Skip to content
Log in Give
Skip to content
EVIDENCE BASED
METHOD
Risk–Need–Responsivity Model · Andrews & Bonta, 2010

CASE TYPE ▸ JUVENILE BIAS · JURISDICTION ▸ NYC · STATUS ▸ ACTIVE INTERVENTION

Restoring what was broken — one young offender at a time.

Bias-motivated offenses by minors rose 152% in New York City in January 2026 — and the city can detect, report, and prosecute them but has no clinical answer for the young people who commit them. This is that answer: an evidence-based, tiered rehabilitative intervention for youth ages 12 to 18, sequenced across five phases and built on cognitive-behavioral therapy, restorative justice, and Holocaust survivor testimony.

AGES
12–18
TIERS
3
PHASES
5
CONTACT HOURS
12–170

REF # PW-YHC-2026 FILED · BROOKLYN, NY

EXHIBIT 01 · BIAS-CRIME TRENDS
SOURCE · NYPD HATE CRIME TASK FORCE · FILED 2026

Antisemitism is the dominant form of hate crime in New York City.

Anti-Jewish complaints, NYC, 2021–2024
1002003004002021202220232024196241330344

Anti-Jewish hate consistently leads every other category. Complaints climbed year over year across the four-year window the Task Force tracks.

“January 2026 saw hate crimes jump 152% year over year, driven by anti-Jewish incidents.”
— NYC Council Task Force on Antisemitism, April 22, 2026 briefing paper
152%

Year-over-year spike in bias crimes citywide, January 2026, driven overwhelmingly by anti-Jewish hate.

1,246

Anti-Jewish complaints recorded from 2020 to 2024 — the highest of any category, nearly three times the next most reported.

128

Anti-Jewish arrests in 2024 — leading all hate-crime categories.

These describe real categories of harm reported to the NYPD Hate Crime Task Force, presented without names, dates, or identifying details.

Swastikas painted across playground slides and equipment in a public park — dozens of them, on surfaces built for children.

A teenager arraigned on hate-crime charges after emailing antisemitic death threats to hundreds of Jewish classmates.

A Jewish New Yorker wearing a kippah surrounded by a crowd and punched while trying to enter a synagogue.

§ 03 · THE GAP

The city can detect and report. It cannot yet rehabilitate.

A 14-year-old is charged with an antisemitic offense. The investigation closes. The District Attorney decides how to proceed. What happens next? The city's existing apparatus was not built to answer that question.

§ 03 · THE GAP

NYPD · OPHC · MOCA — OPERATIONAL FUNCTIONS

  • NYPD Hate Crime Task Force — detection, investigation, and reporting.
  • Office for the Prevention of Hate Crimes (OPHC) — victim notification and interagency coordination.
  • Mayor's Office to Combat Antisemitism (MOCA) — advisory, convening, and public communications.
None of these offices operates a clinical intervention for the juvenile offender.
— 2026 NYC Council Task Force record

§ 03 · THE GAP

THE GAP — CLINICAL REHABILITATION

  • No tier-matched intervention for juvenile antisemitic offenses.
  • No bias-specific clinical content — no counter-conspiracy module, no offense-linked community-service model.
  • No manualized protocol replicable across court jurisdictions.
GAP IDENTIFIED
SECTION
THE PROGRAM · AT A GLANCE
REF
PW-YHC-2026

What this program is.

An evidence-based, tiered rehabilitative intervention for youth ages 12 to 18 who have committed bias-motivated offenses targeting Jewish individuals or communities. The program combines cognitive-behavioral therapy, Holocaust survivor testimony delivered through Project Witness's Remember & Rebuild art therapy sequence, restorative justice conferencing, offense-linked community service, and 6 to 18 months of structured maintenance. Intensity is matched to each case through a standardized Bias Motivation Assessment at intake, which assigns one of three treatment tiers by severity, ideological depth, and risk profile — a proportional clinical response, not a single fixed curriculum.

A standardized Bias Motivation Assessment at intake determines the appropriate treatment tier.

