Boston
Initial Findings
DOCUMENTS AVAILABLE
Katz, Lawrence F., Jeffrey R. Kling, and Jeffrey B.
Liebman, The
Early Impacts of Moving to Opportunity in Boston, October 2000. Subsequently
revised and published in Choosing a Better Life: Evaluating the Moving to
Opportunity Social Experiment. Edited by John Goering and Judith Feins. Washington, DC:
The Urban Institute Press, 2003.
Kling, Jeffrey R., Jeffrey B. Liebman, and Lawrence F. Katz, Bullets
Don't Got No Name: Consequences of Fear in the Ghetto,
Joint Center for Poverty Research Working
Paper 225, April 2001. Subsequently revised and published in Discovering
Successful Pathways in Childrens Development: Mixed Methods in the Study
of Childhood and Family Life. Edited by Thomas S. Weisner. Chicago:
The University of
Chicago Press, 2004.
MTO-Boston Follow-up Survey Instrument in English
and Spanish.
MTO-Boston Sources
of Survey Questions.
Katz, Lawrence F., Jeffrey R. Kling, and
Jeffrey B. Liebman, Moving to Opportunity in Boston: Early Results of a
Randomized Mobility Experiment, Final version published in Quarterly Journal of
Economics (May 2001) 607-654.
SUMMARY
This research examines the short-run impacts
of a change in residential neighborhood on the well-being of low-income
families, using evidence from a program in which eligibility for a housing
voucher was determined by random lottery. The experiences of households at the Boston site of Moving To Opportunity (MTO), a demonstration program in five
cities, are examined. Families in high poverty public housing projects applied
to MTO and were assigned by lottery to one of three groups: Experimental --
offered mobility counseling and a Section 8 subsidy valid only in a Census
tract with a poverty rate of less than 10 percent; Section 8 Comparison --
offered a geographically unrestricted Section 8 subsidy; or Control -- offered
no new assistance, but continued to be eligible for public housing.
Quantitative analyses of program impacts
uses data on 540 families from a baseline survey conducted at program
enrollment, a follow-up survey administered 1 to 3.5 years after random
assignment, and state administrative data on earnings and welfare receipt. 48
percent of the Experimental group and 62 percent of the Section 8 Comparison
group moved through the MTO program. One to three years after program entry,
families in both treatment groups were more likely to be residing in
neighborhoods with low poverty rates and high education levels than were
families in the Control group. However, while members of the Experimental group
were much more likely to be residing in suburban communities than were those in
the Section 8 group, the lower program take-up rate among the Experimental
group resulted in more families remaining in the most distressed communities.
Households in both treatment groups experienced improvements in multiple
measures of well-being relative to the Control group including increased
safety, improved health among household heads, and fewer behavior problems
among boys. Experimental group children were also less likely to be a victim of
a personal crime, to be injured, or to experience an asthma attack. There are
no significant impacts of MTO treatment either on the employment, earnings, or
welfare receipt of household heads in the first three years after random
assignment.
QUESTION
- What are the comprehensive impacts of a
residential neighborhood on the well-being of residents?
DATA
AND DESIGN
Five
data collection methods were used:
- Field work to observe the operations of the
program.
- 12 open-ended qualitative interviews with a
random sample of household heads in the Experimental and Section 8
Comparison groups.
- The HUD MTO baseline survey, completed by all
participants in Section 8-only, Experimental, and Control groups of the
MTO program.
- A follow-up survey of 520 MTO families, on
average 2 years after entry into the program. 340 of these were conducted
by phone between June and July, 1997, with an additional 180 interviews in
person, for an overall response rate of 96.3 percent. The sample was
limited to families who had taken up to 120 days to find a new residence
and then had lived in that residence for at least nine months.
- State administrative data on earnings from the
Massachusetts Department of Revenue.
- State administrative data on public assistance usage
from the Massachusetts Department of Revenue.
Controlling for
characteristics known prior to randomization, the authors estimate the effect
of the Intent To Treat (ITT); that is, the average
causal effects for those who took-up the treatment and those who did not. The
effect of Treatment on the Treated (TOT) is then estimated by using treatment
assignment as an instrumental variable, and imputing a Control Complier Mean
(CCM)-- the a counterfactual estimating what the
effect of treatment would have been for control group members, had they
received treatment.
RESULTS
- One to three years after program entry, families in both treatment
groups were more likely to be residing in neighborhoods with low poverty
rates and high education levels than were families in the Control group.
However, while members of the Experimental group were much more likely to
be residing in suburban communities than were those in the Section 8
group, the lower program take-up rate among the Experimental group
resulted in more families remaining in the most distressed communities.
- MTO Experimental group families had moved to neighborhoods that had
significantly lower poverty rates, higher employment rates, and a greater
degree of racial heterogeneity, in comparison to the Control group
families. The Section 8 Comparison group had similar, but smaller,
differences from the Control group families. Both treatment groups had
moved to neighborhoods with less drug dealing and less gunfire, and were
less likely to be victims of property crimes, while children in the
Experimental group were less likely to be victims of personal crimes.
- There were no significant impacts of MTO treatment on either the employment, earnings, or welfare receipt of
household heads in the first three years after random assignment.
- Households in both treatment groups experienced improvements in
multiple measures of wellbeing relative to the Control group, including
increased safety, improved health among household heads, and fewer
behavior problems among boys. Experimental group children were also less
likely to be victims of a personal crime, to be injured, or to experience
an asthma attack.
CITATION
Brennan, Brian. Boston.
Moving To Opportunity
Research. Created August 30, 2000.
Last Modified February 7, 2001. http://www.nber.org/mtopublic/boston.htm.
Return to MTO Main Page