policy actions under observation.160 Step three acknowledges that all actions to mitigate climate change may not necessarily promote environmental justice for all communities, so care should be taken to universally diminish health disparities instead of shifting the burden to underprivileged communities.161
157 Id. at 2.
158 Id. at 11-16.
159 Id. at 17-20.
160 Id. at 18.
161 Id. at 20-22.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
44 1
APPENDIX 5
Application of the REIA:

Colorado’s Extreme Risk Protection Order Statute
This example examines Colorado’s extreme risk protection order statute, codified in Colo. Rev. Stat. §§ 13-14.5-101 – 13-14.5-114. It is important to note that this REIA example was created with the collaboration of internal team members and external partners over an extended period of time.

What a completed REIA looks like will differ depending on the partners involved and the time and resources available when completing it. The most significant aspect of an REIA is that it is used.

What are the stated objectives of the gun violence prevention policy? – What are the implicit objectives of the policy?
– What strategies are employed to achieve those objectives? Extreme Risk laws, also known as Extreme Risk Protection Orders or ERPOs, are civil court orders that can be used to temporarily prohibit the possession and purchase of firearms by persons a court deems to pose a significant danger of harming themselves or others by possessing a firearm. The goal of ERPOs is to reduce firearm homicides and suicides by removing firearms from individuals found to be at high risk of committing gun violence. An ERPO is a civil court order that utilizes alternative methods of risk reduction before resorting to the criminal legal system, as opposed to many prior gun violence prevention laws that have used criminal penalties as a primary remedy.

ERPO laws include short-term and long-term orders. Both processes begin when a petitioner (in Colorado, law enforcement or family or household members) requests the court to temporarily prohibit a person (referred to as the “respondent”) from possessing firearms by presenting evidence that the person poses an “immediate” risk of danger to themselves or others by accessing or possessing firearms. If granted, the respondent is barred from purchasing and possessing firearms for the duration of the order. Generally, a hearing for a short-term order occurs when the petitioner files their request with the court and the order lasts 1-2 weeks if granted. The long-term order hearing includes both the respondent and petitioner and the resulting order is usually in place for one year. A long-term order may be extended or terminated early upon request of the parties involved and a court hearing.

Colorado’s ERPO law, introduced as HB19-1177, took effect on January 1, 2020. There are a few noteworthy aspects of the state’s law. First, Colorado is currently the only state that provides free, court-appointed representation to ERPO respondents. The respondent may hire a private attorney at their own expense, but they are guaranteed court-appointed counsel paid for by the state. Second, the law allows for alternative methods of surrendering firearms that minimize direct interactions with law enforcement. For example, an ERPO respondent could surrender their firearms for safekeeping to a federally licensed firearms dealer or a family member who does not reside with the respondent and may legally possess them. Third, law enforcement may concurrently petition for an ERPO and a search warrant for firearms. It is a class 2 misdemeanor offense for respondents to possess firearms while subject to an ERPO.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
45 2
What is the context of racial inequity that informs the issue being addressed? – What is the historical and contemporary racial context of the issue this policy addresses? – What are the nuances related to the jurisdiction (national, state, or local) where the policy will be implemented?
– How might the policy impact different forms of inequity, including victimization, arrest, and incarceration?
Black Americans are shot by law enforcement at disproportionately higher rates than white Americans. Unarmed black people are over three times more likely to be shot and killed by police compared to white people. Colorado is no exception, with Black and Latino people disproportionately shot by law enforcement as compared to white people. High-profile incidents of police brutality against BIPOC, such as the 2019 killing of Elijah McClain in Aurora, CO, have also shaken public trust in Colorado police. Concerns about potentially violent interactions by law enforcement with BIPOC ERPO respondents are not unfounded.

The lack of trust between BIPOC communities and law enforcement creates the additional concern of potential under-use of ERPOs by these communities. They may be less likely to petition the courts for an ERPO or work with law enforcement to file for an ERPO to avoid interactions with the legal system. If that were the case, then opportunities to employ the life-saving benefits of ERPO would be lost. Another explanation for the under-use of ERPOs with BIPOC communities could be that law enforcement are bringing criminal charges against people of color for the same sets of circumstances that result in an ERPO petition when the respondent is white. As explored in greater detail below, BIPOC populations are currently underrepresented in ERPO petitions filed. Since there is only one year of data available on Colorado ERPO and relatively few orders were petitioned during that time, the question of ERPO use and enforcement by race cannot yet be conclusively answered. ERPO petition rates by race should be closely monitored to see if petition disparities persist.

