There's still time to apply! Accepting applications for Fall 2026 with scholarship support available. Apply now!
Skip the wait: get your graduate admissions decision in 24 hours at Instant Decision Day, July 15. Register today.
There's still time to apply! Accepting applications for Fall 2026 with scholarship support available. Apply now!
Skip the wait: get your graduate admissions decision in 24 hours at Instant Decision Day, July 15. Register today.
June 2026 marks five years since the first cohort of Korbel School Master of Public Policy (MPP) students graduated in affiliation with the newly launched Scrivner Institute of Public Policy. Their time in the program coincided with a period of transformation for the program—new leadership in Fall 2020 under founding Scrivner Institute Director and MPP degree director Naazneen Barma, the beginning of a revitalized and more interdisciplinary curriculum, and deeper integration within the Korbel School, leading to a unique MPP degree that addressed policy at the local, comparative, and global comparative levels. This cohort learned and graduated under very unique circumstances—including being forced into remote learning during the Covid-19 pandemic—and they have been shaping policy across different sectors and with various perspectives ever since.
Today, these alumni are working across government, research, nonprofit leadership, advocacy, and international policy—with analytical rigor, adaptability, and a commitment to impact. From leading health policy research and advocacy and running for city council, to negotiating international trade agreements, bridging academic research and policy, and expanding access to youth programs, their paths reflect the interdisciplinary promise and excellence of the Korbel MPP experience in partnership with the Scrivner Institute.
Five years after graduating, we asked some alumni from that first cohort to reflect on their path since graduating and how the MPP program shaped and prepared them for their careers. Thank you to cohort member Michelle Popovi for this wonderful feature idea!
What drew you to the MPP program at Korbel? What was it like being part of the first cohort to graduate under the Scrivner Institute as the program was being revamped?
Dania: What initially drew me to the MPP program at Korbel was its unique combination of rigorous policy analysis, quantitative methods, and its strong focus on international affairs. Coming from Lebanon and being deeply interested in the intersection of politics, economics, and development, I wanted a program that would equip me with both analytical tools and practical policy skills. Being part of the first cohort to graduate under the Scrivner Institute was an exciting experience. The program was evolving and adapting to better prepare students for real-world policy challenges, and there was a strong sense that we were helping shape that transformation. The faculty were highly engaged and receptive to student feedback, which created a collaborative learning environment and made us feel invested in the program's success.
Luis: When I decided to pursue an MPP, I already had about ten years of experience in the Brazilian public service. During that time, I often felt the need for a more technical, analytical, and evidence-based approach to public policy in government. I chose Korbel after carefully researching different programs. What drew me to the MPP was its connection to the U.S. public service experience, combined with its emphasis on research, quantitative methods, and practical policy analysis. For me, it offered the right balance between academic training and real-world application.
Gillian: Attending DU as both an undergraduate and graduate student, I knew that the MPP program was right for me. The courses were immediately of interest and a top tier policy education in a city I already knew and loved made the Scrivner Institute a perfect fit. As a member of the first graduate cohort, I have felt a responsibility to continue to positively impact the Korbel community and offer advice to those still to come. I have seen the program change immensely since graduating, and have been impressed by the ways in which the school is able to meet the moment.
Kristin: I originally sought out admission to DU’s MSW program but decided to also add a dual degree in public policy, as I knew it would better help prepare me for the macro social change work I was interested in.
Matt: I was an undergraduate majoring in public policy, where I spent most of my time focusing on state and local issues for Colorado. Hoping to get an edge up in the job market, I extended my degree into the MPP through the 4+1 program. As the policy program transitioned, I enjoyed taking advantage of electives at Korbel through the international studies program. I got to indulge my love of foreign affairs in classes which used case studies from around the world, while still refining my policy skills and their applications to Colorado.
What has your career path looked like in the five years since graduation? How did the program shape your path?
Dania: Since graduating, my career has centered on bridging academic research and public policy. I have worked with organizations including the World Bank, USAID, Oxfam America, and the U.S. Army War College. Today, I serve as Program Head and Senior Analyst at the New Lines Institute for Strategy and Policy, where I lead research and policy initiatives focused on the Middle East and Central Asia. I also teach as an adjunct professor at Georgetown University and George Washington University. Finally, I finished my PhD in Political Science from the University of Colorado Boulder.
The MPP program played a critical role in shaping this path. It strengthened my ability to translate complex research into actionable policy recommendations and helped me develop the analytical skills necessary to engage policymakers, practitioners, and academic audiences. It also reinforced the importance of evidence-based policymaking, which remains central to my work today.
Kelsie: I started as an intern at the National Conference of State Legislatures while completing my MPP in 2020, and have been there full-time for five years. At NCSL, I analyze state health policy, author publicly-available policy briefs and publications, answer research questions from state legislators and legislative staff and plan meetings and educational sessions throughout the year bringing policymakers together for shared learning. I now lead the organization's health workforce policy research portfolio, including scope of practice policy, recruitment and retention, licensure and certification, graduate medical education and access to care topics, which are constantly evolving across states. The MPP program honed my policy research skills, my ability to summarize and analyze complex state statutes, my understanding of state budgeting processes and my comfort and confidence working alongside policymakers to address the most pressing health care issues across states.