AGES
12 to 18
FORMAT
Individual 1:1 clinical work, with structured family and parent sessions by tier
SETTING
Outpatient · Brooklyn, NYC · remote options for maintenance follow-up
DURATION
12–170 contact hours over 4–30+ weeks + 6–18 mo maintenance
REFERRAL PATHWAYS
Court diversion · probation condition · post-adjudication disposition · school-based referral · family self-referral
CLINICAL LEAD
Licensed clinician (CBT-trained) · licensed art therapist · PW survivor liaison · RJ facilitator · independent victim advocate
FAMILY COURT COMPATIBLE MANUALIZED PROTOCOL
THE FIVE PHASES
The week ruler.
TOTAL CONTACT HOURS
12–170

The week ruler.

PHASE 01

Intake & Assessment

W1–2

Standardized Bias Motivation Assessment and motivational interviewing establish severity, ideological depth, and risk profile. Offense typology is classified against the BMA framework (thrill-seeking, peer-driven, retaliatory, ideologically-embedded), and the youth is assigned to Tier I, II, or III with a matched treatment track. Tier assignment is a clinical determination, not a sentencing recommendation.

Phases are clinically sequenced — cognitive groundwork before survivor encounter, encounter before accountability, accountability before service, service before graduated release. Out-of-order delivery loses the mechanism.

TIER ASSIGNMENT MATRIX

Proportional response, not political.

The matrix maps two clinical dimensions from the Bias Motivation Assessment. The horizontal axis is ideological depth — how far a young person's beliefs run, from an impulsive or peer-driven act with no articulated worldview through to an organized, identity-constitutive antisemitic framework. The vertical axis is intervention intensity — how many contact hours the case clinically warrants. Cases fall into one of three diagonal zones. Tier I sits at low depth and brief intensity. Tier II sits at moderate depth and standard intensity. Tier III sits at entrenched depth and intensive intensity. Higher intensity is matched only to higher need: the Risk–Need–Responsivity model holds that over-treating a low-risk youth can disrupt prosocial bonds and increase recidivism, so intensity is rationed to risk rather than applied uniformly.

TIER I

12–16 contact hours · 6–8 sessions

Brief Intervention

BMA typology: Thrill-Seeking or Peer-Driven. Ideological depth scored absent-to-surface; first adjudicated offense; no radicalization history; no active threat-assessment indicators.

Abbreviated BMA screening · core cognitive restructuring · one Holocaust survivor encounter · single parent session.

Typical pathway: Family Court adjustment or pre-petition diversion. Tier assignment is a clinical determination, not a sentencing recommendation.

TIER II

100–120 contact hours · ~25 sessions

Standard Protocol

BMA typology: Thrill-Seeking or Peer-Driven at moderate severity. Ideological depth scored surface-to-moderate; peer influence a primary driver; limited or passive online exposure; no active threat-assessment indicators.

Full BMA · all five Phase-2 modules (2A–2E) · survivor encounter and Remember & Rebuild art therapy · full restorative accountability process · 10–15 hours community service · graduated maintenance.

Typical pathway: Family Court Act §340.1 diversion or adjournment in contemplation of dismissal, with two to four family sessions. Tier assignment is a clinical determination, not a sentencing recommendation.

Cases approaching active threat-assessment threshold require separate evaluation.

MODULE INDEX · PHASE 2 PROTOCOLS
PHASE 2 PROTOCOLS
10 modules · clinically integrated

Ten modules.

Bias-motivated offending is driven by several criminogenic needs at once — distorted thinking, conspiracy belief, online habit, peer pull, and family environment — so the protocol addresses each through its own manualized module rather than a single generic curriculum.

2A · Cognitive Restructuring for Bias

Goal Clinical goal: interrupt automatic stereotype activation and rebuild evidence-based thinking patterns about Jewish identity and history.

Evidence Evidence: meta-analyses of cognitive-behavioral programs for justice-involved youth associate CBT with studies reporting 20–30% recidivism reductions (e.g. Landenberger & Lipsey, 2005).

Example Example exercise: "Source-check the claim." The youth traces a belief they hold back to the media that introduced it, and the clinician walks them through the verifiable evidence trail.

