Quarterly Housing Market Update - HUD - 6/7/12


Uploaded by HUDchannel on 08.06.2012

Transcript:
GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M VERY PLEASED TO WELCOME YOU
TO OUR SECOND QUARTER UPDATE ON HOUSING MARKET CONDITIONS AND
OTHER RESEARCH. AS IS OUR USUAL PRACTICE, WE
WILL LEADOFF OUR PROGRAM WITH AN UPDATE ON THE QUARTERLY MARKET
CONDITIONS GIVEN BY KEVIN CAIN, OUR CHIEF MARKET ANALYST IN OUR
OFFICE OF ECONOMIC AFFAIRS AND WILL BE FOLLOWED BY A PANEL ON
THE NOW SORT OF VERY FAMOUS MOVING TO OPPORTUNITY
EXPERIMENT. WE'RE JOINED BY A VERY
DISTINGUISHED SET OF PANEL LISTS.
LARRY KATZ FROM HARVARD UNIVERSITY, MICHAEL SEGMAN WHO
IS FROM THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY AND SUSAN LUNDQUIST
FROM ST. JOSEPH UNIVERSITY. THE PANEL WILL BE EXCEPTIONALLY
WELL-MODERATED BY TODD RICHARDSON, WHO IS THE ACTING
DEPUTY ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR POLICY DEVELOPMENT IN THE OFFICE
OF POLICY, DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH.
WE'RE JOINED TODAY BY FOLKS WHO HAVE JOINED US IN PERSON, BUT I
KNOW WE ARE ALSO JOINED BY MANY WHO ARE WATCHING US VIA WEBCAST.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR JOINING US THIS AFTERNOON.
IF YOU CHOOSE, YOU MAY TWEET YOUR QUESTIONS USING THE
HASHTAG. WE WILL BE TAKING QUESTIONS
AFTER THE PANEL AND PLEASE DO SUBMIT YOUR QUESTIONS TO US.
WITH THAT, LET ME TURN IT OVER TO KEVIN CAIN.
>> THANK YOU, ERIKA. AS IS MY CUSTOM, I WANT TO THANK
RANDLE GOODKNIGHT FROM OKLAHOMA CITY WHO ALWAYS HELPS OUT BY
PUTTING TOGETHER THE MAPS IN MY PRESENTATION THIS AFTERNOON.
A NOTE ABOUT THE MAPS. THE COLOR THEMES ARE ALL THE
SAME. BROWN INDICATES WORSE OFF
CONDITIONS AND BLUE IS INCREASED CONDITIONS.
WE'RE INTRODUCING CHANGES THIS TIME AROUND WITH THE MAPS.
THE NATIONAL MAPS WILL HAVE A REGIONAL FOCUS RATHER THAN A
STATE FOCUS. AND WE'VE INCLUDED SOME REGIONAL
LEVEL MAPS FOR CERTAIN FACTORS THAT HIGHLIGHT CHANGES AT THE
METROPOLITAN AREA OR AT THE STATE LEVEL.
BEFORE WE BEGIN TALKING ABOUT THE HOUSING MARKETS, LET'S TALK
ABOUT THE NATION'S ECONOMY. FIRST, WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT
NONFARM PAYROLL JOBS, WHICH IS A MEASURE OF THE NUMBER OF JOBS IN
THE ECONOMY. AND THE FIRST FIGURE SHOWS A
YEAR OVER YEAR PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN NONFARM PAYROLL SINCE 2002.
LOOKING AT THE 12-MONTH AND THREE-MONTH AVERAGES THROUGH
MARCH OF 2012. THE 12-MONTH AVERAGE, WHICH IS
SHOWN IN BLACK, SHOWS AN ANNUAL CHANGE AND IS MORE STABLE
MEASURE OF ECONOMIC PERFORMANCE. THE THREE MONTH AVERAGE, WHICH
IS SHOWN IN RED, IS A GOOD INDICATOR FOR WHERE THINGS ARE
HEADING. DURING THE 12-MONTHS ENDING IN
MARCH 2012, NONFARM PAYROLLS AVERAGE NEARLY 131.9 MILLION
JOBS. THIS WAS UP 1.3% OR 1.7 MILLION
JOBS COMPARED WITH A YEAR AGO. THE THREE-MONTH AVERAGE IS TREND
AGO BIT HIGHER SHOWING A 1.6% YEAR OVER YEAR GROWTH RATE.
FOR THE FOURTH CONSECUTIVE QUARTER, EVERY REGION IN THE
COUNTRY ADDED JOBS RELATIVE TO A YEAR AGO.
THE ENTIRE COUNTRY IS IN BLUE. IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2012,
GROWTH WAS LED BY THE SOUTHWEST AND ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGIONS BY
2.2%. EVERY OTHER REGION GREW AT A
RATE SLOWER THAN THE NATIONAL AVERAGE, 1.6% AND GROWTH OF LESS
THAN 1% SHOWN IN THE LIGHT BLUE. THIS NEXT MAP SHOWS GROWTH IN
THE SOUTHWEST REGION BY METROPOLITAN AREA.
THOSE AREAS IN THE DARKEST SHADES OF BLUE GREW BY MORE THAN
2% AND THAT'S 21 OF THE 47 METROPOLITAN AREAS IN THAT
REGION. THIS INCLUDES HOUSTON AT 3.6%,
AUSTIN AT 2.9% AND DALLAS AT 2.4%.
THE NATIONAL UNEMPLOYMENT RATE WAS 8.6% IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF
2012. THIS WAS DOWN FROM 9 1/2% A YEAR
AGO. REGIONS IN BLUE HAD A RATE LOWER
THAN THE NATIONAL RATE LED BY THE GREAT PLAINS AT 6.
7%. THOSE REGIONS IN BROWN HAD A
HIGHER RATE THAN THE NATIONAL AVERAGE LED BY THE PACIFIC AT
11%. AND ON A STATE LEVEL, NORTH
DAKOTA STILL HAD THE LOWEST RATE IN THE NATION AT 3.8%.
NEVADA HAD THE HIGHEST RATE AT 12.3%.
WHAT ABOUT THE CHANGE IN UNEMPLOYMENT FROM A YEAR AGO?
ON A NATIONAL LEVEL, THE UNEMPLOYMENT RATE IN THE FIRST
QUARTER OF 2012 WAS DOWN NEARLY 1% FROM A YEAR AGO AND THE
REGIONS IN DARK BLUE DECLINED RATE GREATER THAN OR EQUAL TO
THE NATION. THE LARGEST WAS IN THE
SOUTHEAST, WHICH WAS DOWN BY 1.3% FOLLOWING FROM 1.4% A YEAR
AGO TO 9.1%. WITH THE DECLINES LED BY 1.8%
THE EDGE POINT DECLINE AND A 1.7 PERCENTAGE POINT DECLINE IN
ALABAMA AND FLORIDA RESPECTIVELY.
THE RATE DECLINED IN EVERY REGION OF THE COUNTRY EXCEPT FOR
NEW YORK NEW JERSEY, WHICH WAS UP SLIGHTLY BY 0.2 PERCENTAGE
POINTS. NOW LET ME GIVE AN OVERVIEW OF
THE CURRENT HOUSING MARKET CONDITIONS.
AS A RESULT OF THE CONTINUED WEAK ECONOMY, SALES MARKET
CONDITIONS REMAIN SOFT IN MUCH OF THE COUNTRY.
JUST FOR A BIT OF BACKGROUND, BALANCE CONDITIONS EXIST.
WE HAVE A SURPLUS AND TIGHT MARKETS OCCUR WHEN DEMAND
EXCEEDS SIMPLY AND WE HAVE A HOUSING SHORTAGE.
THE CASE SCHILLER AND CORE LOGIC HOME PRICES INDICES SHOW THAT
THE RATES ARE DECLINING, THIS IS THE 7th CONSECUTIVE QUARTER OF
DECLINE. EXISTING HOME SALES DECLINED BY
2% IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2012 AND THAT'S THE SAME RATE OF
DECLINE THAT WE SAW IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2011.
INVENTORIES OF NEW HOMES FOR SALE WERE DOWN 20% FROM A YEAR
AGO AND 21% FOR EXISTING HOMES. BASED ON THE CURRENT RATE OF
HOME SALES, THERE'S A 5.2 MONTH SUPPLY OF NEW HOMES COMPARED
WITH THE 7.3 MONTH SUPPLY AND A 6.2 MONTHS SUPPLY OF NEW HOMES.
THE SALES VACANCY RATE WAS 2.2% IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2012.
THAT'S DOWN FROM 2.6% A YEAR AGO.
RENTAL MARKET CONDITIONS ARE BALANCED THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY
AND CONDITIONS CONTINUE TO TIGHTEN.
AN ESTIMATED 51% OF NEW APARTMENTS COMPLETED DURING THE
FOURTH QUARTER OF 2011 WERE ABSORBED WITHIN THE FIRST THREE
MONTHS. THIS WAS DOWN SIGNIFICANTLY
COMPARED TO A RATE OF 64% ABSORPTION A YEAR AGO.
MULTIFAMILY PRODUCTION INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY IN THE FIRST
QUARTER OF 2012 RELATIVE TO A YEAR AGO.
SO IF BOTH OF THOSE TRENDS CONTINUE, THEN THE DECLINES THAT
WE SEE IN VACANCY RATES WILL PROBABLY STOP AND WE MAY SEE
VACANCY RATES START TO RISE IN THE FUTURE.
LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT REGIONAL CONDITIONS.
THESE ARE ASSESSMENTS PROVIDED BY OUR REGIONAL ECONOMISTS
THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY. IMPROVEMENTS IN AN AREA ARE
SHADED IN BLUE AND DECLINES ARE SHADED IN BROWN.
YOU CAN SEE THERE'S NOT A LOT OF CHANGE GOING ON.
NO SIGNIFICANT CHANGES FROM THE PREVIOUS QUARTER.
SALES MARKET CONDITIONS AROUND THE COUNTRY REMAIN SOFT.
BUT CONDITIONS ARE IMPROVING IN MOST REGIONS.
IN THE SOUTHWEST, CONDITIONS WENT FROM SOFT TO SLIGHTLY SOFT.