Though ERPOs are civil orders, violations of an ERPO may result in a misdemeanor criminal charge.

While data are lacking on ERPO violations, Black people are overrepresented for weapon offense arrests and charges in Colorado as compared to white people, but are also more likely to have their charges dismissed. It remains to be seen whether similar trends will apply in response to ERPO violations.

ERPO is a tool most often used to prevent firearm suicide, with research suggesting that at least one suicide is averted for every 10 to 20 orders issued. Colorado has a consistently high gun suicide rate compared to other states in the country, which disproportantly impacts white men. On average, 633 Coloradans die by firearm suicide each year, 81% of whom are white men. White people in Colorado have firearm suicide rate over two time times higher than their Black and Latino counterparts. These differences in firearm suicide rate may contribute to differences in ERPO usages among racial groups.

Half of the counties in Colorado have declared themselves as “Second Amendment sanctuaries, ” in part to reject the application of Colorado’s ERPO law. It is unclear how a Second Amendment sanctuary status will impact the implementation of the law in the long term. An analysis of the first year of ERPO implementation in Colorado shows that 24% of “sanctuary” counties have had at least one petition for an ERPO, as compared to 48% of non-sanctuary counties. More specifically, there were 1.52 ERPO petitions filed per 100,000 people in “sanctuary” counties and 2.05 per 100,000 in non-sanctuary counties. Observing ERPO petition rates by county over time could provide more insight into whether Second Amendment sanctuary status impacts ERPO implementation.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
46 3
What types of racial disparities could potentially result from the policy’s design and implementation?
– How could the policy reduce, perpetuate, or exacerbate racial inequity? – How could disparities in implementation and impact differ between and within impacted communities?
If abused by law enforcement or other petitioners, ERPOs could be disproportionately used to disarm people of color without good cause. Similarly, law enforcement could disproportionately bring violations of ERPOs against BIPOC communities, which would involve the criminal legal system. However, either of these potential scenarios requires egregious misuse, as opposed to a routine functioning of the law. The appointment of attorneys to represent respondents, in addition to evidentiary standards that must be satisfied by courts during every step of the case, are both built-in protections for the civil liberties of respondents. Colorado’s ERPO law also allows for family members to petition for ERPOs in addition to law enforcement, and permits respondents to either sell or transfer their firearms to a federally licensed firearms dealer or family members as an alternative to engaging with law enforcement for gun dispossession. Though law enforcement acts in service of the courts and is an inherent aspect of the ERPO process, Colorado’s ERPO law provides alternative avenues to reduce their direct involvement with respondents.

Early court data on ERPO usage in Colorado has also shown that courts are able to identify and dismiss improper ERPO petitions. Out of the more than 100 Colorado ERPO petitions filed in 2020, an analysis by the Colorado School of Public Health found only four instances of misuse, where the petitioner falsely characterized their relationship to the respondent. All of those petitions were dismissed.

In an attempt to anticipate the potential impacts of adopting an ERPO law, the Colorado Legislative Staff Council issued a fiscal note on the state’s ERPO bill. Since Colorado’s ERPO law creates a class 2 misdemeanor offense for a respondent who does not surrender possession of their firearms while under a long-term or short-term ERPO, the state sought to estimate the impact of the new law by analyzing the existing Colorado offense of knowingly possessing an illegal weapon (a class 1 misdemeanor). The Council’s analysis found that within the last three fiscal years before ERPO’s passage in Colorado, Black people made up 4% of the population and accounted for 5.4% of persons charged for an illegal weapons charge and Latino people made up 21% of the population and accounted for 5% of persons charged for an illegal weapons charge. Looking at ERPO research from other states, the fiscal note reasoned that “assuming that 95 percent of respondents comply with an ERPO, it is estimated that there will be an increase of less than 10 criminal case filings and convictions per year. ”
That being said, there is a potential equity concern with the concurrent search warrant feature of Colorado’s ERPO law. Giving law enforcement greater authority to enter people’s homes without undergoing a separate search warrant request process could lead to other types of exposure to the criminal system. The concurrent filing of a search warrant with an ERPO petition expedites the search warrant process. Concurrent filing is more efficient than filing for both requests independently and reduces the likelihood of a respondent using a firearm while law enforcement waits for a separate search warrant, but can result in the search for and discovery of items law enforcement did not have justification to seek out. Ultimately, the concurrent filing feature is not a necessary component for the functioning of the law.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
47 4
5 Who are the specific communities that will be impacted by the policy? – Is the policy based on needs and goals expressed by impacted communities? – Have drafters of the policy identified and engaged impacted communities at every step of the process?
ERPOs can apply to anyone in Colorado who may legally possess firearms. However, individuals at risk of suicide or prone to mental health or behavioral crises may be more likely to experience ERPOs than the general public. Sensitive to the diverse needs and interests across their state, the primary sponsors of Colorado’s ERPO law went to great lengths to receive input from impacted parties in crafting the policy.