2B · Counter-Conspiracy & Critical Thinking

Goal Clinical goal: dismantle specific antisemitic conspiracy beliefs — the Protocols of the Elders of Zion forgery, dual-loyalty tropes, Great Replacement variants — through Socratic questioning and media-source analysis.

Evidence Evidence: studies identify conspiracy cognition as among the strongest predictors of antisemitic behavioral intention (Bilewicz et al.), and intervention research associates structured counter-conspiracy work with measurable reductions in belief endorsement.

Example Example exercise: "Trace the lie." The youth maps one conspiracy claim back through its media vectors, then writes a counter-narrative supported by primary sources.

2C · Digital Citizenship & Online Behavior

Goal Clinical goal: rebuild online habits — feed hygiene, platform responsibility, de-escalation, and bystander recognition.

Evidence Evidence: youth digital-citizenship and bystander-intervention studies (OJJDP-reviewed) associate structured online-behavior instruction with increased prosocial intervention and reduced participation in online harassment.

Example Example exercise: "Your last 30 days." The clinician and youth review 30 days of the youth's actual platform activity and identify three moments where a different action was available.

2D · Identity & Prosocial Development

Goal Clinical goal: build an identity that does not depend on bias, and map prosocial peer-network alternatives to the relationships that reinforced the offense.

Evidence Evidence: meta-analyses of Functional Family Therapy and related approaches that target peer and identity factors associate them with studies reporting 25–60% recidivism reductions.

Example Example exercise: "Three futures." The youth writes three ten-year self-portraits; the clinician and family then identify which identity foundations already exist and which still need to be built.

2E · Family Sessions

Goal Clinical goal: psychoeducate parents, build monitoring and communication skills, and strengthen the family supervision system around the youth.

Evidence Evidence: family-based interventions such as Functional Family Therapy hold one of the strongest evidence bases in juvenile-justice research, with studies associating them with substantial recidivism reductions.

Example Example exercise: joint parent–youth communication training with role-play of a trigger scenario identified during the Phase-1 assessment.

3A · Holocaust Survivor Encounter

Goal Clinical goal: move bias from the abstract to the embodied through a structured, consented encounter with Holocaust survivor testimony.

Evidence Evidence: narrative-transport research (Green & Brock, 2000) and prejudice-reduction meta-analyses (Hsieh, 2022, d = 0.43) associate first-person testimony encounters with reduced prejudice.

Example Example exercise: a structured two-hour encounter — survivor testimony followed by a facilitated youth response, with the survivor, the clinician, and a Licensed Art Therapist present.

3B · Remember & Rebuild Art Therapy

Goal Clinical goal: enable non-verbal processing of the survivor encounter and consolidate the youth's affect and meaning-making.

Evidence Evidence: an art-therapy outcome review (Slayton et al., 2010) reports significant positive effects for populations that struggle with emotional expression, and Potash (2005) describes art as a bridge between traumatic experience and meaning-making.

Example Example exercise: a multi-session art sequence paired with each survivor encounter — the work is kept, reviewed, and revised across Phase 3 under a Licensed Art Therapist.

3C · Restorative Accountability

Goal Clinical goal: produce an accountability the young person understands and owns, while supporting the victim or community surrogate throughout.

Evidence Evidence: restorative-justice meta-analyses associate conferencing with studies reporting 25–30% reductions in repeat offending, with specific research on RJ for hate crimes (Walters).

Example Example exercise: staged preparation — separate sessions first, then a conferenced dialogue, then a written Repair Agreement negotiated by all parties.

4A · Community Service & Reintegration

Goal Clinical goal: support reintegration through service linked to the offense, consolidating behavioral change in a real-world role.

Evidence Evidence: studies associate offense-linked service with roughly 20–30% greater effect than generic service hours.

Example Example exercise: 10–25 hours placed within a Jewish community organization — a synagogue archive, community center, or Holocaust education program — with structured weekly reflection journaling.