ON THE RENTAL SIDE, CONDITIONS REMAIN RELATIVELY UNCHANGED FROM
LAST QUARTER. IN THE MID-ATLANTIC, PREVIOUSLY
BALANCED TO TIGHT CONDITIONS ARE CLASSIFIED AS MIXED WITH
CONDITIONS BEING SLIGHTLY SOFT IN BALTIMORE, TIGHT IN
PHILADELPHIA AND BALANCED IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
MOST AREAS ARE BALANCE TO TIGHT EXCEPT FOR SOFT MARKETS IN
TEXAS, NEVADA AND ARIZONA. BUT ALL OF THOSE MARKETS ARE
ALSO IMPROVING. THE CORE LOGIC AND CASE SCHILLER
HAD 1.9% DURING THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2011 TO THE FIRST
QUARTER OF 2012. THIS IS 7th CONSECUTIVE QUARTER
OF DECLINES FOR BOTH OF THOSE INDEXES.
IF YOU LOOK, IF YOU SQUINT HARD AT THE SCREEN AND YOU LOOK AT
THE FHSA INDEX SHOWN IN RED THERE, YOU'LL SEE THAT THE FHSA
INDEX IS SHOWING A SLIGHT POSITIVE GAIN IN THE FIRST
QUARTER OF 2012 UP BY ABOUT A HALF A PERCENT.
THIS NEXT MAP SHOWS THE CHANGE IN THE CORE LOGIC INDEX BY
REGION FROM THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2011 TO THE FIRST QUARTER OF
2012. THIS IS NONSEASONALLY ADJUSTED
DATA AND INCLUDES DISTRESSED SALES.
HALF THE REGIONS IN BROWN REPRESENT PRICE DECLINES.
THE OTHER HALF IN BLUE REPRESENTING PRICE INCREASES.
NEW ENGLAND AND THE MIDWEST DECLINED AT A FASTER RATE THAN
THE NATIONAL AVERAGE, DOWN 3 1/2% AND 2%.
THE LARGEST GAINS OCCURRED IN THE ROCKY MOUNTAIN REGION, WHICH
WAS UP BY 3.3%. AND ON A STATE LEVEL, THE
LARGEST DECLINE OCCURRED IN DELAWARE, WHICH WAS DOWN 9% AND
THE LARGEST INCREASE WAS IN WEST VIRGINIA WHICH WAS UP BY 4 1/2%.
ACCORDING TO THE CENSUS BUREAU, THE MEDIAN PRICE OF A NEW HOME
IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2012 WAS $232,000.
THIS IS UP 2% FROM A YEAR AGO. AND ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL
ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, THE MEDIAN PRICE OF A HOME WAS
$158,000. THIS WAS UNCHANGED FROM A YEAR
AGO. THE NEXT MAP SHOWS THE PRICE
CHANGE INS THE NEW ENGLAND REGION AT THE METROPOLITAN LEVEL
DURING THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2012.
14 OF THE 18 METROPOLITAN AREAS IN THE REGION DECLINED AT A
FASTER RATE THAN THE NATIONAL AVERAGE AND SIX OF THOSE WERE BY
6% OR MORE. THE FORECLOSURE SITUATION IS
REMAINED RELATIVELY UNCHANGED IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2012.
THIS MAP SHOWS THE PERCENT OF HOME LOANS THAT ARE 90 DAYS OR
MORE OF DELINQUENT. THE NATIONAL AVERAGE WAS 7.8% OF
ALL LOANS IN THOSE THREE CATEGORIES, THIS IS DOWN FROM 8%
IN MARCH 2011. THE THREE REGIONS IN THE TWO
SHADES OF BROWN HAVE A RATE THAT IS HIGHER THAN THE NATIONAL
AVERAGE WHILE THE OTHER SEVEN REGIONS ARE BELOW THE NATIONAL
AVERAGE. MOST REGIONS REMAINED RELATIVELY
UNCHANGED WITH THE EXCEPTION OF THE PACIFIC, WHICH WAS DOWN 2.2
PERCENTAGE POINTS FROM A YEAR AGO.
THAT WAS LED BY DECLINED IN ARIZONA, NEVADA AND CALIFORNIA
OF 3.23 AND TWO PERCENTAGE POINTS RESPECTIVELY.
THE HIGHEST REGION WAS THE SOUTHEAST AT 11.1% AND AS YOU
CAN SEE FROM THIS MAP, THAT WAS PRIMARILY BECAUSE FLORIDA, WHICH
STILL HAS THE HIGHEST RATE IN THE COUNTRY AT 18% AND THAT RATE
IS RELATIVELY UNCHANGED FROM A YEAR AGO.
MISSISSIPPI AND GEORGIA ARE ALSO ABOVE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE WITH
RATES OF 9.5% AND 8.3% RESPECTIVELY.
EXISTING HOME SALES DECREASED BY 2% IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2012
ON A YEAR OVER YEAR BASIS. THIS WAS THE SAME RATE OF
DECLINE AS LAST QUARTER. SIX REGIONS HAD A DECLINE
GREATER THAN THE NATIONAL AVERAGE LED BY
NEW YORK/NEW JERSEY AND GREAT PLAINS.
BOTH AT 11%. THE LARGEST INCREASE OCCURRED IN
NEW ENGLAND WHICH WAS UP BY 8%. NEW HOME SALES WERE UP BY 13%
FROM THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2011 TO THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2012.
LOOKING CLOSER AT NEW ENGLAND, SALES WERE UP IN 17 OF THE 18
METROPOLITAN AREAS SHOWN. AND JUST TO NOTE THERE, IN
LOUISTON, THE ONLY AREA TO DECLINE, THE DECLINE WAS 22
HOMES. IT'S A RELATIVELY SMALL SCALE
THERE. ALL FOUR OF THE METROPOLITAN
DIVISIONS THAT SURPRISE THE BOSTON CBSA EXPERIENCED
SIGNIFICANT GAIN. SINGLE FAMILY HOME BUILDING
INCREASED 18% IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2012 TO 98,000 HOMES
TO THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2011. A SINGLE FAMILY HOME BUILDING
INCREASED IN EVERY REGION OF THE COUNTRY, EXCEPT FOR
NEW YORK/NEW JERSEY WHERE IT WAS FLAT.
THE GAINS RANGED FROM 5% IN THE MID-ATLANTIC TO 53% IN THE ROCKY
MOUNTAINS. AND THE NUMBER OF MULTIFAMILY
UNITS PERMITTED WAS UP BY 77% TO 59,900 UNITS DURING THE FIRST
QUARTER OF 2012 AND THE NUMBER OF MULTIFAMILY UNITS PERMITTED
WAS UP IN EVERY REGION. THE INCREASES RANGED FROM 25% IN
THE MID-ATLANTIC TO 228% IN THE NORTHWEST.
RENTAL MARKET CONDITIONS CONTINUE TO TIGHTEN AROUND THE
COUNTRY. ACCORDING TO REESE DATA, WHICH
COVERS 200 MARKET AREAS, VACANCY RATES WERE DOWN IN 179 MARKETED
AREAS AND THEY WERE UP OR UNCHANGED IN 21 MARKET AREAS.
THE AVERAGE VACANCY RATE FOR ALL AREAS COVERED DECLINED BY 3.1
PERCENTAGE POINTS. THERE WAS 13 MARKETED AREAS WITH
A DECLINE. THOSE AREAS SHOWN IN DARK BROWN.
ACCORDING TO THE CENSUS BUREAU FOR THE ENTIRE U.S., THE RENTAL
VACANCY RATE WAS 8.8% IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2012 DOWN FROM
9.7% A YEAR AGO. TAKING A LOOK AT THE SOUTHWEST.
VACANCY RATES WERE DOWN IN 25 AREAS AND UP IN ONLY FOUR AREAS.
THE RATE WAS DOWN BY 2.2 PERCENTAGE POINTS IN HOUSTON,
BUT THAT MARKET STILL REMAINS SOFT WITH A VACANCY RATE OF
8.1%. IN ADDITION, VACANCY RATES
DECLINED BY MORE THAN 2% IN FORT WORTH, BEAUMONT AND
DENNISON, WHICH ARE ALL SHOWN IN THE DARK BROWN.
MARKET RENTS WERE UP BY AN AVERAGE OF 2.2% NATIONALLY IN
THE MARKETS COVERED BY REESE FROM THE FIRST QUARTER 2011 TO
THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2012. THE AVERAGE MARKET RENT IN THE
FIRST QUARTER 2012 FOR THE 200 AREAS WAS $2,247.
RENTS INCREASED IN 198 OF THE MARKET AREAS.
SO ONLY TWO AREAS WHERE IT DIDN'T INCREASE.
IT WAS DOWN 1% IN FORT MYERS AND RENTS UNCHANGED IN JACKSONVILLE.
RENTS INCREASED BY MORE THAN 2% LED BY INCREASES OF 5.1% IN
SAN FRANCISCO AND 4.2% IN SAN JOSE.
ONCE AGAIN, HIGHLIGHTING THE SOUTHWEST, MARKETS INCREASED IN
EVERY METROPOLITAN AREA OF THE SOUTHWEST.
14 OF THOSE AREAS HAD INCREASES OF MORE THAN 2% AND EVERY AREA
EXCEPT FOR BEAUMONT INCREASED BY MORE THAN 1%.
SO IN SUMMARY, YEAR OVER YEAR JOB GROWTH FOR THE FIRST QUARTER
OF 2012 WAS 1.6%. SALES MARKETS REMAINED SOFT IN
THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2012 WITH CONTINUING PRICE DECLINES AND
SLIGHT DECLINE IN HOME SALES. RENTAL MARKET CONDITIONS REMAIN
BALANCED TO TIGHT THROUGHOUT THE 98 WITH RENTS CONTINUING TO RISE
AND VACANCY RATES CONTINUE TO DECLINE.
FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, GO TO THE U.S. HOUSING MARKET
CONDITIONS REPORT. FEEL FREE TO CONTACT ME OR
CONTACT YOUR LOCAL FIELD ECONOMIST.
AT THIS TIME I HAVE GREAT PLEASURE TO TURN THE MICROPHONE
OVER TO TODD RICHARDSON. >> THANK YOU, KEVIN.
THAT WAS VERY HELPFUL. ONE OF MY FAVORITE THINGS, I
LIKE TO GET THESE SNAPSHOTS. IT'S LIKE CANDY TO ME.
YOU CAN SEE ALL THIS STUFF ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON IN THE COUNTRY
IN 12 MINUTES OR A 15-MINUTE PRESENTATION IS FANTASTIC.
THE PANEL WE HAVE TODAY IS ON MOVING OPPORTUNITY.
BEFORE I START, I'D LIKE TO MAKE A NOTE THAT -- A COUPLE NOTES.
