By Kateira Aryaeinejad and Thomas Leo Scherer

In 2012, the National Institute of Justice’s (NIJ) Domestic Radicalization to Terrorism program began funding research on issues related to domestic radicalization and terrorism in the United States. A component of this portfolio is focused specifically on evaluations and assessments of terrorism prevention programs implemented across different populations. This report synthesizes these efforts, reviewing shared and singular lessons from NIJ-sponsored evaluations of terrorism prevention and terrorism prevention-relevant programming and focusing on both evaluation findings and processes. The projects reviewed for this report vary notably in their timelines, methods, programmatic focuses, and audiences. As such, the lessons drawn from them are not necessarily scientifically comparable or generalizable. However, important lessons emerge from this research, underscoring shared insights from NIJ-sponsored evaluative efforts and illuminating important areas for consideration in future programmatic and evaluative endeavors. First, findings from NIJ-sponsored evaluations emphasize the importance of gaining community buy-in and assuring program relevance for participants before implementing terrorism prevention or terrorism prevention-relevant programs. Although this may vary based on the intended program audience (e.g., youth, communities, law enforcement), the findings overall suggest that to ensure program fidelity, utility, relevance, and buy-in, programs should be developed in close consultation and cooperation with the audiences for which they are constructed. Doing so can also help alleviate concerns regarding the perceived stigmatization or targeting of specific communities in which terrorism prevention efforts take place and help address concerns about and issues in associating specific communities or demographics with national security threats. Second, programs for terrorism prevention and preventing/countering violent extremism can yield benefits beyond meeting terrorism prevention goals. They can also be complementary to and even carried out within public health or community resilience initiatives. The utility of incorporating terrorism prevention into these frameworks may vary based on the intended program audience and outputs. Careful attention should be paid in framing program activities and language when they are implemented via these larger frameworks. Indeed, if violent extremism awareness and prevention efforts are not appropriately integrated into a public health or community resilience model, participants may be confused as to the purpose, goals, and nature of the activities in which they are participating, to the detriment of short- and long-term programmatic goals and awarenessraising activities. Third, evaluative efforts in general face programmatic and methodological challenges that limit their ability to assess the impact of a program and the generalizability and veracity of their findings. NIJ-sponsored evaluations went to commendable lengths to address issues associated with data availability, generalizability, validity, and determinations of impact; however, certain challenges — including participant attrition rates and lack of available data — limited their ability to do so. These challenges offer important lessons for future evaluations of terrorism prevention programs. These evaluation findings suggest that several activities should be considered in addressing challenges that may arise during the evaluation process. These activities could include implementing formative evaluations or evaluability assessments prior to program implementation and evaluation, implementing strategies to limit participant attrition in the interest of maintaining appropriate sample sizes, and ensuring adequate resourcing for continued engagement in terrorism prevention initiatives. In addition, NIJ-sponsored evaluation findings suggest that program evaluators should consider incorporating control or comparison groups to assess programmatic impact on individual attitudes, behaviors, and outcomes, along with comparative analysis focused on assessing the outcomes and impact of programs replicated in different communities and settings to increase the generalizability, validity, and utility of evaluation findings. More information about NIJ-sponsored efforts to incorporate these elements is detailed in this report. Looking forward, findings from this review suggest important gaps and considerations that should be addressed by and incorporated in future programmatic and evaluation decisions. These include evaluating the long-term impact of programs through follow-up assessments, incorporating additional indicators for measuring and assessing potential behavioral change and knowledge retention, and assessing the comparability of programs’ impact on different forms of terrorism across different ideological spectrums. Finally, further consideration should be given to determining the appropriate approach, strategy, and goals for terrorism prevention activities based on the audiences they are geared toward. Based on the evaluation findings, in some cases it may be beneficial to explore and test efforts aimed at incorporating terrorism prevention activities and programs within a broader portfolio of public health and violence reduction-focused efforts. Future programmatic, research, and policy-oriented activities might consider further exploration of the benefits and potential issues associated with doing so in addressing radicalization to terrorism within the United States

Washington, DC: U.S. National Institute of Justice, Office of Justice Programs, 2024. 33p.

By Mohamed Bin Ali and Ahmad Saiful Rijal Bin Hassan

Far-right extremism based on racial and extremist ideologies is finding resonance among some Singaporean youth, posing a challenge to the country’s counterradicalisation strategies, which had been based on religiously motivated extremism. The Singapore authorities need to review their counter-radicalisation frameworks as they grapple with this emerging threat.

S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), NTU 2025. 4p.

