This page is no longer being updated. It may contain outdated information and links may no longer function as originally intended.
You may notice that a practice’s outcome ratings may not be the same as the programs that are encompassed by that practice and vice versa. For example, some practices have outcomes that are rated Effective, but program outcomes listed in the Related Programs section are rated Promising, Ineffective, or Negative Effects.
This can happen because practice ratings reflect an assessment of the average effectiveness of a specific characteristic(s) common across programs, strategies, or procedures. Practice ratings do not take into account variations in implementation or other program-specific factors. If such variations impact the effectiveness of the essential practice characteristic(s), practice and program ratings may diverge as the program-specific effectiveness may differ from the average effectiveness across multiple programs.
Programs rated during and after March 2025 are rated-by-outcome, which will be a more direct comparison to outcomes rated in practices.
Yes. As new research becomes available, interventions may be re-reviewed and ratings may change to reflect the most current evidence base. Programs rated before March 2025 are going through a re-review process to transition their ratings using the ratings-by-outcome scoring instrument, providing more detailed information for each outcome instead of an overall program rating.
Practitioners can use the platform to identify evidence-based interventions in their field, compare effectiveness across similar programs, gain insight into implementation and resource requirements, and make informed decisions about resource allocation. CrimeSolutions can be used when planning for new programs, updating existing programs, and to learn about innovative collaborations used in other jurisdictions.
Policymakers can use CrimeSolutions to prioritize funding for effective intervention approaches, inform policy development using evidence-based data, and support the implementation of proven strategies in their jurisdiction.
Researchers can use CrimeSolutions to identify gaps in evidence, focus on Promising programs to build stronger evidence, and consult evidence standards to strengthen evaluation designs.
Media should accurately represent the ratings as displayed on CrimeSolutions, avoiding characterizing ratings as NIJ’s approval or disapproval of intentions. The ratings reflect the quality and consistency of the evidence, not just program popularity. The program ratings are for interventions implemented in specific settings, which may have varying results in other jurisdictions based on resources, implementation, and focus.