ONE IS THAT THE DEPUTY SECRETARY IS COMING IN HERE AT 4:00 P.M.
SO -- OR WE HAVE TO EXIT AT 4:00 P.M. ON THE DOT APPARENTLY.
SO EVERYBODY IS AWARE OF THAT. THE OTHER THING IS THAT, YOU
KNOW, ERIKA WAS UP HERE. SHE DID A NICE INTRODUCTION.
BUT WHAT ERIKA FAILED TO MENTION IS THAT SHE'S ONE OF MANY
PEOPLE, A KEY PERSON HAVING MADE MOVING VERY SUCCESSFULLY.
SHE WAS INTERESTED IN PROVIDING FUNDING TO SUPPORT THE MOVING TO
OPPORTUNITY RESEARCH. AND SO SHE WAS VERY PATIENT AS
WE TRIED TO FIGURE OUT HOW WE COULD MAKE IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE
FUNDING FROM OUTSIDE FUNDERS BE ABLE TO BE USED TO MAKE THIS
FULL-FLEDGED DEMONSTRATION. IT WAS A TIME OF FAIRLY SCARCE
RESOURCES FOR RESEARCH AND HAD WE NOT HAD FUNDING FROM McARTHUR
AND OTHER FOUNDATIONS AND FEDERAL AGENCIES, WE WOULDN'T BE
HERE TODAY TO TALK ABOUT THESE RESEARCH FINDINGS.
I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ERIKA PLAYED A LARGE ROLE IN MTO
BEFORE SHE CAME HERE. NOW SHE'S HERE, SHE'S BEEN HERE
FOR US TO RELEASE THESE FINDINGS, WHICH ARE VERY, VERY
INTERESTING. SO WITH THAT NOTED, THANK YOU,
ERIKA. SO IN 2010, THERE WERE 42
MILLION PERSONS IN POVERTY IN THE UNITED STATES.
6.3 MILLION OF THOSE PERSONS IN POVERTY LIVE IN NEIGHBORHOODS OF
EXTREME POVERTY. NEIGHBORHOODS WITH A POVERTY
RATE OF GREATER THAN 40%. AND BETWEEN 2000 AND 2010, WE
SAW A SIGNIFICANT GROWTH NOT ONLY IN POVERTY BUT WE ALSO SAY
AN LARGER GROWTH IN PERSONS IN POVERTY IN THESE NEIGHBORHOODS
OF EXTREME POVERTY. SO THE QUESTION THEN BECOMES IS
LIVING IN A HIGH POVERTY NEIGHBORHOOD HARMFUL FOR POOR
FAMILIES? SO AS THE RESEARCHES HAVE
POINTED OUT, THROUGH STUDIES DATING BACK TO THE 17th CENTURY
SHOWING THAT PEOPLE LIVING IN DISTRESSED NEIGHBORHOODS HAVE
MORE CRIMINAL INVOLVEMENT THAN OTHERS LIVING IN LESS DISTRESSED
AREAS. WHEN I WAS IN POLICY SCHOOL,
WILLIAM WILSON'S LANDMARK 1987 BOOK "THE TRULY DISADVANTAGED"
ARGUED THAT IN THESE DISTRESSED NEIGHBORHOODS, THERE'S A LACK
OF -- AND I QUOTE HERE -- MAINSTREAM ROLL MODELS THAT HELP
KEEP ALIVE THE PERCEPTION THAT EDUCATION IS MEANINGFUL, THAT
STEADY EMPLOYMENT IS A VIABLE ALTERNATIVE TO WELFARE AND THAT
FAMILY STABILITY IS THE NORM, NOT THE EXCEPTION.
BUT I WILL NOTE THAT ALMOST ALL OF THE PAST RESEARCH WAS
OBSERVATIONAL. SO THERE REMAINS UNCERTAINTY
ABOUT THE DEGREE TO WHICH VARIATION ACROSS NEIGHBORHOODS
AND PEOPLES OUTCOME REFLECTS THE CAUSAL EFFECT OF NEIGHBORHOOD,
ENVIRONMENT, PER SE VERSUS THE PROPENSITY OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF
PEOPLE TO LIVE IN DIFFERENT AREAS.
SO THIS BRINGS US TO MOVING OPPORTUNITY.
THERE WAS SOME RESEARCH FROM CHICAGO THAT SUGGESTED FAMILIES
WITH VOUCHERS THAT MOVED TO THE SUBURBS FARED BETTER THAN THOSE
THAT REMAINED IN THE CITY OF CHICAGO.
IN 1992, ALEX HOLICOFF CONVINCED APPROPRIATIONS TO CREATE MOVING
TO OPPORTUNITY AND PROVIDE $70 MILLION FOR HOUSING VOUCHERS.
THAT -- THE IDEA OF THE PROGRAM WAS TO PROVIDE COUNSELLING TO
FAMILIES TO HELP THEM MOVE FROM PUBLIC HOUSING TO LOWER POVERTY
NEIGHBORHOODS. FORTUNATELY THAT LAW CALLED FOR
AN EVALUATION. WHEN THE CLINTON TEAM MADE THE
DECISION TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS PROGRAM, BY PROVIDING TO DO
A VERY RIGOROUS EXPERIMENTAL EVALUATION.
SO IT BAKE THAT NTO WAS NOT ONLY A PROGRAM, BUT IT WAS A
CONTROLLED EXPERIMENT THAT TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE FACT THAT MORE
FAMILIES WOULD WANT THESE VOUCHERS THAN THERE WERE
VOUCHERS AVAILABLE. AS SUCH, WE WERE ABLE TO
RANDOMLY SELECT FROM A POOL OF APPLICANTS WHO WANTED TO MOVE
FROM A HIGH POVERTY PUBLIC HOUSING ENVIRONMENT TO A LOW
POVERTY NEIGHBORHOOD WITH A HOUSING VOUCHER AND COMPARE THEM
TO THE FAMILIES THAT APPLIED BUT WERE NOT SELECTED IN THE
LOTTERY. WITH 4,604 FAMILIES IN THE
STUDY, THIS GIVES US A VERY ROBUST SAMPLE TO MEASURE THE
IMPACT OF THE SIMPLE INTERVENTION OF HELPING A FAMILY
MOVE FROM A HIGH POVERTY ENVIRONMENT TO A LOW POVERTY
ENVIRONMENT. FAMILIES LEASED UP IN NEW YORK,
BALTIMORE, CHICAGO, LOS ANGELES AND BOSTON.
BETWEEN 1990 AND 1998. WE CONDUCTED AN INTERIM
EVALUATION WHERE WE SAW IMPACT AS OF 2001 AND THIS FINAL
EVALUATION WHERE WE SEE IMPACTS AS OF 2010-11.
ONE OF THE GREAT THINGS ABOUT MTO IS THE INTERESTING RESEARCH
QUESTION ABOUT THE IMPACT OF NEIGHBORHOODS BROUGHT TOGETHER A
VERY DIVERSE GROUP OF RESEARCHERS TO STUDY THE IMPACT
OF THE PROGRAM AND IN THAT VEIN I ASKED THREE FOLKS THAT HAVE
WORKED ON THE RESEARCH IN VARIOUS CAPACITIES TO SPEAK
TODAY ON WHAT WE'VE LEARNED AND WHAT THEY THINK IT MEANS.
SO OUR PANEL MEMBERS TODAY IS LARRY KATZ FROM HARVARD
UNIVERSITY. HE SERVED AS A PRINCIPAL
INVESTIGATOR ON MTO THAT WAS THE MTO FINAL EVALUATION THAT WAS
RECENTLY COMPLETED. WE HAVE MIKE STEGMAN, COUNSELOR
TO TREASURY SECRETARY GEITHNER CURRENTLY.
FROM 1993 TO 1997, HE WAS THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR POLICY
DEVELOPMENT AND RESEARCH AND WAS ONE OF THE KEY PLAYERS IN
CREATING THE MOVING TO OPPORTUNITY DEMONSTRATION.
AND WE HAVE SUSAN CLAMPET LUNDQUIST.
THIS BRINGS TOGETHER THE QUANTITATIVE, THE QUALITATIVE
AND THE POLICY EXPERIENCE WITH THE PROGRAM.
SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO LARRY WHO IS GOING TO
GO THROUGH THE KEY FINDINGS FROM THE FINAL EVALUATION.
>> THANK YOU. >> SINCE TODD DID SUCH AN
EXCELLENT JOB IN THE INTRODUCTION OF GOING OVER
BASICALLY THE BACKGROUND OF MTO AND THE MOTIVATION, I THINK I
CAN GO THROUGH THAT QUICKLY. BUT I FIRST NEED TO SAY A COUPLE
WORDS. THE LONG RUN EVALUATION OF
MOVING TO OPPORTUNITY WAS A LARGE TEAM EFFORT.
NORMALLY A FEW NAMES ON THE SLIDE DUE TO THE LIMITATIONS OF
THE FORMAT I WAS TOLD I COULD PUT SLIDES IN FOR HUD, THERE
WOULD BE ANY OTHER NAMES IF YOU ALLOWED ME TO HAVE OTHER FONTS.
LUDWIG IS THE PROJECT DIRECTOR AND.
LISA HAS BEEN VERY INSTRUMENTAL. WE'VE GOTTEN A LOT OF HELP FROM
PEOPLE AT HUD FOR MANY YEARS, INCLUDING MARK SCHROEDER AND
TODD. YEARS AGO JOHN GORING AT THE
BEGINNING. IT'S A LARGE TEAM EFFORT
INVOLVING ECONOMISTS, SOCIALOLOGISTS, PEOPLE THAT DO
PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH STUDIES.
WE LOOKED BEYOND THE STANDARD EDUCATION, INCOME, HOUSING AND
EARNINGS. OKAY.
SO I'LL VERY QUICKLY GO OVER THE MOTIVATION FOR THE STUDY AND
RESEARCH SINCE TOM WENT OVER -- TODD WENT OVER IT ALREADY.
AS HE NOTED, THERE'S A LOT OF CONCERN FOR RACIAL AND ECONOMIC
SEGREGATION ACROSS NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE U.S.
WE HAVE STILL TREMENDOUS RACIAL SEGREGATION.
THE TYPICAL AFRICAN AMERICAN FAMILY LISTS IN A LARGELY
AFRICAN AMERICAN NEIGHBORHOOD, PARTICULARLY LOW INCOME ONES.
