Designing Justice + Designing Spaces

Designing Justice + Designing Spaces
Name	Designing Justice + Designing Spaces
Formation	2017
Headquarters	Los Angeles, California
Founder	Angelica Hale
Focus	Criminal justice reform, urban design, public safety

Designing Justice + Designing Spaces is a Los Angeles–based initiative that brings together architects, planners, activists, and legal advocates to reform carceral environments and reimagine public space in ways that reduce incarceration and promote community safety. The project connects design practice and criminal justice reform with partnerships across nonprofit organizations, municipal agencies, philanthropic foundations, and academic institutions. Its work engages practitioners and communities through competitions, workshops, policy advocacy, and built interventions.

Overview

Designing Justice + Designing Spaces convenes collaborative teams composed of designers, organizers, and legal experts to transform spaces such as courthouses, jails, police stations, and public housing. The initiative partners with organizations including the ACLU, NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Brennan Center for Justice, and Vera Institute of Justice, as well as universities like USC, UCLA, Columbia University, and Harvard Graduate School of Design. It collaborates with foundations such as the Ford Foundation, MacArthur Foundation, Rockefeller Foundation, and Open Society Foundations to fund pilot projects and research. Practitioners often engage municipal bodies including Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, New York City Mayor’s Office, Chicago Department of Public Health, and Alameda County Sheriff’s Office to align design interventions with decarceration goals.

History and Origins

The initiative emerged from conversations among activists, architects, and scholars in the 2010s influenced by movements and institutions such as Black Lives Matter, Movement for Black Lives, Prison Policy Initiative, and Sentencing Project. Early antecedents include community design centers like the DesignTrust for Public Space, the Architecture Lobby, and the Rural Studio, alongside reform efforts led by organizations such as Families Against Mandatory Minimums and JustLeadershipUSA. Founders drew on precedents in restorative justice programs, community policing reform projects with the Rand Corporation and Urban Institute, and participatory design methodologies practiced by groups like Project for Public Spaces and Local Initiatives Support Corporation.

Principles and Frameworks

Designing Justice + Designing Spaces promotes principles that integrate abolitionist theory and evidence-based practice from scholars and institutions such as Angela Davis, Ruth Wilson Gilmore, Critical Resistance, and the Prison Policy Initiative. Frameworks used in projects reference human-centered design methods from IDEO and Stanford d.school, trauma-informed design research from the Center for Health Design, and public interest design manifestos endorsed by the American Institute of Architects and Royal Institute of British Architects. The initiative emphasizes metrics and evaluation drawing on data sources like Bureau of Justice Statistics, National Institute of Justice, Pew Charitable Trusts studies, and NIJ-funded randomized controlled trials.

Case Studies and Implementations

Project collaborations have produced interventions in jurisdictions including Los Angeles County, New York City, Cook County, Alameda County, and Philadelphia. Built and proposed projects have involved courthouse redesigns with collaborations including Skidmore, Owings & Merrill, Gensler, Perkins&Will, and Diller Scofidio + Renfro alongside community partners such as Inner-City Arts, Community Coalition, and Housing Rights Center. Pilot programs have reimagined booking spaces, electronic monitoring hubs, diversion centers, and community hubs with partners such as Midtown Community Court, Bronx Defenders, and Public Defender offices in jurisdictions like San Francisco and King County. Research partnerships with RAND Corporation, Urban Institute, Columbia Justice Lab, and Stanford Criminal Justice Center have informed implementation and assessment.

Policy and Legal Context

The initiative operates amid legislative and administrative landscapes shaped by statutes and reforms including the First Step Act, Bail Reform Acts in New York and California, consent decrees involving the Department of Justice, and local ordinances on police oversight such as civilian review boards in Chicago and Oakland. Legal advocacy partners include the NAACP Legal Defense and Educational Fund, Southern Poverty Law Center, Legal Aid Society, and Public Defender associations that litigate conditions of confinement and advocate for decarceral budgets. Funding and procurement practices interact with municipal contracting rules in cities like Los Angeles, New York, and Seattle and with federal grant programs from the Department of Justice and Centers for Disease Control.

Impact and Outcomes

Reported outcomes include reduced use of holding cells, increased diversion rates, reduced recidivism in certain pilots, and redirected funds toward supportive housing and behavioral health services. Evaluations cite measurable impacts tracked by partners such as Vera Institute of Justice, Pew Charitable Trusts, and local evaluators in Los Angeles County and New York City. Collaborations have influenced municipal policy decisions, budget reallocations endorsed by reform-minded officials including district attorneys, mayors, and county supervisors, and have been highlighted in coverage by media outlets including The New York Times, Los Angeles Times, and The Atlantic.

Criticism and Challenges

Critics underscore tensions between design interventions and systemic reform, citing concerns raised by abolitionist groups, defense organizations, and local activists that aesthetic improvements may legitimize or entrench policing infrastructures. Academic critics from faculties at Yale, Princeton, and UC Berkeley and watchdog groups such as Human Rights Watch and ACLU note difficulties in attributing causal effects, risks of securitization, procurement constraints, and sustainability amid political shifts. Implementation challenges include coordinating across agencies like sheriffs’ offices, public defenders, and departments of health, securing long-term funding from partners such as philanthropic foundations, and reconciling competing legal mandates and community priorities.

Category:Criminal justice reform organizations