According to the office for the Colorado House Democrats, who oversaw the creation of the bill, the primary bill sponsors engaged a diverse array of stakeholders throughout the legislative process.

The primary sponsors met with several Colorado cities and counties, including the cities of Aurora, Boulder, Colorado Springs, Commerce City, Denver, Northglen, Trinidad, and Westminster, and the counties of Boulder, Denver, Douglas, and El Paso. State police, district attorneys, defense attorneys, and county sheriffs were in contact with the bill sponsors on behalf of the criminal legal system. State organizations committed to mental health and violence reduction, such as the Colorado Behavioral Healthcare Council, Colorado Ceasefire, Colorado Public Health Association, Colorado Psychiatric Society, Mental Health Colorado, and Violence Free Colorado, were also engaged. National interest groups, such as Everytown for Gun Safety Action Fund, Giffords, the National Alliance on Mental Illness, the National Rifle Association, and the National Sports Shooting Foundation, weighed in on the bill as well.

Beyond external engagement, the primary sponsors also worked closely with the Colorado Black and Latino caucuses. The caucuses, in turn, engaged directly with their community connections to provide further input on the legislation. By engaging opponents and proponents of the legislation and expanding their stakeholder network through partnerships with diverse caucuses, the primary sponsors of Colorado’s ERPO law applied a holistic outreach strategy to identify and engage with impacted parties during the policy creation process.

What, if any, data could be used to measure whether racial inequities could be reduced, perpetuated, or exacerbated by the policy?
– Does the policy rely on a variety of data sources and types to understand relevant equity issues?
– What are the gaps in the data?
– How could the data be improved?
An ERPO implementation report released by the Colorado Office of the Attorney General evidenced geographical differences in ERPO usage. Using court information, preliminary data from the first seven months of the law taking effect illustrates that ERPOs were filed in 18 of Colorado’s 64 counties. While a few cases were filed in rural counties in Western and Eastern Colorado, the bulk of the cases were filed in the Denver metro area and along the Front Range (Fort Collins, Colorado Springs, Boulder, and Golden). Denver filed the most ERPOs. About 34% of all ERPOs

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
48 6
were filed in Denver County, where around 12% of the state’s population resides. It was expected that localities more supportive of ERPO would be more likely to implement it during the law’s early days. Continued evaluations will be necessary to see if more counties begin to embrace ERPO as a tool to reduce gun violence.

A study from the Colorado School of Public Health presents an even closer look at the available court data on ERPO petitions that were filed and granted. In 2020, the first year ERPO was implemented in Colorado, 109 ERPO petitions were filed. Out of the 86 petitions that were analyzed, 61 were granted for short-term ERPOs, 49 were subsequently granted for long-term ERPOs, and 25 were denied outright. Over 75% of ERPO petitions were filed by law enforcement, with 85% of requests for orders being granted. Family or household members filed far fewer petitions, and only 15% of their long-term ERPO requests were granted.

Though demographic data on ERPO implementation in Colorado was not included in the Attorney General’s report, it was acquired for the Colorado School of Public Health study. Most petitions were filed against male respondents (85%), and 80% of all respondents were white. BIPOC populations were underrepresented in short-term ERPO petitions, drawing 16% of petitions despite making up 31% of the state population. There was no data available on the ages of respondents.

The lack of comprehensive demographic data is a significant limitation of Colorado’s ERPO law.