THE MAJOR CHANGES IN FAIR HOUSING, ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITIESES FOR AFRICAN AMERICANS HAVE MEANT SUBSTANTIAL
IMPROVEMENTS IN MANY OF THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS, BUT HAVE ACTUALLY
LED TO REDUCTIONS OVER THE LAST SEVERAL DECADES AND RACIAL
SEGREGATION. OVER THE SAME PERIOD, ECONOMIC
SEGREGATION HAS INCREASED. LOW INCOME AFRICAN AMERICANS AND
WHITES AND HISPANICS ARE LESS LIKELY TO LIVE WITH HIGHER
INCOME FAMILIES. THAT'S AS PREDICTED 25 YEARS AGO
BY WILLIAM WILSON TALKING ABOUT THE DECLINE OF INNER CITY
NEIGHBORHOODS AND INCENTIVES OF MIDDLE CLASS FAMILIES TO MOVE
OUT OF POORER NEIGHBORHOODS HAS LARGER FOR PARTICULARLY AFRICAN
AMERICAN FAMILIES WHERE THE LIKELIHOOD OF LIVING WITH
SOMEONE, IF YOU'RE A POORER FAMILY WHO HAS THE MEDIAN INCOME
IN THE U.S. HAS FALLEN IN HALF OVER THIS PERIOD.
SO THERE'S BEEN LARGE INCREASES IN ECONOMIC SEGREGATION, RACIAL
SEGREGATION REMAINS VERY HIGH. BUT IT'S NARROWED, WHICH RAISES
THE IMPORTANT QUESTIONS, CAN WE USE THIS EXPERIMENT TO LEARN A
LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE IMPACTS OF ECONOMIC VERSUS RACIAL
SEGREGATION ON FAMILY OUTCOMES. THE SECOND ONE IS A QUESTION
THAT'S BEEN AROUND FOR HUNDREDS OF YEARS AS TODD NOTED.
WE KNOW FROM OBSERVATIONAL STUDIES THAT FAMILIES LIVING IN
LOW INCOME AND DISTRESSED NEIGHBORHOODS FARE WORSE IN
ADULT ECONOMIC OUTCOMES. THE CHILDREN ARE LESS LIKELY TO
DO WELL IN SCHOOL. THEY END UP HAVING SHORTER LIFE
EXPECTANCIES, MORE INVOLVED IN CRIME.
ON A WIDE RANGE OF MEASURES OF DISTRESS, THERE'S STRONG
CORRELATION. RESEARCH HAS SHOWN THAT THE MORE
STUFF YOU CONTROL FOR IN A REGRESSION OR WHICHEVER WAY YOU
WANT TO DO IT, THE SMALLER THE NEIGHBORHOOD EFFECTS APPEAR TO
BE. THAT LEADS TO WHAT IS A GAME
CALLED NAME THAT RESIDUAL. IF YOU BELIEVE IN NEIGHBORHOOD
EFFECTS, YOU'LL CALL THAT THE -- EVEN AFTER YOU HAVE CONTROLLED
FOR EVERYTHING, THERE'S LARGE UNEXPLAINED DIFFERENCES.
IF YOUR A SKEPTIC, YOU'LL SAY HOW MANY YEARS OF SCHOOLING
SOMEONE HAD, THEIR PARENTS HAD BUT YOU DON'T KNOW THE QUALITY
OF IT. IF YOU CONTROLLED FOR IT ALL THE
WAY, THERE WOULDN'T BE ANYTHING LEFT FOR NEIGHBORHOOD
ENVIRONMENTS. THAT WAS SORT OF THE BACKGROUND
FOR SETTING UP THIS EXPERIMENT TO TRY TO REALLY GET A SENSE OF
WHAT IF WE COULD TRULY RANDOMIZE THE LIKELIHOOD THAT DIFFERENT
FAMILIES WHO WOULD BE OBSERVATIONALLY AND ON TERMS OF
ALL THE UNOBSERVABLES ON AVERAGE SORT OF EQUIVALENT, WHAT IF WE
CAN DO THAT AND FOLLOW THEM FOR A LARGE NUMBER OF YEARS.
BASICALLY THAT'S WHAT MTO HAS BEEN ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH.
AS TODD NOTED, 4,600 FAMILIES ENTERED THIS PROGRAM AND GOT
RANDOMLY A SIGNED. OTHERS CONTINUED TO GET THEIR
SAME SUPPORT. WHAT I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT
TODAY IS WHAT HAS HAPPENED OVER THE LAST 15 YEARS IN OBSERVING
THESE FAMILIES AND PARTICULAR THE LONG RUN OUTCOMES.
AS TODD NOTED, THIS WAS IN A 1992 URBAN BILL.
IT'S A RANDOMIZED URBAN EXPERIMENT.
THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION IN 93 WORKED TO MAKE SURE THAT
HAPPENED. IT WAS OPEN TO FAMILIES LIVING
IN PUBLIC HOUSING OR PROJECT-BASED ASSISTANCE IN FIVE
CITIES. TO THE BE ELIGIBLE, IT HAD TO BE
A PROJECT OR A PUBLIC HOUSING PROJECT IN A CENSUS TRACK WITH
OVER A 40% POVERTY RATE AS OF 1990.
SO THESE ARE THE POORER CENSUS TRACK RATES IN THE UNITED
STATES. THE TYPICAL FAMILY LIVED IN A
CENSUS TRACK WITH A 53% POVERTY RATE AT BASELINE WHEN THEY WERE
RANDOMIZED IN, WHICH WAS FIVE TIMES THE NATIONAL AVERAGE.
THESE ARE THE 2 TO 3% HIGHER POVERTY RATES IN THE UNITED
STATES. FAMILIES WERE ENROLLED FROM 1994
TO 1998. WHAT WAS THE EXPERIMENT?
FAMILY THE FAMILIES THAT SIGNED UP, WE SHOULD THINK OF THEM AS
INDIVIDUALS LIVING IN PUBLIC HOUSING THAT BASICALLY WANTED TO
GET A VOUCHER TO MOVE. IN MOST OF THESE CITIES, THERE
WERE VERY LONG WAITING LISTS TO GET VOUCHERS.
IN ONE OF THE TREATMENT GROUPS, THE SECTION 8, WHICH THEY GOT A
STANDARD SECTION 8 VOUCHER AND NO EXTRA SPECIAL TREATMENT
BESIDES WHAT YOU WOULD GET IF YOU HAD GOTTEN ONE.
IN THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP, YOU GOT A SECTION EIGHT VOUCHER BUT
YOU COULD ONLY USE TO IT MOVE TO A HOUSING UNIT IN A CENSUS TRACK
THAT HAD UNDER A 10% POVERTY RATE.
BELOW THE NATIONAL AVERAGE OF POVERTY AS OF THE 1990 CENSUS
BUT THERE WAS COUNSELLING AND HELP.
BUT YOU SHOULD THINK OF IT AS HOUSING MOBILITY, NOT
COUNSELLING ABOUT DIFFERENT ASPECTS OF YOUR LIFE.
THAT'S BASICALLY WHAT THE MTO EXPERIMENT IS.
WHO ARE THE PEOPLE WHO PARTICIPATED IN THIS EXPERIMENT
WHO ARE GOING TO LEARN SOMETHING ABOUT WHETHER BASICALLY WHO IS
LIVING IN HIGH POVERTY PUBLIC HOUSING PROJECTS IN THE 1990s.
THAT ARE -- THEY BASICALLY HAD TO BE POOR FAMILIES WITH
CHILDREN SO THEY'RE NOT SURPRISINGLY DISPROPORTIONATELY
SINGLE FEMALE-HEADED HOUSEHOLDS, MINORITY AROUND THE TIME THAT
WELFARE WAS GOING IN. THE VAST MAJORITY WERE ON PUBLIC
ASSISTANCE AND THE VAST MAJORITY HEADS OF THE HOUSEHOLD WERE
MOTHERS AND NOT WORKING. OVER THE TIME THAT MTO TOOK
PLACE, THERE WERE MASSIVE CHANGES IN THE SOCIAL SAFETY
NET. WELFARE REFORM HAPPENED.
THE SHIFT TOWARDS WORK-BASED ASSISTANCE.
THERE WERE HUGE EMPLOYMENT INCREASES OF MOTHER IN THE
SAMPLE, BUT THAT'S TRUE FOR THE CONTROLLED AGREEMENT AND THE
TREATMENT GROUP. WHILE THEY ART STARTED IN
PROJECT BASE ADD CYST ANSWER THE, MANY OF THOSE UNITS WERE
DEMOLISHED OVER THE TIME PERIOD. SO YOU SHOULDN'T THINK OF THE
CONTROLLED GROUP AS PERSISTING FOR THE LAST 15 YEARS IN THE
ROBERT TAYLOR HOMES OR IN THE SAME UNIT IN BALTIMORE UNIT.
MOST OF THE PEOPLE IN THE CONTROL GROUP ALSO MOVED.
IT'S JUST THEY DON'T MOVE WITH THE ASSISTANCE AS EARLY AND WITH
THE TIMING OF THEIR CHOOSING AS DO THE MTO ONES.
WE'LL SEE THEY END UP IN DIFFERENT NEIGHBORHOODS.
IN BALTIMORE AND CHICAGO, IT'S ALMOST 100% AFRICAN AMERICAN.
THEY'RE MUCH MORE MIXED GROUPS BETWEEN HISPANICS, BLACKS AND A
MODEST GROUP OF POOR WHITES IN BOSTON, L.A. AND NEW YORK WHO
ARE LARGELY HISPANIC AND BLACK. AND AT EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE
SITES AT THE BASELINE SURVEY, WE ASKED THEM FOR WHY IT IS THEY
WANTED A HOUSING VOUCHER TO MOVE.
3/4s OF THE FAMILIES LISTED ESSENTIALLY CONCERNS WITH
SAFETY, CRIME, GANGS AND VIOLENCE AS BY FAR THE MOST
IMPORTANT REASON THEY WANTED TO MOVE.
MUCH HIGHER UP, SCHOOLS FOR KIDS WERE MODESTLY IMPORTANT AND
IMPROVING HOUSING QUALITY, LOOKING FOR WORK AND ECONOMIC
OPPORTUNITY WAS ALMOST THE NULL SET.
PEOPLE LISTED THAT AS THEIR MOTIVATION.
WHAT DID WE TRY TO DO TO LEARN ABOUT THIS SAMPLE?
