Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42683365›Full record

ArticlePNAS nexus2026

Civilianized safety practitioners reduce crime and disorder: Evidence from a quasiexperimental evaluation in San Francisco.

Forrest Stuart, Caylin Louis Moore, Patrick Janulis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PNAS nexus, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Forrest StuartDepartment of Sociology, Stanford University, 450 Jane Stanford Way-Building 120, Stanford, CA 94305, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4840-2124
Caylin Louis MooreDepartment of Sociology and Criminology, Pennsylvania State University, 229 Hammond Building, University Park, PA 16802, USA.
Patrick JanulisDepartment of Medical Social Sciences, Northwestern University, 625 N. Michigan Ave-21st Floor, Chicago, IL 60611, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7214-2612

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Cities across the United States are experimenting with civilian-led alternatives to policing, yet rigorous evidence of their effectiveness remains scarce. This study evaluates a large-scale civilianized public safety program in San Francisco that deploys unarmed "safety practitioners" to high-crime intersections to provide consistent presence, de-escalation, and service referrals in place of traditional law enforcement. Using a generalized synthetic control design covering 624 intersections from 2018 to 2023, we estimate the causal impact of practitioner deployment on reported crime. We find that deployments significantly reduced total and behavioral health-related crimes, with smaller yet meaningful reductions in drug and violent crimes, and no change in property crime. These effects persisted across robustness checks comparing daytime (operating) to nighttime (nonoperating) hours, suggesting that observed declines are attributable to practitioner presence rather than secular trends. The findings indicate that civilianized safety practitioners-drawn largely from communities affected by incarceration, addiction, and homelessness-can function as capable guardians who lower public disorder without relying on coercive authority. By embedding trusted, nonpolice actors in high-need public spaces, cities may improve safety while reducing harmful police contact and expanding workforce opportunities for people historically excluded from the formal economy.

Indexed as

behavioral healthcivilian public safetycrime preventionquasiexperimental evaluationurban governance

Identifiers

PMID42683365
PMCPMC13531706

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.