By Zoe Marchment, Caitlin Clemmow, Paul Gill

This is the protocol for a Campbell systematic review. The objectives are as follows. The EGM has three main objectives: (1) Identify the strength (in terms of evidence quality) and depth (in terms of volume of evidence) of evidence base on the efficacy of situational crime prevention measures in preventing terrorist attacks against soft targets and crowded places. (2) Identify the heterogeneity in the effects of situational crime prevention measures against terrorist attacks and link this to issues related to context and implementation. (3) Identify the mechanisms through which situational crime prevention measures have an effect on terrorist attacks. To achieve these objectives, an EGM will seek out reliable quantitative evidence on effect and qualitative evidence on mechanisms, moderators, implementation and economics. Resultingly, it will be possible to identify research gaps and evidence imbalances to facilitate research investment, identify gaps and topics for new research, and provide a foundation for systematic reviews by showing where sufficient evidence exists for aggregation. The underpinning programme of work will result in the presentation of rigorous empirical research on this topic to help researchers and decision-makers understand the available evidence.

Campbell Systematic Reviews, Volume21, Issue2, June 2025, 12p.

Edited by Giray SADIK  

According to Strategic Concept 2022, terrorism, which poses the immediate asymmetric and transnational threat, is one of two main threats to NATO. Even though NATO’s focus is currently directed to the other main threat, Russia, particularly after its war against Ukraine, terrorism has remained a major threat across the NATO territory and periphery. Besides, the adaptations of terrorist organizations in response to current wars such as the one in Ukraine are likely to exacerbate terrorist threats for NATO Allies and partners. Therefore, there is an ongoing need for research and learning around global terrorism landscape and its implications for NATO. To this end, this research aims to identify the lessons learned for NATO from the RussiaUkraine war for countering terrorism effectively. Russia’s war on Ukraine since February 2022 has led to dramatic changes in global geopolitics and the all-encompassing domains of security, connectivity, and modern warfare. Although significant and widespread, the effects of this ongoing war on global terrorism have yet to be comprehensively analyzed. To address this gap in a timely manner, this project aims to examine the effects of the Russia-Ukraine war on terrorism through expert discussions on the contemporary trends and lessons learned for global counter-terrorism efforts, and NATO Allies and Partners. To this end, we organized a workshop in hybrid format (in-person and online) with the contributing authors of the edited book. Workshop participants include academics, practitioners, and subject matter experts from various NATO Allies and Partners.   

Ankara, Turkey: Centre of Excellence Defence Against Terrorism (COE-DAT) , 2025.   138p.

By Nina Wilén and Kwesi Aning

Over the past decade, Western and multilateral security interventions in the Sahel have failed to stabilize the region, while national and local efforts, particularly in Mali and Burkina Faso, have remained largely militarized. These approaches have proven ineffective in addressing the underlying causes of instability, such as food insecurity, lack of basic services, and limited economic opportunities. The key lesson learned is that military action alone cannot resolve the Sahel’s security crisis—political engagement from local, national, and regional actors is crucial.

Konrad-Adenauer-Stiftung e. V. 2 COUNTER EXTREMISM PROJECT, 2025// 28p.

By Danny Klinenberg

Why do people join domestic violent extremist organizations? This paper from Danny Klinenberg, an IGCC nonresident fellow, examines an understudied reason: organizational outreach. Klinenberg studies how the inflow of new members to the Oath Keepers, America’s largest paramilitary organization, is affected when the group’s leadership employs three tactics: showcasing their ideological zeal through armed standoffs with the government, membership discounts, and sports sponsorships. Using a variant of the synthetic control method, he finds that standoffs increase new memberships by 150 percent, discounts increase new memberships by over 60 percent, and sports sponsorships decrease new memberships. Membership is less responsive in counties with higher income inequality, but is more responsive in politically conservative counties. The findings provide new insights into ways extremist groups attract potential recruits.

La Jolla, CA: UC Institute on Global Conflict and Cooperation, WORKING PAPER NO. 10, 2024. 42p.

By The Committee on Assessing and Improving Strategies for Preventing, Countering, and Responding to Weapons of Mass Destruction Terrorism: Chemical Threats; Board on Chemical Sciences and Technology; Division on Earth and Life Studies; National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine

Domestic and foreign violent extremist organizations, or terrorist groups, have caused a greater amount of harm with chemical agents than with biological or radiological weapons. The United States capacity and capability to identify, prevent, counter, and respond adequately to chemical threats is established by the strategies, policies, and laws enacted across multiple levels of government. While the number of chemical terrorism incidents has risen and fallen over time, there is no empirical or analytical indication that the threat is disappearing. This report comes at a time when the nation's highest-level strategies have shifted from focusing primarily on violent extremist organizations to focusing more on Great Power Competition. This shift in relative perceived threat and consequent prioritization will impact efforts against chemical terrorism, and in turn, affect funding priorities. Revised risk assessments are needed to reprioritize risks guided by new strategies, so that strategy-aligned budgets can be created. The report recommends weapons of mass destruction budgets be aligned with evolving priorities and incentivize activities that transition promising research to operations.

National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2024, 209 pages