5A · Maintenance & Follow-Up

Goal Clinical goal: sustain change across 6–18 months of structured maintenance and intervene at the first sign of regression.

Evidence Evidence: the spacing effect (Cepeda et al., 2006) indicates that consolidation distributed over time outperforms compressed delivery.

Example Example exercise: graduated check-ins stepping from monthly to quarterly, with family maintenance contact and booster sessions triggered by specific warning signs.

SECTION
§ 08 · MEASUREMENT PROTOCOL
TRACKED THROUGH
18 MONTHS POST-COMPLETION

MEASUREMENT PROTOCOL

What we measure, and when.

Each case is measured at three timepoints across six instruments — recidivism plus five standardized attitude, cognition, knowledge, and contact measures. The same battery is administered at intake, at discharge, and again at 18-month follow-up, so change is tracked against each participant's own baseline rather than a group average. Where the literature is invoked, it is the literature: meta-analyses associate cognitive-behavioral and restorative-justice approaches with studies reporting 20–30% recidivism reductions, and Functional Family Therapy with 25–60%. Those are benchmarks the protocol is built against — not outcomes this program claims for itself.

INTAKE
  • Recidivism — bias-motivated and general reoffense, against the participant's prior record
  • Bias attitudes — Antisemitic Attitudes Scale (AAS-16)
  • Conspiracy cognition — Conspiracy Cognition Scale (CCS-5)
  • Intergroup empathy — Intergroup Empathy Scale (IES-12)
  • Holocaust knowledge — Holocaust Knowledge Assessment (HKA-15)
  • Prosocial contact — Intergroup Contact & Civic Scale (ICCS-8)
DISCHARGE
  • Recidivism — bias-motivated and general reoffense, against the participant's prior record
  • Bias attitudes — Antisemitic Attitudes Scale (AAS-16)
  • Conspiracy cognition — Conspiracy Cognition Scale (CCS-5)
  • Intergroup empathy — Intergroup Empathy Scale (IES-12)
  • Holocaust knowledge — Holocaust Knowledge Assessment (HKA-15)
  • Prosocial contact — Intergroup Contact & Civic Scale (ICCS-8)
18-MONTH FOLLOW-UP
  • Recidivism — bias-motivated and general reoffense, against the participant's prior record
  • Bias attitudes — Antisemitic Attitudes Scale (AAS-16)
  • Conspiracy cognition — Conspiracy Cognition Scale (CCS-5)
  • Intergroup empathy — Intergroup Empathy Scale (IES-12)
  • Holocaust knowledge — Holocaust Knowledge Assessment (HKA-15)
  • Prosocial contact — Intergroup Contact & Civic Scale (ICCS-8)
TRACKED THROUGH 18 MONTHS POST-COMPLETION

Several of these instruments — the Antisemitic Attitudes Scale (AAS-16), Conspiracy Cognition Scale (CCS-5), Holocaust Knowledge Assessment (HKA-15), and Intergroup Contact & Civic Scale (ICCS-8) — are program-developed and not yet formally validated. They are reported as internal change measures, not as established psychometric findings. Recidivism is tracked from official records; the Intergroup Empathy Scale (IES-12) adapts published items. Formal validation is a stated priority of the evaluation plan.

PHASE 3 · REMEMBER & REBUILD

What art therapy does, clinically.

Cognitive restructuring gives the participant words. The survivor encounter gives that work weight. Art therapy gives a container — a non-verbal channel to process what the words and the testimony put inside. The clinical rationale is correlational, not promissory: Slayton, D'Archer & Kaplan (2010) reviewed the art-therapy outcome literature and report significant positive effects for populations that struggle with emotional expression, and Potash (2005) characterizes art-making as a bridge between traumatic experience and meaning-making. These studies associate creative expression with improved processing; they do not establish that this program produces a given result.

A Phase 3 session is structured, not performative. The Licensed Art Therapist, the survivor liaison, and the participant sit at a working table with materials laid out. Survivor testimony is shared, in keeping with the consent and preparation governing Project Witness's archive. The participant is not asked to speak; they are asked to make. The work is kept, revisited, and revised across the phase, so that processing happens over time rather than in a single sitting. Diamond and Shrira describe creative expression of this kind as a holding space for what is otherwise too large to say directly.