WE DID A COUPLE THINGS. WE DID A LARGE SCALE HOUSEHOLD
SURVEY ASKING THE HOUSEHOLD HEADS A WIDE RANGE OF QUESTIONS
ABOUT HEALTH, EDUCATION, ECONOMICS, DATA, PHYSICAL AND
MENTAL HEALTH. THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS,
CONNECTIONS, THEIR SOCIAL CAPITAL.
WE ALSO TRIED TO GET A COUPLE KIDS FOCUSED ON KIDS 10-20 AT
THE TIME IN THE LONG RUN EVALUATION FROM 2008-10.
THESE ARE LARGELY YOUNG KIDS AT THE TIME OF RANDOM ASSIGNMENT.
MANY WERE PRESCHOOL. SO BEFORE THAT, WE'RE GETTING A
LONG PERIOD IN WHICH THEY HAVE BEEN EXPOSED TO NEW
NEIGHBORHOODS. THIS IS REALLY LOOKING AT THE
GROUP THAT IS NOW GROWN UP AND FORMED THEIR PEER GROUPS IN VERY
DIFFERENT TYPES OF NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS
VERSUS THE CONTROL GROUP. WE SUPPLEMENTED THAT WITH DATA
ON EMPLOYMENT, INSURANCE RECORDS, TO LOOK AT EARNINGS AND
FOLLOW THEM OVER TIME. SCHOOL DISTRICT INFORMATION,
QUALITY OF SCHOOLS. WE DID OUR OWN ACHIEVEMENT TESTS
TO HAVE SIMILAR ACHIEVEMENT TESTS FOR THE KIDS ACROSS ALL OF
THE SITES. WE ALSO HAVE SCHOOL MEASURES.
WE HAVE PUBLIC HOUSING AND HOUSING ASSISTANCE INFORMATION
FROM HUD AND A WIDE RANGE OF PUBLIC ASSISTANCE INFORMATION.
COLLEGE INFORMATION FROM THE NATIONAL STUDENT CLEARING HOUSE.
IN MOST CASES, THE SURVEY AND THE ADMINISTRATIVE DATA
BASICALLY ARE QUITE CONSISTENT AND WE PUT IN GREAT EFFORT, ISR,
THE INSTITUTE FOR SURVEY RESEARCH AT MICHIGAN, PLAYED A
MAJOR ROLE IN IMPLEMENTING THE SURVEY AND WE GOT A 90% RESPONSE
RATE, WHICH IS PRETTY REMARKABLE 15 YEARS AFTER RANDOM ASSIGNMENT
GIVING THE TYPICAL FAMILIES HERE MOVE TWO OR THREE TIMES.
SO THERE WAS A GREAT EFFORT BY HUD OVER THE YEARS.
SO WHAT DO WE LOOK AT? THE SIMPLEST THING YOU CAN LOOK
AT WHAT IS NONE AS AN ATTEMPT TO COMPETE.
IT COMPARES THE MEAN OUTCOMES OF THE PEOPLE THAT WERE RANDOMLY
ALLOCATED A VOUCHER AND COMPARE THAT TO THE CONTROL GROUP.
THAT TELLS YOU THAT'S THE MOST KOSHER THING YOU CAN LOOK AT.
IT'S SAYING PEOPLE WITH DIFFERENT OPPORTUNITIES TO MOVE.
THAT'S THE ONLY THING ON AVENUE RING THAT SHOULD BE DIFFERENT
AMONG THESE GROUP. THERE'S THOUSANDS OF THEM.
SO ALL OTHER DIFFERENCES SHOULD WIPE OUT ACCORDING TO SAMPLING
ERROR. BASICALLY THAT TELLS YOU IF
YOU'RE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO GET SUCH A VOUCHER EARLIER THAN
OTHER FAMILIES, WHAT DOES IT MEAN FOR YOUR FAMILY LIFE
OUTCOME? THAT'S A SIMPLE COMPARISON OF
MEANS. IF YOU'RE WILLING TO MAKE ONE
OTHER ASSUMPTION, BEING OFFERED A HOUSING VOUCHER ONLY AFFECTS
YOUR OUTCOMES IN YOU USE THE HOUSING VOUCHER, WHICH IS A
REASONABLE FIRST CASE ASSUMPTION, THEN YOU CAN
BASICALLY INFLATE THOSE ESTIMATES BY DIVIDING BY THE
FRACTION THAT ACTUALLY WE'RE ABLE TO USE THE HOUSING VOUCHER.
THE LEASE RATE OR THE COMPLIANCE RATE.
AS WE'LL SEE ABOUT HALF OR 47% OF THE PEOPLE IN THE
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP WERE ABLE TO LEASE UP.
YOU MIGHT ASK, WHY DOESN'T EVERYONE?
THEY ALL WANTED A VOUCHER. WHY DIDN'T THEY ALL LEASE UP?
THERE'S A COUPLE OF REASONS WHY. ONE IS YOU ONLY HAVE A LIMITED
TIME PERIOD TO DO IT. 4 TO 6 MONTHS ARE THE WAY THE
SECTION 8 VOUCHERS WORKED IN THIS PERIOD.
IF YOU'RE A POOR FAMILY LIVING IN PUBLIC HOUSING IN NEW YORK,
BOSTON, VERY TIGHT HOUSING MARKETS IN THE MID TO LATE
1990s, IT WASN'T SO EASY TO FIND A UNIT THAT YOU COULD LEASE UP
IN IN THAT TIME PERIOD. SOME OF IT WAS THE DIFFICULTY
GIVENING THE TIME FRAME. AS IT TURNS OUT, LOS ANGELES WAS
AN EASIER HOUSING MARKET FOR DOING THAT THAN NEW YORK,
BALTIMORE OR CHICAGO. THE SECOND REASON IS THESE ARE
DYNAMIC FAMILIES. AT THE TIME YOU SIGNED UP, MAYBE
YOU DIDN'T WANT TO MOVE. THREE YEARS LATER WHEN YOU GOT
THE VOUCHER, YOU GOT A JOB, YOU WERE HAVING A NEW RELATIONSHIP.
THERE WERE SOME JUST NORMAL CHANGES IN PEOPLE'S LIVES.
MOST OF IT IS THE DIFFICULTY OF LEASING UP.
SO ABOUT HALF OF THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP WAS ABLE TO
LEASE UP AND MOVE TO UNDER 10% POVERTY AREAS AND ABOUT 60% OF
THE SECTION 8 GROUP. SO YOU CAN MULTIPLY THE
EXPERIMENTAL ONES BY 2.1 AND THE SECTION 8 ONES BY 1.6 TO GET
WHAT WOULD BE THE EFFECT ON SOMEONE WHO ACTUALLY USED A
VOUCHER. SO THE BIG QUESTION WE WANT
ASKED, IS THERE A REAL EXPERIMENT IN TERMS OF THE
NEIGHBORS THESE FAMILIES LIVED IN AND DID IT PERSIST.
THE ANSWER IS THERE'S QUITE A LARGE EXPERIMENT IN TERMS OF
NEIGHBORHOOD ENVIRONMENTS. WHAT THIS CHART SHOWS YOU IS
FIRST, BASELINE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE COLUMN THAT SAYS CONTROL
MEAN. 53% WAS THE AVERAGE POVERTY RATE
OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS THESE FAMILIES WERE LIVING IN AT
BASELINE AT THE TIME OF RANDOM ASSIGNMENT.
THOSE TREATMENT EFFECTS, THERE'S X ANTI-IDENTICAL BETWEEN THE
CONTROL GROUP. THIS WAS RANDOM ASSIGNMENT.
ONE YEAR AFTER RANDOM ASSIGNMENT, THE EXPERIMENT AL
GROUP THAT MOVED BASICALLY WAS IN AREAS IN 10-15 PERCENT
POVERTY RATE. WHY WEREN'T THEY IN UNDER 10%
AREAS? THAT'S BECAUSE IN 1996, THE
PLACE THAT HAD A 10% POVERTY RATE IN 1990 THAT YOU COULD MOVE
TO WITH A SECTION 8 VOUCHER, PROBABLY HAD A 15% POVERTY RATE.
THAT'S BETTER THAN YOUR STARTING PLACE, BUT DON'T THINK OF THEM
AS MOVING TO RICH NEIGHBORHOODS. THEY'RE MOVING TO THE EDGE OF
BETTER NEIGHBORHOODS, BUT SORT OF THE EDGE OF THOSE
NEIGHBORHOODS FALLING APART BUT STILL MUCH NICER.
EVEN TEN YEARS OUT, THE DIFFERENCES NARROWED.
THAT IS LARGE BY BECAUSE THE CONTROL GROUP IMPROVES WHERE
THEY'RE LIVING, NOT BECAUSE THE EXPERIMENTAL SECTION AND GROUPS
ARE LEAVING AND GETTING INTO WORSE NEIGHBORHOODS OVER TIME.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE FULL 15 YEARS SINCE RANDOM ASSIGNMENT, ON
AVERAGE, THE EXPERIMENTAL IN 9% LOWER POVERTY AREAS, WHICH IS
ALMOST 20 PERCENTAGE POINTS IF YOU ACTUALLY MOVED.
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SPENDING YOUR TIME TYPICALLY IN A 40%
POVERTY AREA AND A SORT OF 15 TO 20% AREA AND THE EFFECT IS
ABOUT 2/3s OF THAT FOR THE SECTION 8 GROUP.
ONE WAY TO ILLUSTRATE THE DIFFERENCES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD
ENVIRONMENTS OF THESE GROUPS IS THE SIMPLE GRAPH.
THIS JUST GIVES YOU THE DISTRIBUTION OF THE TYPICAL
NEIGHBORHOOD YOU LIVED IN OVER THE 15 YEARS AFTER RANDOM
ASSIGNMENT. IF YOU WERE SOMEONE THAT MOVED
WITH A VOUCHER IN THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP VERSUS THE
CONTROLLED GROUP. BASICALLY THAT YELLOW LINE SHOWS
YOU THERE WERE DIFFERENT EXPERIENCES.
THE TYPICAL EXPERIMENTAL GROUP MOVER MOVED TO A TRACK WITH A
10-20 POVERTY RATE. THEY'RE LIVING IN THE MEDIUM
McFAMILY DISTRIBUTION. DON'T THINK THIS IS UPPER MIDDLE
CLASS, THIS IS WELL INTO THE RANGE THAT YOU'D THINK OF AS A
PRETTY GOOD WORKING CLASS AREA OR MIDDLE CLASS NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT'S ABOUT THE 40th PERCENTILE. THE CONTROL GROUP IS STILL SOME
OF THEM ARE MOVING TO BETTER NEIGHBORHOODS BUT TYPICALLY IN A
40%, WHICH IS STILL THE BOTTOM 5% OF NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE U.S.