Luis: After graduating, I returned to the Brazilian federal government, working on policies for small enterprises, especially initiatives connected to entrepreneurship and ecotourism. The MPP helped me bring more evidence, structure, and analytical rigor to the design and evaluation of those policies. About two years later, I joined Brazil’s trade negotiation team. Since then, I have worked on Brazil’s trade agreements, particularly the Mercosur-European Union Agreement. The program shaped my path by giving me a broader analytical perspective on policy, economics, and international trade, which continues to be very valuable in my work.
Gillian: Obtaining an MPP set me up for a strong career in the nonprofit industry, which can serve as a testing ground for ideas that can translate into public policy solutions. Since graduating, I have used the policy analysis skills I learned in the MPP to critically evaluate nonprofits and the programs they operate, serving in both the development and community impact sides of the nonprofit industry. Outside of my career path, I have also found a deep passion for volunteerism, a trait that was fostered in me while pursuing the MPP. Today, I am the Program Director for A Thousand Summers, a nonprofit helping connect youth with transformative outdoor experiences. I feel it was only the unique blend of people, classes, and place at Scrivner that helped get me here.
Kristin: Most of my time during the last five years has been spent with the Alzheimer's Association managing their advocacy program in Colorado, Wyoming, and now Utah. I focus on both state and federal grassroots advocacy and lobbying efforts here in CO working on healthcare policy and consumer protections.
Matt: I went straight to work for Congresswoman Diana DeGette in Washington DC after graduating. Due to my elevated skillset, I was given significant research tasks in addition to standard new hire duties. That turned into a series of quick promotions, and I managed a portfolio of policy topics for the office. After three years, I was homesick for Colorado, so I moved back to Denver and started working for Denver City Councilwoman Amanda Sawyer. The MPP program had taught me a wide breadth of knowledge, spanning everything from international to hyper local. My MPP set me well ahead of the curve, so much so that 5 short years later I am confidently running for Denver City Council to continue delivering results for Denverites at the local level
Were there specific classes, experiences, or mentors that were especially formative or impactful?
Dania: Several experiences were particularly formative. The quantitative methods and policy analysis courses challenged me to think more systematically about policy problems and strengthened my confidence in working with data. These courses became especially valuable as I later pursued doctoral research and policy analysis.
I was also fortunate to learn from faculty who encouraged intellectual curiosity while emphasizing practical policy applications. Their mentorship helped me see how rigorous academic research can directly inform policymaking and public debates. The collaborative environment at Korbel also exposed me to classmates from diverse professional and international backgrounds, which broadened my perspective on global policy challenges.
Kelsie: I took a December course with Dr. Salucci where we explored local policy topics across Denver. We covered nearly every topic you can imagine--housing and homelessness, historic preservation, transportation, economic development, education systems, public health and more. We had the opportunity to meet with local leaders, and these discussions stick with me to this day. Alongside the very place-based and locally-focused jobs I held during my time at Korbel at Denver Public Library and Colorado Preservation Inc., this course solidified my love for and commitment to Denver as my home.
Luis: It is difficult for me to point to one specific class as the most formative. Looking back, I think the real value came from the way different classes complemented each other and helped me build a broader policy toolkit. Courses related to public policy analysis, international trade, economic development, quantitative methods, and policy evaluation all contributed to the way I think about public problems today. Rather than one single class, the most impactful part of the program was the combination of tools, perspectives, and experiences.
Kristin: Professors Lapo Salucci and Naazneen Barma were both amazing sources of support and really helped with making the most of the switch to online learning during the height of the pandemic. They were able to continue to make zoom classes engaging and provided great feedback while I was working on my policy memorandum.
Matt: I took multiple budgeting and economics courses while at Korbel. Nearly every aspect of policy making hinges on immediate and future budget impacts. Learning the language of accounting has helped me significantly in my career, as well as when and what kind of tertiary consequences a policy may have. Many of my courses required an experiential component too. I recall sitting in a Colorado Joint Budget Committee Hearing about higher education across the state, taking notes on all the deferred maintenance which institutions wanted the state legislature to fund. Nearly none of them were selected. It was a humbling experience to learn the costs associated with the projects, and the tough decisions legislators made for what got funding and what did not
How do you feel the program prepared you for the public policy challenges you encounter in your field? Which skills or tools from the program have been most valuable in your work?
Dania: The program taught me how to approach complex policy challenges with both analytical rigor and practical awareness. In my current work, I regularly analyze issues ranging from regional security and political economy to energy policy and governance. These issues rarely have straightforward solutions, and the MPP program helped me develop frameworks for evaluating competing priorities, assessing evidence, and communicating findings effectively.
The skills that have been most valuable are policy analysis, quantitative research methods, program evaluation, and policy writing. Equally important was learning how to communicate complex ideas to different audiences—from policymakers and diplomats to students and the broader public. That ability to translate research into clear, actionable insights has become one of the most important parts of my career.