Slayton, D'Archer & Kaplan, 2010 · Potash, 2005 · Diamond & Shrira

Explore the Remember & Rebuild program
Remember & Rebuild participant artwork Remember & Rebuild participant artwork Remember & Rebuild participant artwork
PROJECT WITNESS ARCHIVE Remember & Rebuild · selected fragments · gradient placeholders pending cleared archive imagery

APPENDIX A · EVIDENCE BASE

What the literature actually shows.

These are findings from the published literature on rehabilitative interventions, not outcomes from this program. Each bar reports the range studies associate with the named approach; the protocol is assembled from frameworks that carry this evidence.

Cognitive-behavioral therapy for bias

Landenberger & Lipsey, 2005 · N = 58

Meta-analysis: Landenberger & Lipsey, 2005 · N = 58 Studies report 20–30% recidivism reductions for well-implemented CBT. Landenberger & Lipsey, 2005 — meta-analysis, N = 58 studies (odds ratio 1.53; best-implemented programs exceeded 50% reduction over controls).

20–30%

Functional Family Therapy

Sexton & Turner, 2010 · Dopp et al., 2017

Meta-analyses: Sexton & Turner, 2010 · Dopp et al., 2017 Studies report 25–60% recidivism reductions when peer and family factors are targeted together — one of the strongest evidence bases in juvenile-justice research. Sexton & Turner, 2010.

25–60%

Restorative justice conferencing

Walters, 2019 · Bouffard et al., 2017

RJ meta-analyses: Walters, 2019 · Bouffard et al., 2017 Meta-analyses associate victim-offender conferencing with 25–30% repeat-offense reductions, with effects documented specifically in hate-crime cases. Walters, 2019 — restorative-justice meta-analyses.

25–30%

Offense-linked community service

OJJDP · offense-linked protocols

Service studies: OJJDP · offense-linked protocols Studies associate offense-linked service with a 20–30% greater effect than generic service hours; the mechanism is meaning-making and repair tied to the harm caused. OJJDP — offense-linked service-protocol summaries.

+20–30%

APPENDIX B
APPENDIX B · WHAT THIS PROGRAM EXPLICITLY AVOIDS

Each approach below carries evidence of harm in the literature. The REJECTED mark records an external research finding, not a Project Witness classification.

REJECTED

Scared Straight

Studies associate Scared Straight with increased delinquency — a 1–28% rise in reoffending across nine randomized controlled trials. It makes outcomes worse, not better.

Petrosino et al., 2013 — Campbell systematic review, 9 RCTs (odds ratio 1.68–1.72).

REJECTED

Boot camps

Reviews report null or harmful effects across 32 studies, with no recidivism benefit regardless of participant demographics. The confrontational model does not change behavior.

Wilson, MacKenzie & Mitchell, 2005 — meta-analysis of 32 studies.

REJECTED

Mandatory diversity lectures

Research associates coercive, mandatory anti-prejudice messaging with strengthened bias rather than reduced bias, through a stereotype-rebound effect. Compelled attitude change tends to backfire.

Dobbin & Kalev, 2016 · Legault, Gutsell & Inzlicht, 2011.

§ 11 · WHAT MAKES THIS DIFFERENT

Generic anti-bias curricula do not reach antisemitism.

  1. Content-specific, not generic anti-bias.

    Every module targets the specific cognitive structures of antisemitism — Protocols-of-the-Elders-of-Zion conspiracy cognition, dual-loyalty tropes, Great Replacement variants — rather than abstract "tolerance." The counter-conspiracy module is itself a program differentiator.

  2. Survivor encounter, not abstraction.

    Project Witness's Holocaust survivor testimony archive and Remember and Rebuild art therapy program are already-operating assets. Most programs do not have this. The encounter moves bias from theoretical to embodied.