Information on the race, gender, and age of ERPO respondents is essential to understanding whether the law is being applied in an equitable manner and should be readily available to legislators, researchers, and the public. Though the Colorado School of Public Health was able to access that data, they did so by examining all relevant court records. Such methods are labor- intensive and time-consuming. Creating legal requirements for demographic data collection and sharing could resolve this problem.

Can any potential racial inequities be avoided or mitigated without compromising the stated objective?
– Is the policy designed to effectively address the stated objectives without exacerbating potential racial inequities?
– Could other options achieve the same goals while also achieving more equitable outcomes? Colorado’s ERPO law raises concerns that innocent individuals will unlawfully lose their firearms, be arrested, and charged with criminal violations. However, the law has several layers of built-in legal protections to reduce the likelihood of any of these risks coming to fruition. The guaranteed appointment of counsel for ERPO respondents, standards of proof necessary for court findings during every step of the ERPO process, and guaranteed opportunities for respondents to present their case in court all reduce the chances that Colorado’s ERPO law will be applied unjustly.

Though not inherent in the design of the law, inequitable implementation will need to be carefully monitored as well. The under-use of ERPOs, or overreliance on criminal penalties in situations where ERPOs could have been utilized, could result in disparate impacts along racial lines.

Preliminary assessments of the issuance of ERPOs in Colorado are promising and do not show signs of misuse. No current legal alternatives to ERPO present a lower risk to racial equity. Though there is no evidence of concurrent search warrants being issued or utilized improperly, requiring a separate warrant filing process is recommended to prevent the risks of such misuse in the future.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
49 7
8 9
Does the policy remedy existing racial inequities?
– Can the policy be drafted to promote anti-racism, anti-violence, harm reduction, and decarceration?
Colorado’s ERPO law was not passed with an explicit intention to remedy racial inequities in the state or mitigate future ones. However, the robust due process protections, options to surrender firearms without law enforcement involvement, and a guaranteed right to counsel for respondents in long-term ERPO hearings all promote anti-violence and harm reduction without initially contributing further to mass incarceration. Violations of ERPOs could result in misdemeanor offenses, so the risk of criminal legal involvement is still present, but only after all other attempts at constructive intervention have been exhausted.

Further, ERPOs were designed with specific intent to address mental health equity. ERPOs, including Colorado’s law, focus on evidence-based behavioral indicators of risk and avoid using mental health diagnoses as prohibitors. ERPOs are civil orders, as opposed to criminal, “because they are designed to keep people safe by preventing a tragedy from occurring, not to criminalize elevated risk of violence or self-harm. ” These measures, while intended to promote mental health equity, may serve to advance harm reduction and decarceration outcomes pertinent to racial equity as well.

ERPOs require few judicial resources and entail little cost, aside from unresolved questions regarding storage of surrendered firearms. Stakeholder education is the largest hurdle to effective ERPO implementation. ERPOs are only useful if they are applied, which will not happen if law enforcement, community members, and judicial officers do not know what an ERPO is or how it can be used to prevent gun violence, or if there are not assigned resources to support its implementation. Since Colorado’s ERPO law was enacted in 2020, data on its implementation is currently limited.

What methodologies can be utilized to evaluate the implementation, progress toward stated objectives, and any racialized impacts of the policy? – How do impacted communities define relevant outcomes, and how can they be measured? – How will data be collected, analyzed, and reported?
– Are evaluation processes transparent and iterative?
Colorado’s ERPO law should be evaluated on an annual basis to allow for adjustments in each coming legislative session. Data on the number of ERPOs sought and granted in each county can be acquired from the state court system. However, data are not currently collected in a systematic way on demographic information (such as age, race, and gender) related to ERPO usage. This deficiency should be corrected.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
50 APPENDIX 6
Analyses of Foundational Collaboration Frameworks
We identified six source frameworks to inform our work to create core tenets of equitable collaboration and coalition building for the gun violence prevention movement. Below are our analyses of each, highlighting commonalities and variances among them. 1 . PolicyLink:

PolicyLink’s Building the Base for Equity Advocacy provides benchmarks for advocates to cultivate equitable coalitions that will ideally translate into equitable policy change. This framework is one that can be used to launch a new effort, assess success of a current effort, or evaluate effectiveness of a completed advocacy strategy. PolicyLink identifies four components to equitable base building which include community visioning and organizing, initial power analyses, and planning the advocacy strategy. Under each of these components there are guiding questions to help coalitions through the process and equity benchmarks to determine if they are being successful. One of the guiding questions is “How central are the people most impacted by the problem to creating a vision and plan for equitable change?” with benchmarks such as “The groups, communities, and people most affected by the problem identify it as a priority for change. ” This framework prioritizes collaborative vision and goal setting as the imperative to cultivating equitable advocacy efforts.
2 . The Prevention Institute:

The Prevention Institute proposes Eight Steps to Effective Coalition Building, which focuses on how to effectively engage a range of stakeholders from individuals to organizations and government agencies to collaboratively address social causes. It provides recommendations on how to leverage existing resources instead of creating entirely new structures, while ensuring communities are centered throughout the process and that the proposed goals and outcomes meet the needs of all stakeholders, not one stakeholder. The core components of this framework are: discuss and analyze the group’s objectives and determine coalition need(s); recruit the right people; adopt more detailed activities and objectives suiting the needs, interests, strengths, and diversity of the membership; convene coalition members to develop budgets, map agency resources and needs, and devise the coalition’s structure; plan for ensuring the coalition’s vitality; and evaluate programs and improve as necessary. This framework looks at the lifespan of a coalition and underscores the importance of intentional planning, values and goal setting, and evaluation to ensure the coalition is effective.
3 . The Urban Institute:

The Urban Institute’s Trauma-Informed Community Building Engagement report highlights the principles, strategies, and practices needed to complete trauma-informed community building engagement. Although trauma-informed and equitable are not synonymous, these concepts often are juxtaposed together to create a safe and thriving environment for survivors and those of underrepresented identities. The recommendations within the report are based on two case studies that focus on community-building efforts in two public housing facilities in Washington, D.C. and San Francisco. This framework emphasizes the importance of acknowledging historical and contemporary inequities within socioeconomically disadvantaged communities, as practitioners also aim to do when working with racially and ethnically diverse communities. This framework is separated into three sections: principles, strategies, and practices. These practices are especially relevant to the gun violence prevention movement, as there is individual and collective trauma inflicted by gun violence. The practices that the Urban Institute recommends

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
51 are: do no harm, acceptance, community power, and sustainability. This framework underscores how coalition leaders must not only focus on transactional goals, but also on the process and environment in which the goals are accomplished. There is an emphasis on having emotional intelligence and ongoing transparency to not perpetuate ongoing harm. 4 . Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault:

Wisconsin Coalition Against Sexual Assault developed A Pratical Guide for Creating Trauma Informed Disability, Domestic Violence and Sexual Assault Organizations. The domestic violence movement has made a collective commitment to become more trauma-informed in order to better support survivors. This framework is unique in the sense that it provides an intersectional approach to being trauma-informed for disability, domestic violence, and sexual violence organizations. It recommends that in order to provide a comfortable space for survivors, organizations should commit to: understanding trauma first, safety and autonomy, safety and hospitality, and safety and accessibility. These principles all include safety, which the framework explains references physical and figurative safety, underscoring the responsibility and commitment organizations should proactively take to augment their efforts to center those they are advocating on behalf of.
5 . The Center for Community Health and Development at the University of Kansas:

The Center for Community Health and Development at the University of Kansas’ Choosing Strategies to Promote Community Health and Development focuses on an operational approach to ensure success in coalition building. The framework provides specific tasks for coalition leaders to do in the beginning of forming a coalition, which includes developing the vision, mission, and objective of the collective. This framework highlights the importance of having clearly articulated governance structures, a strategic plan, leadership, membership, division of labor, action, and results, funding, and developing a maintenance plan. Unlike some of the other frameworks, this one does not focus on the relational aspect of coalition building, which other frameworks show should also be prioritized. These particular recommendations provide a good checklist of tasks to add to ensure there is infrastructure, but do not take into account the emotional intelligence and cultural competence needed to do so. 6 . The National Center for Trauma-Informed Care:

The National Center for Trauma-Informed Care’s guide to Engaging Women in Trauma Informed Peer Support provides resources for peer supporters to be trauma-informed when engaging with women who are receiving services for mental health and/or substance abuse. The guide suggests the following principles as necessary components of healthy and safe environments:
voluntary, non-judgemental, empathetic, respectful, honest and direct communication, mutual responsibility, and sharing power. Although this guide focuses on one-on-one interaction, coalitions are made up of various individuals and the one-on-one interactions with survivors are critical in all coalition spaces. There is a collective and individual responsibility to ensure that individuals are cognizant of their words and actions and prioritization of those who are most impacted. In addition, mental health, substance use/misuse, and being a trauma survivor are intrinsically linked to efforts around gun violence prevention. Specifically, mental health equity has been a long-standing effort within the movement, there are connections between substance use/misuse and various forms of gun violence, and as the movement looks to become more intersectional, supporting the entire range of survivor identities is paramount. In addition, it is important to understand the role of gender identity in violence and how power dynamics within coalition spaces can re-traumatize survivors.

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
52 APPENDIX 7
Glossary of T erms
Advocacy: A broad range of activities that can influence public policy, including public education, lobbying, and voter education.162
Anti-racism: An individualized approach of actively opposing racist behaviors and impacts by advocating for changes in political, economic, and social life.163 Anti-racist: Someone who is supporting an anti-racist policy through their actions or expressing anti-racist ideas. This includes the expression of ideas that racial groups are equals and do not need developing, and supporting policies that reduce racial inequity.164 Coalition: An alliance of distinct parties, people, or states for joint action toward a common goal or cause.165
Coalition-building: The process by which people and organizations form a coalition.166 Collective interest: Those factors corresponding to the common good of the collective. They are not unrelated to members’ individual interests, for the collective’s moral existence depends on its ability to provide a collective interest that improves the lives of its individual members. At the same time, the collective interest is not simply a sum of its members’ individual interests. It is a set of factors facilitating the fulfillment of the individual interests of diverse members at the same time.167 Criminal legal system: The system (laws, procedures, institutions, and policies) in which people are policed, prosecuted, and punished for the commission of a crime.168 Cultural competence: A set of integrated patterns of human behaviors (language, thoughts, communications, actions, customs, beliefs, values, and institutions of racial, ethnic, religious, or social groups), attitudes, and policies that come together in a system, agency, or among professionals that enables effective work as an individual or within an organization in cross-cultural situations. 169 Cultural humility: A lifelong commitment to self-evaluation and critique, to redress power imbalances, and to develop mutually beneficial and non-paternalistic partnerships with people and communities.170
Decarceration: Effective decarceration will be occurring when the incarcerated population in U.S. jails and prisons is substantially lessened, existing racial and economic disparities among the incarcerated are redressed, and public safety and public health are maximized.171 162 Bolder Advocacy. (n.d.). What is Advocacy? Retrieved October 27, 2021, from https://www.bolderadvocacy.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/ What_Is_Advocacy.pdf
163 Racial Equity T ools. (2020). Racial Equity T ools Glossary. Retrieved October 27, 2021, from https://www.racialequitytools.org/glossary 164 Kendi, I. X. (2019). How T o Be An Antiracist. Random House. 165 Merriam-Webster. (n.d.). Coalition. Retrieved October 27, 2021, from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/coalition 166 Beyond Intractability. (2003). Coalition Building. Retrieved October 27, 2021, from http://www.beyondintractability.org/essay/coalition- building
167 Newman, D. (2004). Collective Interests and Collective Rights. The American Journal of Jurisprudence, 49(1). https://academic.oup.com/ajj/ article-abstract/49/1/127/197857?redirectedFrom=fulltext 168 Cornell Law School. (2020). Criminal Justice. Retrieved October 27, 2021, from https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/criminal_justice 169 Center for Disease Control and Prevention. (2021). Cultural Competence in Health and Human Services. https://npin.cdc.gov/pages/cultural- competence#what
170 Greene-Moton, E. & Minkler, M. (2019). Cultural Competence or Cultural Humility? Moving Beyond the Debate. Health Promotion Practice. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/1524839919884912 171 Institute for Justice Research and Development (2022). Smart Decarceration Initiative https://ijrd.csw.fsu.edu/smart-decarceration-initiative