Kelsie: My work at the National Conference of State Legislatures is strictly nonpartisan--As a membership organization for state legislators and legislative staff, we do not take any positions for or against state policy. In Korbel's MPP program, we were regularly challenged to consider a variety of perspectives as we analyzed policy outcomes or researched potential policy recommendations. This provided me with a unique skillset to understand a variety of policy strategies across the political spectrum, and I use that skill in my work daily.
Luis: The program prepared me by exposing me to a different government and policy-making environment. Many classes explored how the U.S. government approaches public policy challenges, and that comparative perspective was very valuable for someone coming from another country. It also helped me better understand the connection between academic research and policy practice. The quantitative methods and policy evaluation tools I learned at Korbel have been especially useful in my work, helping me think more clearly about policy impacts, evidence, and decision-making.
Gillian: Working for a nation-wide serving nonprofit, I have become more intimately aware of not just how policy changes from state to state, but how national policy can impact individuals and families on a large scale. In my field, I work with families who make under 500% of the federal poverty guidelines; families who have generally been left behind by public policy makers. The skills I learned in the MPP helped me see the real-world implications of policy work, and what can happen to individuals when large scale policies either don’t help or can’t help. I have been able to see that policy analysis helps decision makers measure the success of a given policy, and that data only tells part of the story. The rest lies in getting to know people for who they are and meeting them where they are.
Kristin: I feel the program gave me a solid base of knowledge for public policy work so that I had the confidence and skills to pursue many different opportunities in the field of public policy. I originally saw myself focusing on sustainability and/or housing policy work, but have now branched out into the healthcare space. With the tools I gained from the program, I feel I was able to adapt into different policy spaces that I didn’t originally have much experience in.
Matt: Korbel taught me to ask good questions and analyze how trustworthy a source is. Public policy is not apolitical, and there will always be competing interests. It's up to me to ask the right questions and find legitimate sources to support a policy goal. I learned enough about fallacies of logic and how to manipulate statistics, knowledge which has helped me parse through competing narratives to see a picture closer to the truth.
What advice would you give to current students to make the most of their time in the program?
Dania: Take advantage of every opportunity to connect theory with practice. Seek internships, research opportunities, and projects that allow you to apply what you learn in the classroom to real policy challenges. I would also encourage students to build strong relationships with faculty and classmates. Some of the most valuable lessons and opportunities come from those connections. Finally, don't be afraid to explore interdisciplinary interests. Many of today's policy challenges—whether related to security, economic development, migration, or climate—require perspectives from multiple fields.
Kelsie: Ask for what you need! The staff and faculty across DU are incredibly supportive, intentional and committed to making sure you get the absolute most out of your experience. During my time, I was able to take classes in the Sturm College of Law, Daniels College of Business, Morgridge College of Education and the Graduate School of Social Work. Each of these schools and programs provided me with distinct practical and academic skills and knowledge that inform my career today. I also built independent study courses on alternative policy analysis methods and research skills with Dr. Greenfield, which uniquely tailored the program to my skills and interests.
Luis: My advice would be to make the most of your time in the program, because it goes by very quickly. Looking back, I feel it was a privilege to take classes with the professors I had and to be part of that academic environment. I would encourage current students to explore as many of Korbel’s resources as possible, both inside and outside the classroom. Be intentional with your time, ask questions, engage with different perspectives, and take full advantage of the experience while you are there.
Kristin: Take advantage of the opportunity to branch out not only into different areas of public policy but also other areas of focus that the university offered. I pursued dual degrees in public policy and social work, and it really helped shape the kind of work I’ve pursued after graduation.
Matt: You live in the 19th largest city in America, which is the capital of the 20th largest state. Both Denver City Council and the Colorado General Assembly are in your backyard. I highly encourage you to get out there and attend some hearings, listen to committees, and sign up to speak on topics you are passionate about. There is so much activity at the state and local level and you can learn so much about the general legislative and budgetary process just by following along.
What is a favorite story or memorable moment from your time as a student?
Dania: One of my favorite memories was the sense of community among students in the program. Many of us came from different countries, professional backgrounds, and life experiences, yet we were united by a shared commitment to solving complex policy problems. Some of the most meaningful learning happened outside the classroom—through debates, group projects, and conversations that challenged our assumptions and expanded our perspectives.
Another memorable aspect was realizing how much I had grown analytically and professionally by the end of the program. Looking back, I entered Korbel with a passion for public policy, but I left with the tools, confidence, and network needed to build a career at the intersection of research, teaching, and policymaking. That transformation is something I continue to appreciate today.
Gillian: My favorite memory from being a student was getting to walk across the stage at graduation. I received my undergraduate degree during the height of COVID, so it was an important moment for me to be able to celebrate with friends and family. As the first person in my family to receive an undergraduate degree, let alone an advanced degree, it was very important for me to be able to finally celebrate my accomplishment.
Matt: A really memorable moment was during one of my quantitative classes. I am not a math person and was generally running myself pretty ragged back then. I fell asleep in class, face down on the table, prompting Professor Salucci to end class early. I wasn't the only one with a vacant, glassy stare and it was clear no one understood the concept. He spent a lot of time reworking the lesson for our next class, and we all bounced back better because of it. You don't get that kind of attention to the students and personalized approach at a big school. And it's just one example of how incredibly supported I felt through my entire time at Korbel.