IN TERMS OF ECONOMIC ISOLATION. THE OTHER THING TO NOTE IS
THERE'S NOBODY, ZERO PEOPLE IN THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP THAT USED
A VOUCHER THAT MOVED BACK TO AN AREA THAT THEY STARTED IN.
SO NOBODY REMAINED, WHO HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE OUT MOVED
BACK TO THE EQUIVALENT OF THOSE EX-ANTI-NEIGHBORHOODS.
WHERE A FRACTION OF THE CONTROL GROUP REMAINED IN SUCH
NEIGHBORHOODS. SO HOW BIG WAS THE IMPACT ON
OTHER ASPECTS OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD?
THEY WERE CONCERNED WITH SAFETY. AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, 4 TO 7
YEARS OUT, THAT I WERE SUBSTANTIALLY BOTH IN THEIR
SELF-REPORTS AS MANY AS MANY OBJECTIVE MEASURES IN SAFER
NEIGHBORHOODS. MUCH MORE SATISFIED WITH THEIR
NEIGHBORHOODS. THERE WAS MUCH LESS GRAFFITI AND
CRIMINAL VICTIMIZATION. YOU CAN USE OBJECTIVE MEASURES
OF OUR SURVEYORS WALKING AROUND, CRIME RATES OR SELF-REPORTS
HERE. AGAIN, THE DIFFERENCE IS NARROW
OVER TIME. THAT IS BECAUSE THE CONTROL
GROUP MOVES THE BETTER NEIGHBORHOODS.
THERE'S STILL LARGE DIFFERENCES 15 YEARS OUT.
WHAT DID IT MEAN IN TERMS OF OTHER MEASURES OF NEIGHBORHOODS?
BASICALLY THE SHARE MINORITY DOES GO DOWN BUT DESPITE --
WHILE THEY'RE MOVING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE INCOME
DISTRIBUTION, THEY'RE STILL IN DISPROPORTIONATELY HIGH MINORITY
AREAS. REMEMBER, THE VOUCHERS WERE
TARGETED AT THE POVERTY RATE, NOT AT DESEGREGATION BY RACE.
THERE'S SMALLER CHANGES. LARGE INCREASES IN MEDIAN
HOUSEHOLD INCOME. YOU KNOW, OF ALMOST A DOUBLING
IF YOU DO THE TOTE FOR THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUPS AND LARGE
IMPROVEMENTS THAT NARROW OVER TIME.
MUCH MORE MODEST CHANGES IN THE SCHOOL THE KIDS ARE IN.
SO THE TYPICAL KID WENT FROM THE 18th PERCENTILE SCHOOL IN THE
CONTROL GROUP ONLY TO THE 22nd PERCENTILE IN THE EXPERIMENTAL
SCHOOL. MOVING OPPORTUNITIES IS A
RESIDENTIAL MOBILITY PROGRAM. HAD LARGING EFFECTS ON
NEIGHBORHOOD SAFETY, NEIGHBORHOOD EDUCATION OF WHO
YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE ON THE POVERTY OF YOUR NEIGHBORS.
DIDN'T CHANGE YOUR SCHOOL PEERS NEARLY AS MUCH.
IF YOU LOOK AT THE GEOGRAPHY OF THE MAPS, THE KIDS TENDED TO BAD
THE -- THE FAMILIES TENDED TO BE LIVING AT THE EDGE OF
NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE THE RENT WAS LOWER SO YOU COULD USE A SECTION
8 VOUCHER AND YOU DIDN'T GET TO THE BETTER ATTENDANCE ZONE.
SO SCHOOLS CHANGED LESS THAN NEIGHBORHOODS.
WHAT DID THIS MEAN FOR OUTCOME? BASICALLY WHAT WE SEE, 10-15
YEARS OUT IS -- WHAT WE SAW ONE YEAR OUT, WHAT WE SAW FIVE YEARS
OUT WERE LARGE IMPROVEMENTS ON A WIDE RANGE OF MENTAL AND
PHYSICAL HEALTH FOR THE ADULTS. LESS DEPRESSED, MUCH LESS
PSYCHOLOGICALLY DISTRESSED. THERE'S CONCERNS ABOUT SAFETY OF
THEIR KIDS WERE GREATLY AMELIORATED BEING IN SAFER
NEIGHBORHOODS. RATES OF MOMS LIVING IN HIGH
POVERTY AREAS ARE QUITE HIGH AND SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCED BY ACCESS
TO BETTER NEIGHBORHOODS. SIMILARLY, WE FIND SUBSTANTIAL
PERSIST ABOUT THE IMPACTS ON PHYSICAL HEALTH OUTCOMES THAT WE
CAN MEASURE. WE CAN WEIGH PEOPLE AND WE DID
PHYSICALLY WEIGH THEM. SO OBESITY GOES DOWN
SUBSTANTIALLY FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE TO BETTER
NEIGHBORHOODS AND BE LESS DISTRESSED POTENTIALLY CHANGE
DIET AND EXERCISE, UNTREATED DIABETES FELL SUBSTANTIALLY.
MEASURES OF PHYSICAL DISABILITIES ALSO FELL
SUBSTANTIALLY. SO HEALTH AND WELL BEING
MEASURED IMPROVED DRAMATICALLY. THIS IS A LONGSTANDING VIEW.
ONE OF THE INITIAL MOTIVATIONS FOR PUBLIC HOUSING.
WHAT WE SAW A ONE YEAR OUT, WHAT WE SAW FIVE YEARS OUT AND 10-15
YEARS OUT IS IN A TECHNICAL TERM, DIDN'T DO DOODLELY SQUAT
FOR YOUR ECONOMIC OUTCOMES. 1-2% CHANGES THAT ARE NOT LARGE
ENOUGH TO BE STATISTICALLY SIGNIFICANT.
SO LARGE CHANGES IN HEALTH IMPROVEMENTS, SAFETY, YOUR
SOCIAL NETWORKS, YOU'RE HANGING OUT WITH MORE EDUCATED
INDIVIDUALS, PEOPLE DID NOT BECOME MORE SOCIALLY ISOLATED,
BUT IT DIDN'T TRANSLATE. SO IF YOUR VIEW WAS SPATIAL
MISMATCH, IF YOU GOT PEOPLE SOMEWHAT MORE THRIVING
NEIGHBORHOODS, YOU'D CHANGE THEIR ECONOMIC OUTCOMES.
DIDN'T SHOW UP BEING A VERY POWERFUL MECHANISM.
THE OTHER BARRIERS TO EMPLOYMENT OF SINGLE WOMEN WITH LIMITED
EDUCATION SEEMED TO BE MUCH MORE IMPORTANT.
THIS BASICALLY SUMMARIZES IN THE MOST CONSERVATIVE WAY WHAT WE
TAKE HERE ARE INDICES OF THE OUTCOMES FOR PHYSICAL HEALTH AND
MENTAL HEALTH THAT WE SPECIFIED MORE THAN FIVE YEARS BEFORE THE
LONG RUN EVALUATION. DOESN'T USE OUR BEST DATA.
IN THE LONG RUN, WE COLLECTED BIO MARKERS, BLOOD SPOTS BY
PRICKING PEOPLE'S FINGERS. SOMETHING HUD WASN'T VERY HAPPY
FOR US TO BE DOING BEFORE THIS TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPED TEN YEARS
AGO. SO THAT'S NOT IN THIS INDEX.
WE'LL SHOW LARGER OUTCOMES THERE.
IF YOU PUT TOGETHER THESE INDICES, THINGS LIKE IRREGULAR
SLEEP, QUESTIONS ABOUT DEPRESSION, QUESTIONS ABOUT
WEIGHT, YOU CAN SEE  .05 TO  .1 STANDARD DEVIATION IMPROVEMENTS
IN THE HEALTH MEASURES. JUST ABOUT STATISTICALLY
SIGNIFICANT. AND WHAT WE WILL -- I'LL ALSO
POINT OUT LARGER IMPROVEMENTS IN HAPPINESS SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING.
THAT'S GOING TO BE AN INTERESTING OUTCOME.
IF ANYTHING SLIGHTLY NEGATIVE ON ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY.
IF YOU LOOKED A INDIVIDUAL OUTCOMES, DEPRESSION, 20% IS
CLINICALLY DEPRESSED. SIGNIFICANT REDUCTIONS WHEN YOU
LOOK AT THE PSYCHOLOGICAL DISTRESS IMPROVED.
THIS IS SORT OF -- THIS WOULD BE AN FDA CLINICALLY APPROVED TRIAL
IN TERMS OF MOST -- IN TERMS OF ANTI-DEPRESSANTS AND LIKE
LOGICAL DISTRESS. ONE OF THE MOST DISTRESSING
ASPECTS OF THIS POPULATION IS 35% OF THE WOMEN IN THE CONTROL
GROUP ARE EXTREMELY OBESE. OBESITY NUMBER 2.
BMI OVER 35. 20% WOULD BE IF YOU WENT TO BMI
OVER 40. A HUGE PROBLEM OF OBESITY IN
POORER U.S. POPULATIONS. MOVING TO OPPORTUNITY HAD
SUBSTANTIAL REDUCTION IN EXTREME OBESITY, WHICH IS ONE OF THE
LARGEST AND MOST HEALTH COST FACTOR OUT THERE.
SIMILARLY SHOWED UP WITH SUBSTANTIAL CLINICALLY
SIGNIFICANT. THIS IS BASED ON ACTUAL BLOOD
TESTS, NOT ON SELF-REPORTS OF UNTREATED DIABETES.
SUBSTANTIAL IMPROVEMENTS THERE OF MEDICAL VALUE.
WE HAVE A PAPER FROM THE NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE THAT
DOCUMENTS THIS MORE CAREFULLY. WHAT ABOUT THE YOUTH?
SO FOR THE ADULTS, IMPROVEMENT IN HEALTH.
FOR KIDS, WE HAD GREAT HOPES THAT GETTING TO BETTER
NEIGHBORHOODS WOULD IMPROVE SCHOOL ACHIEVEMENT.
AGAIN, NOTHING SHOWED UP IN INTERIM AND NOTHING MUCH IN THE
LONG-TERM. ONE HYPOTHESIS IS A VERY LIMITED
CHANGE IN SCHOOL ENVIRONMENTS RELATIVE TO NEIGHBORHOOD
ENVIRONMENTS. PHYSICAL HEALTH.