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
53 Intersectionality: The concept that race, class, gender, and other individual characteristics intersect with one another in ways that impact how we experience the world and result in complex power arrangements or status hierarchies. It is a tool to understand the complexity of structural oppression.172
Professional expert: A person whose expertise on a particular topic comes from academic learning and not firsthand, experiential learning. Someone with “lived expertise, ” by contrast, has knowledge of a topic based on their firsthand experience.173
Racial equality: The condition that all people, regardless of race, are morally, politically, and legally equal and should be treated as such. Furthermore, it is the belief that different racial groups are equal, with none being inherently superior or inferior. When racial equality is achieved, each individual or group of people has access to the same resources and opportunities.174,175 Race-explicit: Speaking about or otherwise addressing race, racism, or racial disparities without vagueness, implication, or ambiguity. Includes being overt and precise in language, such as which racial group is being discussed.176
Race-neutral: Speaking about or otherwise addressing race, racism, or racial disparities without specifying or directly targeting benefits exclusively to racial minority group members.177 Racial equity: The condition that would be achieved if one’s racial identity no longer predicted how one fares; this is reached through addressing root causes of inequity and implementing institutional and structural changes that level the playing field for all. This includes eliminating policies, laws, practices, attitudes, beliefs, and cultural messages that reinforce differential outcomes by race or that fail to eliminate them. When racial equity is achieved, there is no longer a vertical hierarchy that organizes racial and ethnic groups and true cultural pluralism finally pervades society.178 Racial disparity: The imbalances and incongruities between the treatment of racial groups, including economic status, income, housing options, societal treatment, safety, and other outcomes of life and society.179
Racial justice: A proactive reinforcement of laws, policies, practices, attitudes, and beliefs that produce equitable access, opportunities, treatment, impacts, and outcomes for all.180 Social movement: An organized effort by a large group of people committed to bringing about or impeding social, political, economic, or cultural change.181 172 (Crenshaw 1991; Collins 1990, 1998)
173 Matsuda, M. J. (1987). “Looking to the bottom: Critical legal studies and reparations. ” 22 Harv.C.R.-C.L. L. Rev. 323, 324. https://scholarspace. manoa.hawaii.edu/bitstream/10125/65944/1/Looking%20to%20the%20Bottom.pdf 174 Encyclopedia.com. (n.d.). Racial Equality. www.encyclopedia.com/history/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/racial-equality 175 Milken Institute School of Public Health. (2020). Equity vs. Equality: What’s the Difference?. https://onlinepublichealth.gwu.edu/resources/ equity-vs-equality/
176 Race Forward. (2017). Race-Explicit Strategies for Workforce Equity in Healthcare and IT. www.raceforward.org/system/files/pdf/reports/ RaceForward_RaceExplicitStrategiesFullReport.pdf
177 Myers, S. L. (2018). Race Neutrality: Rationalizing Remedies to Racial Inequality. Rowman & Littlefield. 178 Racial Equity T ools. (2020). Racial Equity T ools Glossary. https://www.racialequitytools.org/glossary 179 Howard University. (n.d.). Racial Disparity. https://library.law.howard.edu/socialjustice/disparity 180 Public Law Center. (n.d.). Our Equity Committee and Shared Definitions. https://www.publichealthlawcenter.org/our-equity-committee-and- shared-definitions
181 University of Minnesota Libraries. (n.d.). 21.3 Social Movements. https://open.lib.umn.edu/sociology/chapter/21-3-social-movements/

RACIAL EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR GUN VIOLENCE PREVENTION
54 Stakeholder engagement: The process used by an organization to engage relevant stakeholders (groups who affect and/or could be affected by an organization’s activities, products, or services) for a purpose to achieve accepted outcomes.182
Trauma-informed care: An approach in the human service fields that assumes that an individual is more likely than not to have a history of trauma and promotes environments of healing and recovery rather than practices and services that may inadvertently re-traumatize. Trauma-informed approaches recognize the presence of trauma symptoms and acknowledges the role trauma may play in a person’s life – including among those providing services.183 182 Deloitte. (2014). Stakeholder Engagement. https://www2.deloitte.com/content/dam/Deloitte/za/Documents/governance-risk-compliance/ ZA_StakeholderEngagement_04042014.pdf
183 University of Buffalo: Buffalo Center for Social Research. (2021). What is Trauma-Informed Care? http://socialwork.buffalo.edu/social-research/ institutes-centers/institute-on-trauma-and-trauma-informed-care/what-is-trauma-informed-care.html

San Jose City CouncilAugust 15, 2022

San Jose City Council
August 15, 2022