This article was written by MPP student Jenni Gutierrez Marquez
On March 1, 2026, I had the honor of meeting U.S. Senator Michael Bennet and Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser at the Governing Colorado: Policy Challenges and Priorities event, hosted by the Scrivner Institute of Public Policy. This event provided a unique opportunity for the public to engage directly with two of Colorado’s most prominent leaders, and current gubernatorial candidates, on some of the state’s most pressing policy challenges.
What set this event apart was its educational approach and non-debate format. As Scrivner Institute Director and moderator Naazneen Barma described, it was “a deep dive dialogue on major policy issues that are facing the state in a non-partisan educational space.” The civil discourse felt significant, offering our community both insight into Colorado’s future leadership and a chance to come together around the gravity of issues ranging from affordability and housing to healthcare, natural resources, and more. The dialogue allowed students and community members to learn about potential solutions from state leaders, appreciate new perspectives, and develop a deeper understanding of the challenges Coloradans across the state are facing. The event embodied what it means to be at the heart of meaningful, community-focused education and civic discourse. On a personal note, I truly appreciated the chance to briefly meet both speakers and engage in informal conversations about my own and my classmates’ interests in public policy.
Affordability emerged as a recurring theme, particularly against the backdrop of current economic challenges. The panel discussed the potential effects of the Kroger and Albertsons merger, which could have led to the closure of grocery stores in rural Colorado. This scenario raised important concerns about the possibility of food deserts, making it even harder for vulnerable populations, especially the elderly, to access affordable groceries. Town halls became crucial forums for both workers and consumers to express their concerns and highlight how issues of affordability touch everyone in the community. The discussion on affordability naturally extended to housing, with widespread anxiety over so many Coloradans spending more than 30% of their income on a place to live. The central takeaway was the need to build an economy where everyone can thrive, an idea both candidates addressed by sharing different approaches they would take to achieve this goal.
Healthcare was another significant topic, particularly the question of how and when the state should step in to address gaps left by the federal government. The conversation focused on the risks of rural hospitals closing and the broader issue of retaining essential healthcare professionals across Colorado. There was a strong emphasis on the need to ensure primary care for all at lower costs, with the understanding that fair compensation is crucial not only in healthcare but also in education and other vital professions. The message was clear: Colorado cannot afford to wait for federal action and must pursue innovative state-level solutions.
Both speakers underscored the importance of the entire state coming together, pooling resources, and moving beyond political differences to protect all Coloradans. The conversation also explored the complex relationship between state and federal governments, focusing on the importance of secure democratic practices and the rule of law. For example, the prosecution of Tina Peters was discussed not as a political issue, but as an affirmation of legal integrity. Throughout, the need for Colorado to advocate for its own rights and remain resilient in defending democratic values was a recurring theme.
Immigration emerged as a deeply personal theme for both speakers, shaped by their family histories. There was broad agreement on the need for Colorado’s next governor to support mixed-status families and prevent unnecessary separations, as well as a shared recognition of the vital role the immigrant community plays in the state. Both speakers highlighted the continued need for immigration reform and emphasized the importance of creating a culture that values and appreciates immigrant neighbors and first-generation Americans. For me, it was particularly refreshing and meaningful to ask a question about immigration enforcement and receive responses rooted in personal experience. Hearing such thoughtful, nuanced answers, focused on community preservation rather than political posturing, was a reminder of the power of honest, empathetic dialogue in a policy setting.
Natural resources and conservation also featured prominently in the dialogue, with Colorado’s identity deeply tied to its beauty and wildlife. The most pressing issue discussed was the ongoing 25-year drought and the challenges it poses for water resources. Ensuring safe drinking water, particularly in southeastern Colorado, remains an ongoing struggle, despite efforts to address it. The panel underscored the need for state-first approaches to water management, prioritizing the rights of Coloradans in water treaties while also recognizing the needs of those downstream. There was a strong call to build coalitions that address these environmental challenges, including targeted efforts to mitigate wildfire risk in areas like Meeker and the Southern Slope. The conversation highlighted real opportunities for Colorado to lead on climate and resource policy, but progress will require concrete action and collective accountability.
Throughout the dialogue, both speakers exemplified a unique sense of Colorado pride. Even when they disagreed on specific policy solutions, there was an ever-present consensus on the need to protect Coloradans and put the state’s people first. The event went beyond just covering the topics, it dove into the political complexities behind them. As community members, we walked away not only with more knowledge but also with a deeper understanding of the challenges ahead and a sense of responsibility to become more aware and innovative. This especially resonated with me as a student preparing to enter the policy field.
Watch the recording of the discussion here.
What makes you feel safe? Is it a familiar voice on the phone, a particular place, friends or family by your side, your spiritual beliefs or even a favorite blanket?
What about a person outside your personal circle, like a paramedic, a lifeguard, a firefighter or a police officer?
20-year-old Joseph said that people should feel safe around police officers, but that isn’t always the case in Durham, North Carolina—where he lives—and elsewhere.