NOT MUCH GOING ON. WE DO FIND CONTINUING
IMPROVEMENTS FOR GIRLS AND MENTAL HEALTH MEASURES AND
SOMETHING -- SO SUSAN WILL HAVE SOME INTERESTING THINGS TO SAY
ABOUT THE CHANGE OF ENVIRONMENTS.
GETTING PEOPLE REMOVED FROM DRUG GANGS SEEMED TO HAVE PERSISTENT
IMPACTS IN KEEPING THEM OUT OF GETTING ARRESTED FOR
DRUG-RELATED CRIMES, ALTHOUGH THE OVERALL ARREST RATES WERE
NOT VERY DIFFERENT. SO WAS THIS -- WHAT'S THE BOTTOM
LINE FOR WHAT MTO DID? WAS IT A SUCCESS?
MANY DIFFERENT WAYS OF MEASURING IT.
IF YOU SAID AS AN ANTI POVERTY POLICY WHO DOES GIVING HOUSING
VOUCHERS IN THE RANGE OF NEIGHBORHOODS YOU CAN MOVE IN A
LARGE CITY WITH A SECTION 8 VOUCHER DO MUCH FOR REMOVING
POVERTY OF THE ADULTS OR INTERGENERATIONAL POVERTY,
THERE'S NO EVIDENCE THAT SUGGESTED BY ITSELF HOUSING
VOUCHERS EVEN WITH HELP MOVING TO BETTER NEIGHBORHOODS DOES
MUCH FOR POVERTY AND ECONOMIC DISTRESS.
ON THE OTHER HAND, IT SEEMS TO DO A LOT FOR PHYSICAL AND MENTAL
HEALTH A AND IF WE LET THE FAMILIES THEMSELVES DEFINE THEIR
WELL-BEING BY ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS, STANDARD QUESTIONS
ABOUT HAPPINESS, THEY SAID WHAT THEY WANTED IS IMPROVEMENTS IN
SAFETY. THEY GOT THAT IN LARGE FOLD.
WHAT DO THEY ACTUALLY SAY OVER THE LONG RUN?
WHAT WE DID IS WE INCLUDED ONE, SO WE COULDN'T DO A FISHING
EXPEDITION OF HAVING 20 DIFFERENT MEASURES AND
SUBJECTIVE WELL-BEING. ONE STANDARD QUESTION FROM THE
GENERAL SOCIAL SURVEY ON HAPPINESS OR SUBJECTIVE
WELL-BEING, WHICH HAS BEEN SHOWN IN MUCH WORK TO BE STRONGLY
CORRELATED WITH THINGS LIKE FMRIs OF BRAIN FUNCTIONING AS
WELL AS HOW MUCH YOUR SPOUSE OR FRIENDS THINK YOU'RE HAPPY OR
SAD AS WELL AS ALL SORTS OF PHYSICAL AND MENTAL HEALTH TYPES
OF OUTCOMES, BLOOD PRESSURE, INDICATORS OF DISTRESS.
WE THINK IT'S A GOOD SUMMARY MEASURE.
BASICALLY WHAT YOU FIND IS IF YOU VIEW THE FAMILIES THEM
SEVENS AS TO WHO THIS IS A SUCCESS AND COMPARE THOSE GIVEN
THE OPTION TO MOVE THAT THOSE THAT DIDN'T.
THERE WAS SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT IMPROVEMENTS OF THE
ADULT HOUSEHOLD HEADS IN THE RANGE OF  .1 STANDARD DEVIATION
OR A FIFTH OF A STANDARD DEVIATION FOR THE MOVERS.
WHAT THAT MEANS, THAT'S THE SIZE OF THE BLACK/WHITE HAPPINESS GAP
IN THE UNITED STATES. IT'S THE SIZE OF THE DIFFERENCE
OF FAMILIES WITH $20,000 MORE INCOME THAN OTHERS.
SO THE BOTTOM LINE IS MTO HAD SUBSTANTIAL IMPACTS ON
NEIGHBORHOOD ENVIRONMENTS. THEY NARROWED OVER TIME BUT
STILL QUITE SUBSTANTIAL OVER 15 YEARS.
THEY DELIVERED IN TERMS OF WHAT THE FAMILIES SAID THEY WANTED,
WHICH IS IMPROVED SAFETY. LET TO IMPROVEMENTS IN PHYSICAL
AND MENTAL HEALTH. SOME QUITE DISTINCTIVE ON
IMPORTANT THINGS, OBESITY AND DIABETES.
VERY LITTLE FOR ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY.
VERY LITTLE FOR THE KIDS OUTCOMES, ALTHOUGH IN TERMS OF
SAFETY AND MENTAL HEALTH. IN GIRLS THERE WERE SOME
IMPROVEMENTS. THE FAMILIES THEMSELVES WOULD
VIEW IT AS A SUCCESS. LOOKS MORE LIKE WHAT I WOULD
CALL MOVING TO TRANQUILLITY THAN MOVING TO OPPORTUNITY.
IF OPPORTUNITY IS ECONOMIC. THE OTHER QUESTIONS, SCIENTIFIC
QUESTION, IS WHAT WERE THE MEDIATING FACTORS, THIS IS QUASI
EXPERIMENTAL THAT LED TO BIGGER IMPROVEMENTS IN HEALTH AND
WELL-BEING OF THESE FAMILIES. AND THERE'S MULTIPLE CANDIDATE
THINGS. THERE'S THEORIES THAT SAY IT'S
RACIAL ISOLATION THAT IS IMPORTANT, THEORYS THAT SAY IT'S
ECONOMIC ISOLATION, THEORYS THAT TALK ABOUT SAFETY.
WHAT WE FOUND IS THE TWO FACTORS THAT REALLY MATTERED USING THE
FACT THAT WE HAVE FIVE DIFFERENT SITES, THE BIGGER THE REDUCTION
IN ECONOMIC ISOLATION OF YOUR NEIGHBORS, THE BIGGER
IMPROVEMENTS IN HEALTH AND WELL-BEING.
AND THE GREATER THE IMPROVEMENTS IN NEIGHBORHOOD SAFETY.
THERE WAS VERY LITTLE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RACIAL AND
ETHNIC SEGREGATION. BOTTOM LINE IS, A MIXED BAG OF
OUTCOMES, BUT WHAT THE FAMILIES SAY THEY VALUED THE MOST, I
THINK IT WAS A VERY VALUABLE INTERVENTION.
ONE SHOULDN'T VIEW HOUSING MOBILITY PER SE IN THE RANGE
THAT WE THINK IS FEASIBLE WITH THIS LEVEL OF SUPPORT AS BEING A
SOLUTION FOR LONG-RUN POVERTY. >> SUSAN WILL TAKE THE PER
SPECULATIVE OF WHY WE DID OR DID NOT SEE THE FINDINGS THAT WE
HAD. >> SO I ALSO DON'T HAVE A LIST
OF EVERYBODY THAT CONTRIBUTED TO THE RESEARCH THAT I'M GOING TO
TALK ABOUT. I'M GOING TO SKIM OVER A LOT OF
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH STUDIES THAT HAPPENED, ESPECIALLY TWO
RESEARCH STUDIES THAT TOOK PLACE IN 2003 AND 2004.
BOTH OF THOSE STUDIES RELIED HEAVILY ON IN DEPTH INTERVIEWS.
IT WOULD BE MORE LIKE A CONVERSATION AND LESS LIKE A
SURVEY. WE'RE REALLY ABOUT WHAT ARE THE
PROCESSES THAT ARE GOING ON HERE.
BOTH OF THE STUDIES ALSO HAD AN ETHNIC GRAPHIC COMPONENT.
ONE OF THESE RESEARCH STUDIES TOOK PLACE IN BALTIMORE AND
CHICAGO WHICH I WAS INVOLVED IN. IT INVOLVED SCHOOL OBSERVATIONS.
WE WANT TO FIND OUT WHY DON'T WE SEE IMPROVEMENTS IN ACADEMIC
ACHIEVEMENT. THE OTHER STUDY TOOK PLACE IN
NEW YORK, BOSTON AND L.A. I'LL REFER TO THAT AS THE
THREE-CITY STUDY. THEIR COMPONENT INVOLVED HANGING
OUT WITH YOUNG ADULTS WITH ADULTS TRYING TO GO ON THEIR
DAILY ROUTINES WITH THEM, TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHAT KIND OF
THINGS WERE GOING ON WITH THEM. SO IN BRIEF, THE QUALITATIVE DAY
THAT REMINDS US THAT THE POLICY STORY IS MORE COMPLICATED THAN
LOW POVERTY NEIGHBORHOODS EQUALLING BETTER OUTCOMES.
THIS CAN BE THE CASE FOR MANY PEOPLE.
BUT WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE INDIVIDUAL
LEVEL SUCH AS WHO BENEFITS AND HOW.
ALSO ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD LEVEL SUCH AS WHAT KIND OF LOW POVERTY
NEIGHBORHOOD AND HOW LONG ONE MUST STAY IN ORDER TO BENEFIT.
ONE OF THE THINGS THAT REALLY HAS EXCITED ME ABOUT BEING
INVOLVED IN MTO RESEARCH OVER THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS IS THAT
WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO BENEFIT FROM THE STRENGTH OF QUANTITATIVE AND
QUALITATIVE RESEARCH. BY WORKING IN TANDEM WITH THE
RESEARCH TEAMS. AND THESE TWO QUALITATIVE
STUDIES THAT I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT REALLY FOCUS ON RESEARCH
PUZZLES THAT CAME OUT OF THE INTERIM EVALUATION SURVEY.
AND I'M GOING TO BE FOCUSING ON THOSE DOMAINS TODAY.
THE FIRST ONE I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT IS ADULT ECONOMIC
SELF-SUFFICIENCY. AS LARRY MENTIONED, THE SURVEY
DIDN'T FIND SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES EITHER AT THE TIME
OF THE INTERIM EVALUATION OR THE FINAL IMPACT EVALUATION.
IN THE MTO QUALITATIVE STUDY IN BALTIMORE, WE WERE ABLE TO MATCH
UP EXPERIMENTAL COMPLIERS AND CONTROL LIKELY COMPLIERS.