  3. Proportional, not political.

    Tier assignment is a clinical judgment, not a political one. A thrill-seeking, peer-driven first offense and an ideologically-embedded case do not receive the same dose: the Bias Motivation Assessment matches intensity — 12 to 170 contact hours across three tiers — to severity, ideology level, and risk. Matched intensity is the Risk–Need–Responsivity model's core insight.

  4. One-on-one, not group.

    Studies associate mixing low-risk youth into intensive groups with higher-risk peers with increased recidivism — from roughly 15 to 32 percent. This program delivers individual sessions with concurrent family involvement: the format the evidence supports.

  5. Fits the city's existing pathways.

    Designed to receive referrals from diversion, probation, school-disciplinary, and post-adjudication pathways. Completion documentation is built to be court-compatible. The program slots into the architecture NYC already has — it does not ask the city to build a new one.

ROUTING · SELECT YOUR PATH

Four ways this page is for you.

IF YOU ARE A JUDGE, PROSECUTOR, PROBATION OFFICER, OR SCHOOL DEAN

Here is exactly what happens when you refer a case to us.

Intake contact within 5 business days. The standardized Bias Motivation Assessment is completed in weeks 1–2. Tier is assigned by clinical assessment, not by referral source. You receive progress reporting at each phase gate and completion documentation built to be court-compatible. Referrals are accepted from diversion, probation, post-adjudication, and school-based pathways. Tier assignment is a clinical assessment, not a sentencing recommendation; cases presenting active threat-assessment indicators are subject to separate evaluation.

Supervising clinician
Contact [email protected] for clinical lead details
Referral partner / MOU
Available upon request — contact [email protected]
Specimen completion letter
Available upon request — contact [email protected]

§ 12 · DELIVERY TEAM

Five roles, working in concert.

  • Clinical Lead

    Licensed, CBT-trained clinician. Conducts the Bias Motivation Assessment, assigns the tier, and leads individual sessions across all five phases.

  • Licensed Art Therapist

    State-licensed art therapist. Leads the Phase 3 Remember and Rebuild art therapy sequence, providing a non-verbal channel for processing the survivor encounter.

  • Facilitator

    Trained program facilitator. Delivers the structured Phase 2 modules between clinical sessions and tracks fidelity against the manual.

  • Restorative-Justice Coordinator

    Certified restorative-justice practitioner. Prepares and leads the Phase 3 conferencing, the accountability statement, and the negotiated Repair Agreement.

  • Family Liaison

    Coordinates the family-involvement sessions that run concurrently with the youth's individual work, and supports the family through intake, phase gates, and reintegration.

SECTION
§ 13 · § 13 · WHO SHOULD REFER
INTAKE
REFERRALS FROM THE FIELD

§ 13 · WHO SHOULD REFER

Accepting referrals from the field.

Referral criteria

  • Youth aged 12 to 18.
  • Adjudicated or diverted for a bias-motivated offense targeting Jewish individuals or communities.
  • Suitable for diversion, a probation condition, or post-adjudication programming.
  • Tier is assigned by clinical assessment, not by referral source.

OFFENSE TYPES

  • Assault
  • Harassment
  • Vandalism
  • Threats
  • Intimidation
  • Property crimes

APPROPRIATE REFERRERS

  • District Attorneys
  • Probation departments
  • Family Court
  • OPHC
  • MOCA
  • Diversion coordinators

Refer a case. Fund the work. Brief the Task Force.

SECTION
§ 15 · § 15 · GET IN TOUCH
CHANNEL
INTAKE · INQUIRIES

§ 15 · GET IN TOUCH

Have a question?
Start the conversation.

For referral intake, Task Force briefings, funder inquiries, press, or partnerships. Send a note and we will respond within 5 business days. For referral discussions, please do not include identifying information about a youth in this form — we will arrange a secure intake channel. All referral details are handled with clinical confidentiality.

Project Witness

Bearing witness to the Holocaust and to antisemitism today. Project Witness builds the curricula, the archival record, and the survivor relationships that make the work of rebuilding possible.

projectwitness.org

PROJECT WITNESS · BROOKLYN, NY · FILED 2026 · CASE TYPE: YOUTH HATE CRIME INTERVENTION