He says, “I think that police officers almost have to have a—not necessarily nurturing aspect, but kind of like a—sense of safety about them. Because you should feel safe around police officers, you know? I don’t necessarily know how to put that in a word, but I think that you should definitely just feel safe around police officers.”
So how can police departments increase safety and earn trust in the communities where they work?
University of Denver Assistant Professor of Public Policy Ajenai Clemmons’ research answers these questions that can extend beyond North Carolina.
On this episode of RadioEd, co-host Jordyn Reiland chats with Clemmons about how the men she interviewed made sense of policing in their neighborhood—and what they needed to both be safe and feel safe.
Clemmons is an assistant professor of public policy at the Scrivner Institute. She researches the policing of marginalized communities in democratic contexts, particularly the United States and Europe. She teaches courses on the politics of the policymaking process, intersectional inequality, as well as state violence and local security.
What the Durham Police Department Can Do to Enhance Safety and Earn Trust
RadioEd S5E3:
Guest: Ajenai Clemmons, Assistant Professor of Public Policy at the Scrivner Institute
Jordyn Reiland (00:04)
You're listening to RadioEd, the University of Denver podcast. I'm your host Jordyn Reiland.
What makes you feel safe? Is it a familiar voice on the phone, a particular place, friends or family by your side, your spiritual beliefs or even a favorite blanket?
What about a person outside your personal circle, like a paramedic, a lifeguard, a firefighter or a police officer?
20-year-old Joseph said that people should feel safe around police officers, but that isn’t always the case in Durham, North Carolina — where he lives — and elsewhere.
He says, “I think that police officers almost have to have a—not necessarily nurturing aspect, but kind of like a—sense of safety about them. Because you should feel safe around police officers, you know? I don’t necessarily know how to put that in a word, but I think that you should definitely just feel safe around police officers.”
So how can police departments increase safety and earn trust in the communities where they work?
University of Denver Assistant Professor of Public Policy Ajenai Clemmons’ research answers these questions that can extend beyond North Carolina.
Clemmons’ work around policing began in 2004 when she worked as a Community Relations Ombudsman in Denver. During that time Clemmons helped create a new government agency called the Office of the Independent Monitor.
Ajenai Clemmons (01:24)
This was in response to some very high-profile incidents, some officer-involved deaths of civilians in Denver and so the city, the citizens rose up. The city came together across all agencies and volunteers from the community as well, to study new systems of civilian oversight that could improve transparency and accountability for public safety in Denver.
Jordyn Reiland (01:49)
The role of the Office of the Independent Monitor allows for an outside party to ensure law enforcement investigations are fair, thorough and timely and that any discipline is reasonable and appropriate.
Civilian oversight of law enforcement is something that's been around for some decades now, but it looks different in every city. Civilian commissions or boards exist in cities throughout the country including Los Angeles, Chicago, Kansas City, Missouri and Detroit.
Clemmons also spent time in Washington, D.C. between 2010 and 2015, where she was the policy director for a national professional association of Black state legislators.
At that time there were a series of high-profile shootings across the country, including Travyon Martin, Michael Brown, Eric Garner, Tamir Rice, Sandra Bland and Freddie Gray.
Clemmons’ interest in policing of marginalized communities only grew from there.
In 2018 until just before the onset of the pandemic, she conducted in-depth interviews with 18- to 29-year-old African American men—like 20-year-old Joseph, who we heard from earlier. These men lived in the most economically distressed, high violent crime areas in Durham.
Clemmons’ work sought to understand how they made sense of policing in their neighborhood — and what they needed to both be safe and feel safe.
She acknowledged the challenges of conducting this type of research in the community and wanted to find ways to ensure people felt the most comfortable sharing their thoughts — positive or negative.
Ajenai Clemmons (03:10)
I went out on foot into these neighborhoods and recruited them. I was in barber shops, I was on basketball courts talking to young men during halftime and trying to pull them aside to see if they were interested in my study. I was hitting the streets. So we did these interviews in a private location. I wanted them to be confidential so that people could be candid. These are very complex feelings that people have, and I wanted them to feel that they could be vulnerable, that they could feel comfortable to be fully honest about whether their experiences were negative, whether they were positive or whether they were neutral, that they would have the full range to discuss whatever they wanted. I was very honored that they were so forthcoming. And they didn't sugar coat anything, and they didn't hold back. And it wasn't just..they were also self-reflective. They talked about what their experiences were like as kids, as youth, as teenagers, you know, being angry, whether they had a chip on their shoulder or not, or whether they were trying to stay out of trouble, and the kinds of ways that they... the kinds of things that they did to keep themselves safe.
Interlude
Jordyn Reiland (04:44)
Why don't people trust the police?
Ajenai Clemmons (04:46)
Yeah, this is a very big question. It's simple, but it's actually complex in a lot of ways. So in a nutshell, people don't trust police when they feel like they're not doing their jobs. They trust police when they feel under policed, when they feel that police are not competent, and I'll talk about that in a second. And they also feel they don't trust police. When they feel that police are being abusive and they're harming them. So they're sort of over policed, right? So these are the neighborhoods that I study. I literally study neighborhoods that are considered by their residents to be over policed and under policed. So in these communities, there's this intense police presence. Residents are stopped on foot or in their vehicles in a way they describe as constant, intrusive and harassing. They describe many officers as quick to accuse them of wrongdoing, right to curse at them and to use unnecessary and excessive force. Yet in these same neighborhoods, in spite of all the police activity going on, they still face high levels of crime, right? And that includes violent crime, and so this causes stress and insecurity on their part. So there's this sense that you know there are all these police around, but they're not there when you need them, right, or they're not in the right spots or focused on the right priorities, or they don't care about us.
When people feel abandoned and neglected, sometimes they distance themselves in return. And so it goes beyond this sense of trust or mistrust, it can breed legal cynicism. And cynicism is this orientation in which the law and agents of its enforcement, like the police and courts, are viewed as illegitimate. They're viewed as unresponsive and ill-equipped to ensure public safety, and that's a definition from Kirk and Papachristos. So it is very much a sense of feeling alienated. And that can go beyond police. It can extend to the judicial system writ large. But when this happens, when people don't trust police anymore and they are cynical toward them, it's rational from the perspective of looking at an individual, but it actually harms the community as a whole, because what happens is that people won't report crime as much, right? They won't cooperate with investigations, they won't serve as witnesses in the court of law as readily, and this can make it very hard to bring people who commit crimes to justice, and I'm not talking about, you know, unserious crimes. I'm talking about serious crimes. And so, you know, these folks are not held accountable, and they are, in fact, making the community less safe. And then this further breeds the cynicism. It's a vicious cycle, because then people see folks running around who are threatening the community, and so then they even feel further alienated, as they feel that the police don't care about them.
Jordyn Reiland (07:55)
Wow, that must be so challenging, and it kind of alludes to what you were talking about with the different meanings and thoughts about safety. And I think you said feeling safe and being safe, if that's correct. Could you talk a little bit about that?
Ajenai Clemmons (08:11)
So in general, a lot of people assume that if crime numbers go down, then they will feel more safe, and that's actually not true. The perception of safety is completely independent of whether or not you are safe or your risk level. So crime went down for years, decades even, and people's assessment of the risk of crime really hasn't changed. And sometimes it went up, even though the crime was going down, depending on where you were. So those are two different things, and it actually makes police, their job tougher, because they do have that accountability of bringing down the crime levels. But then people can feel that way regardless. And so then they have to dedicate some considerable resources to making people feel safer.
In this context, though, there really is unacceptable levels of violent crime and so even though it's a tiny proportion of the population that's carrying it out, it is significant. And in a lot of it, there are innocent bystanders that get caught in the middle. And in fact, out of the men that I interviewed, eight had been shot at least once, and four of those were folks who were caught in the crossfire who didn't have any idea who the shooter was or were mistaken by the shooter for someone else. And then additional men that I interviewed who literally were at a bus stop, waiting for their bus to arrive to go to work, and ended up having to dive for cover as bullets whizzed past them, because somebody saw somebody that they had been looking for, and then, just without regard to the circumstances, just opened fire. So there really is an extraordinary level of risk in these particular neighborhoods, and so it is important for people to both be safer and to feel safer, and so I wanted to make sure that I was being intentional in pulling out those two things in the interviews.
Jordyn Reiland (10:36)
One question that you asked stood out to me, and you said, “If you had a magic wand and could make a perfect interaction happen between an officer and a civilian, what would you do?” And you said you can choose any scenario. Did any of those answers surprise you?
Ajenai Clemmons (10:52)
On the whole, most answers tried to find some sort of win-win. They tried to find some sort of reconciliation between both parties and ensure that that was a positive interaction. And so it wasn't the case that most people's first thought was to just take care of the needs of the civilian. That in that perfect scenario, they really did seek a win-win. And so I was struck by that. A lot of the men did use their wishes to also undo the deaths of the men who had been killed that we talked about earlier, those high-profile deaths that had happened across the country, there was a recognition of that. And it was something that all but one interview we related to on some level, that they could see themselves in those men who had died, or in those people who had died. We certainly want to take into account the women who have been killed as well. So they actually use their magic wand to undo those deaths and to undo the harms that have happened.
Jordyn Reiland (12:10)
You highlight five themes that emerged as the most desired characteristics for officers, including those who are just communicative, invested composed and discerning and adaptive in their decision making. Can you paint a picture for me of the ideal police officer?
Ajenai Clemmons (12:30)
There is not one person that I spoke with who thought that being a police officer was an easy job. Folks were very quick to say it is a hard job. Not everybody should be a police officer, there are a lot of things to manage. It was about being constitutional. People were clear about that. It was making sure that you're observing people's rights, that people are innocent until proven guilty—that officers are truly just in how they enforce the law.
But it goes beyond that. Really, they wanted officers to have integrity. They wanted officers to be good people. And I think this is because this is really the most powerful person in their lives. They're the only person who can literally take life. And so it is important then that people who hold the most amount of power are actually good and righteous, and because you don't have the opportunity to see officers outside of these sort of emergency situations, or time pressure situations, you need other opportunities to observe their behavior, to know if they're trustworthy, right? To know if you can bring confidential information to them, to know whether they will keep confidence and so this is where you know they wanted to see officers' character on display. How do you do that? Well, they got to get in the community. They’ve got to get involved.
Jordyn Reiland (14:14)
Clemmons said that what surprised her about her research in Durham was people’s inherent desire to have a connection and a relationship with law enforcement.
Ajenai Clemmons (14:22)
Now maybe because they can't tell who's a safe officer and who's not a safe officer, and because there's so much unpredictability that is possible in those interactions, having positive encounters and having incredibly scary negative encounters, the safer thing to do could be to avoid police. To try to minimize the possibility of an experience, right? To keep a low profile.
But that ideally in their heart of hearts, many wished that they could just casually walk up to a police officer, say hi, chat, check in, or have that police officer do the same. That in their ideal world, that's what the general relationship would be between the police and the community. That you would see officers jumping in and playing double dutch, or joining in a pickup game of basketball or guiding a young person and talking to them about healthy life choices that those officers would be leading by example, that they would be a fabric of the community, that they would be rolling up their sleeves, and serving food and soup kitchens. And so there were so many ways that they saw police as able to be a force for good that I didn't expect. I didn't expect that level of specificity and of richness and of desire in elevating, actually, the importance and the impact that officers could have.
I also want to add a quote that I think exemplifies this desire for a better relationship and what it would take in order for officers to build trust in the community. So I named this interviewee, Marcus, and he's 25. This is what he says:
“Get police to come out here in these neighborhoods where a lot of these people are getting shot and killed and do something. Make a difference. Go drop off flowers at some of these people's graves. Act like a human being. You want the community to trust you? Do something for the community. Communication. Do a fundraiser. Do a get together, throw a police parade, you know? How many cops are out here, genuinely just to protect and serve? If, instead of judging us, officers would be more prone to trying to get to know the people they see every day, we wouldn't have so many problems with law enforcement and young black men in the communities. Pull up to the basketball court, play some ball with us. Throw a football with us. They're all frisbee for all I care. But do something."
Jordyn Reiland (17:15)
Yeah that really gets to the heart of that aspect of trust building and community involvement and really harkens back to just wanting to have that dual interaction.
Ajenai Clemmons (17:28)
You know, sometimes we can overthink what it would take for officers to create connections. But the desire is already there. It just needs an opportunity to be tapped into. And so it can be so many simple little things that officers can do to connect with folks in a way that's authentic, in a way that's joyful, to have that organic experience. And so those are the things that I'll be researching in the future and working on – like matching officers, even, with opportunities to connect and in activities like anything from this basketball or something sports, to arts and crafts and music, and all sorts of things that young people and officers could take a joint interest in.
Jordyn Reiland (18:24)
Clemmons posed a question that went beyond policing and asked participants if they could have the full attention and concern of anyone in power to fix or improve anything in their life, what would it be?
Here’s one response that really stuck with her.
Ajenai Clemmons (18:37)
This is a quote that really moved me. This is from a young man, Joseph, who's 20 years old, and he said:
“I would tell politicians to more so hear the letter, not the law, of what's being said, and to try to understand people's feelings, not just what they're saying. What comes out of their mouth is ultimately influenced by how they feel. So, if you can understand how someone feels, then you're more so to meet their expectations, not just do what they tell you to do. To say it in other words, when you understand how someone feels, you're more so to not necessarily make the same mistake again, if they understand how we feel when they're reading the analysis and not just see what we're saying, but see in what we are saying, like how we feel, it would help them to make better decisions about how to accommodate what we're saying.”
This is at the heart of what I am trying to do as a researcher, is certainly capture their words, but also pair that with their underlying emotions to capture how they feel, so that when I'm sharing my findings and evidence with policy makers, that they're able to see both. That they're able to see the words, read the words, hear the words, but also understand what's behind that, what's underlying that, that subtext, so that they can properly receive that, understand it and then try to address it in the most appropriate way.
Interlude
Jordyn Reiland (20:29)
Now you write that, in addition to the work that you've done in Durham, at least hundreds, if not thousands of jurisdictions across the country would also be well served by participants' insights and calls for action. How does your work translate beyond North Carolina?
Ajenai Clemmons (20:44)
In terms of the policy recommendations that come out of this report, it is the relationship building. It's also the transparency. It's also the accountability. I mean, if you're not cleaning up things and making it better, if you're not resolving the problems that you know exist in your department, then you're not going to improve that relationship. So, there are many... the hiring, the recruitment, the policies that are in place, the accountability to make sure that those policies are being adhered to, the training and that follow up with the relationship building are all key.
And in Denver, we're fortunate that Police Chief Ron Thomas has taken an interest in this work as well, and so he has already taken many steps in his short—he just recently took over, was appointed relatively recently, and has already started implementing more community outreach programs. And so has asked me to advise on what implementation would look like. And so my colleague Kate Sims and I are working on that with the police department. So, we'll be rolling out a program and evaluating that and measuring and seeing what works, what doesn't work and how to improve upon that. And I think it's commendable, to see a chief that is deeply interested in the evidence base and being a willing partner in the research process to see what can work and how to improve and make things better.
Jordyn Reiland (22:37)
This report is based on interviews that concluded in March 2020 and a lot has happened in the United States as it relates to policing since that time. How do you think about these findings in 2024?
Ajenai Clemmons (22:49)
I believe the findings are still very much relevant in 2024. In the interviews, which ended in March, which ended at the at the onset of the pandemic, the men were very vocal about the deaths that preceded George Floyd, which happened three months after I ended the interviews And so they related very much to the men that they had seen, the people that they had seen in the media. They were concerned about that, they used their magic wand and one of my questions to undo their deaths. So, this was at the forefront. It was something that they thought about when they got pulled over by police. So, George Floyd was not new, in other words, sadly. It was not new to them at all. And so in that sense, I think that the findings still stand.
There have been some researchers that have found in terms of behaviors, like, for example, calling the police to report a crime, that those can be temporarily affected by high profile, very disturbing incidents, but that with time, the behaviors return to normal. And so there's a sort of eventual kind of snap back effect, for lack of a better term, that happens. So whether it's reporting crime, whether it's their likelihood of cooperating with investigations, or avoiding police – whatever police behaviors they had before, whether they were avoiding them, whether they were cooperating with them, all of that, I think, is still relevant. There haven't been a ton of reforms that have happened across the country, not in any kind of systematic way. And so the concerns that they have are still very much present in most jurisdictions, and to the extent that some things were done, not nearly enough, as far as they would be concerned, so the problem is still there. The concerns are still there, and what they were calling for still remains. So yeah, I mean taking all that into account, would say that the findings still stand.
Jordyn Reiland (25:33)
A big thanks to our guest, University of Denver Assistant Professor of Public Policy Ajenai Clemmons. More information on her work can be found in our show notes. If you enjoyed this episode, I encourage you to subscribe to the podcast on Apple Music or Spotify, and if you really liked it, leave us a review and rate our work. It really helps us reach a larger audience and grow the pod.
Joy Hamilton is our Managing Editor, Madeleine Lebovic is our production assistant and musical genius, and James Swearingin arranged our theme. I'm Jordyn Reiland and this is RadioEd.
Article written by Jordyn Reiland.
With Dean Fritz Mayer’s and Chancellor Jeremy Haefner’s opening remarks echoing similar refrains about the Scrivner Institute of Public Policy establishing itself as a new hub of policy discussion in the Denver community, the stage was set for five mayors in the Denver Metro area to discuss the Covid-19 pandemic’s impact on collaboration between cities. The panelists included Mayors Tara Beiter-Fluhr of Sheridan, Michael B. Hancock of the City and County of Denver, Jackie Millet of Lone Tree, Linda Olson of Englewood, and Adam Paul of Lakewood. Associate professor Naazneen Barma, the director of the Scrivner Institute, hosted the event and moderated the conversation.
The inspiration for the event came when Olson, a faculty member at the University of Denver (DU), connected with Barma and another Korbel professor, Tamra D’Estree. According to Katie Aker, the program manager at the Scrivner Institute, the three “got to chatting and thought of the idea to have local mayors come together to discuss how they collaborated primarily through the Covid-19 pandemic but also how they collaborate across cities on issues such as public policy and public health.” From there, Olson contacted other mayors to gauge their interest in participating on the panel. They were enthusiastic to participate because, among other reasons, the opportunity to reflect upon previous work does not come often, according to Aker.
After opening remarks from the Dean and the Chancellor, Barma guided the conversation towards themes of local collaboration in the context of federal responses to the pandemic; how partisanship manifests itself in a local context; the prevalence of misinformation, disinformation, and the challenges these issues post for local governments; and how the University of Denver community might support local governance. Anchoring those broad themes, the mayors highlighted successful local collaborative efforts, emphasizing in particular the Metro Mayors Caucus. The Caucus, which met 6 times a year pre-pandemic, consists of 38 mayors and functions as a peer support group for tackling issues affecting the region.
While themes of collaboration permeated the event, the questions about local responses to the pandemic centered around the concept of regionalism. Mayor Hancock summarized the region’s approach, recalling a helicopter ride early in his tenure with Aurora’s mayor when he “[couldn’t] tell the difference between Denver and Aurora.” Though each mayor voiced their unique approach to pandemic restrictions, the prevailing motto, as stated by Millet, was “even if you vehemently disagreed with the actions that someone else was taking, you still remain cordial with them. I can still like you and disagree with you.” The mayors consistently described this theme as guiding their actions throughout the pandemic.
The panel, when addressing the other questions posed by Barma and audience members, remained cordial in their responses, though underlying differences were hinted at, including when the subject strayed to the light rail system in Denver. Moments of levity included quotations from a country music song and the renowned actor, Denzel Washington. Finally, the panelists urged DU students to intern for city government and to show up to events such as these. Overall, as Chancellor Haefner succinctly put it, the event represented “civil discourse at its best.”
Copyright ©2026 University of Denver | All rights reserved | The University of Denver is an equal opportunity institution