WE DID A MATCHING PROCESS TO FIND OUT WHO IN THE CONTROL
GROUP MIGHT HAVE USED THE VOUCHER WHERE THEY WERE GIVEN
ONE. I'LL CALL THOSE CONTROL LIKELY
COMPLIERS. IN TERMS OF -- WE WANTED TO LOOK
AT THESE TWO GROUPS TO ANALYZE WHAT WERE THE DIFFERENT
PROCESSES GOING ON FOR WHY WE DON'T SEE SIGNIFICANT RESULTS IN
TERMS OF ECONOMIC SELF SUFFICIENCY.
SO IN BOTH THE EXPERIMENTAL AND CONTROL GROUP A PORTION OF THE
ADULTS WERE EXTREMELY ADVANTAGED IN TERMS OF EDUCATIONAL
BACKGROUND, WORK EXPERIENCE, MENTAL AND PHYSICAL HEALTH
ISSUES. SOME OF WHICH MIGHT HAVE BEEN
TRIGGERED BY LIVING IN SUCH HIGH POVERTY NEIGHBORHOODS.
THESE BARRIERS WERE NOT EXPLICITLY ADDRESSED.
FOR THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE THAT MAY NOT HAVE BEEN WORK READY A
MOVE TO A LOW POVERTY NEIGHBORHOOD WASN'T ENOUGH.
THIS WAS FOUND IN A THREE-CITY STUDY AS WELL.
THOUGH THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP MEMBERS WERE MORE LIKELY TO
REPORT HAVING NEIGHBORS, THEY DIDN'T GET INFORMAL ADVICE ABOUT
GETTING JOBS FROM THEM. SO THINKING PEOPLE WILL BE
MOVING TO LOW POVERTY NEIGHBORHOODS, THEY'LL TAKE TO
NEIGHBORHOOD TO GET JOB CONTACTS.
THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN. USUALLY THEY HAD PROFESSIONS
DIFFERENT FROM THEIRS, PROFESSIONS THAT REQUIRED HIGHER
EDUCATIONAL LEVELS OR DIFFERENT WORK EXPERIENCE THAN THEY
THEMSELVES HAD. SO THEIR JOB NETWORKS WEREN'T IN
SYNC WITH ONE ANOTHER. MANY OF THE RESPONDENTS WORKED
LOW WAGE JOBS IN THE HEALTH SECTOR.
I'M TALKING ABOUT BALTIMORE IN HOSPITALS AND NURSING HOMES.
IN THIS METROPOLITAN AREA, MOST OF THE JOBS WERE IN BALTIMORE OR
ON THE FRINGE OF THE CITY SUBURB BOUNDARIES.
SO FOR SOME OF OUR RESPONDENTS, MOVING OUT TO LOW POVERTY
SUBURBAN NEIGHBORHOODS NOT ON REGULAR PUBLIC TRANSIT LINE
MEANT BEING FARTHER FROM JOB OPPORTUNITIES.
THE THREE-CITY STUDY, RESEARCHERS FOUND SIMILAR
RESULTS FOR LOS ANGELES. WHAT IS IMPORTANT HERE, THIS IN
ITSELF CANNOT BOOST EMPLOYMENT RATES AMONK PEOPLE NOT ALREADY
EMPLOYED. FOR THOSE UNEMPLOYMENT, BUT
DON'T HAVE SIGNIFICANT HEALTH OR CHILD CARE BARRIERS, A
NEIGHBORHOOD CLIMATE STRICTURED BY EMPLOYMENT ROUTINES MAY BE AN
ENCOURAGEMENT TO ADULTS TO FIND WORK BUT PROBABLY WON'T HEAR
ABOUT LEADS FROM THEIR NEIGHBORS IF OUR DATA IS TELLING US
ANYTHING. ULTIMATELY MAY TAKE TIME FOR THE
NEIGHBORHOOD CLIMATE TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE FOR ADULTS OR YOUTH.
SO THE ONE YEAR REQUIRED OF THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP THAT THEY
NEEDED TO STAY IN THE LOW POVERTY GROUP MAY NOT BE ENOUGH.
FOR PUBLIC TRANSIT, MOVING TO THESE NEIGHBORHOODS MAY DEPRESS
EMPLOYMENT. SO THE DATA SHOWS THAT LOOKING
BEYOND THE AVERAGE EXPERIENCE OF THE PERSON IN THE EXPERIMENTAL
GROUP OR CONTROL GROUP CAN BE HELPFUL POLICY-WISE IF WE LOOK
BEYOND THAT. THERE'S A LOT OF SUBGROUPS WITH
NEEDS. SO THE NEXT TOPIC IS ADULT
MENTAL HEALTH. AND YOU KNOW, WE SAW THAT MTO
DID HAVE SOME IMPACT ON ADULT MENTAL HEALTH.
MAYBE A LITTLE MORE SIGNIFICANTLY AT THE TIME OF THE
INTERIM EVALUATION THAN THE FINAL EVALUATION.
STILL, THERE WAS SOMETHING THERE.
SO THERE WAS A STUDY THAT WAS DONE USING YOU ALLTATIVE DATA
FROM BALTIMORE. AGAIN, USING THE MATCHED LOW
POVERTY COMPLIER GROUP. THEY EXPLORED WHAT MIGHT BE
UNDERLYING THIS MENTAL HEALTH BENEFIT.
SEEN IN THE SURVEY DATA. SO SIMILAR TO THE SURVEY DATA,
THEY FOUND DIFFERENCES IN HOW THEY PERCEIVED THE PHYSICALNESS
OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WHAT THE PEOPLE IN THE
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP REPORTED IS THAT THERE WAS THIS SHIFT FROM
BEING IN AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE THEY HAD PEST INFESTATION, POOR
QUALITY HOUSING, UNRELIABLE ELEVATORS IN HIGH RISE BUILDINGS
WHERE WHEN THEY BROKE DOWN, YOU'D HAVE TO CLIMB UP FLIGHTS
OF STEPS WITH GROCERIES OR STROLLERS.
TO NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE YOU COULD ACTUALLY HEAR CRICKETS AND BIRDS
AND SEE SQUIRRELS. AND YOU KNOW, NOT HAVE SO MUCH
CONCRETE AROUND YOU. THERE WAS ALSO A CHANGE IN THE
SOCIAL ENVIRONMENT AS WELL. SO PEOPLE IN THE EXPERIMENTAL
GROUP DISCUSSED DIFFERENCES IN SEEING MORE NEIGHBORS IN A
WORKING ROUTINE OR PEOPLE INVOLVED IN SNOW CLEANUPS.
AND THERE WERE RADICAL DIFFERENCES IN TERMS OF EXPOSURE
TO COMMUNITY VIOLENCE WITH CONTROLS REPORTING SEEING MORE
PEOPLE SELLING DRUGS OR SEEING MORE SHOOTINGS AND THE
EXPERIMENTAL GROUP PEOPLE RARELY REPORTING THESE TYPES OF
ACTIVITIES. SO YOU KNOW, THIS IS A POSSIBLE
MEDIATOR TO WHAT WE'RE SEEING WITH MENTAL HEALTH GAINS.
WHAT KIND OF EXPLICIT LINK WAS SEEN THAT PEOPLE SAID, BECAUSE
OF THIS, THIS IS HOW I FEEL. SOME PEOPLE DID.
I HAVE A QUOTE UP HERE FROM AMY WHAT WAS IN THE EXPERIMENTAL
GROUP. SHE STRUGGLED WITH A HOST OF
MENTAL HEALTH PROBLEMS LIKE DEPRESSION, ANGER AND PHOBIAS.
EVEN THOUGH HER MOVE WITH AN MTO VOUCHER DIDN'T AMELIORATE THESE
PROBLEMS, SHE DID SAY THAT THE CHANGE IN THE PHYSICAL
ENVIRONMENT REALLY IMPROVED HER OUTLOOK ON LIFE.
SHE SAID MOVING UP HERE IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT ATMOSPHERE.
THE GREENERY, YOU'RE LIVING IN A HIGH RISE.
YOU GET A LOT OF CEMENT. THERE'S SOMETHING TO THAT EFFECT
IN THE PSYCHOLOGY. THE HARDNESS YOU GET FROM ALL
THAT CONCRETE. THE GREENERY, IT SOFTENS YOU.
IT'S SO BEAUTIFUL AND PEACEFUL. THE SPACE AND THE OPEN SPACE.
SO THIS KIND OF REALLY SPEAKS TO THIS MOVING TO TRANQUILLITY THAT
YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. NOW I WANT TO TALK ABOUT
ADOLESCENT MENTAL HEALTH. BECAUSE WE ALSO SAW THIS BENEFIT
JUST FOR GIRLS THOUGH RATHER THAN BOYS.
IN THE THREE-CITY STUDY, POPKIN AND OTHERS FOUND THAT GIRLS IN
LOW POVERTY NEIGHBORHOODS WERE LESS LIKELY TO BE SUBJECTED TO
VERBAL AND PHYSICAL HARASSMENT BY MEN AND BOYS ON THE STREET
THAN THEIR COUNTER PARTS IN HIGH POVERTY NEIGHBORHOODS.
SO THEY SUGGEST THIS REDUCTION IN FEAR OF HARASSMENT OR OF
HAVING TO CONSCIOUSLY STRATEGIZE ABOUT HOW TO AVOID IT MIGHT BE
THE DRIVING FORCE BEHIND THE DIFFERENTS THAT WE SAW IN MENTAL
HEALTH IN THE SURVEY FOR GIRLS BUT NOT BOYS.
THERE WAS ALSO AN ANALYSIS CONDUCTED COMPARING BALTIMORE
EXPERIMENTAL PLAYER WITH MALES AND FEMALES.
THIS QUALITATIVE ANALYSIS FOUND CLEAR DIFFERENCES ACTUALLY
BETWEEN THE EXPERIMENTAL AND THE CONTROL GROUP THAN GENDER
DIFFERENCES WITHIN THE GROUPS. SO FOR EXAMPLE, THE STRESSORS
THAT WERE FOUND THAT WERE REPORTED BY PEOPLE IN THE
CONTROL GROUP WERE REALLY OF A MUCH MORE SERIOUS NATURE THAN
THOSE IN THE EXPERIMENTAL COMPLIER GROUP.
FOR EXAMPLE, YOU MIGHT HAVE SIMILAR PEOPLE SAYING YES, I
FELT ANXIOUS IN THE LAST MONTH OR YES, I FELT ANGRY IN THE LAST
MONTH. BUT THE ACTUAL QUALITATIVE
REASONS FOR WHAT DROVE THEIR ANXIETY WERE VERY DIFFERENT.
SO YOU MIGHT HAVE PEOPLE IN THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP SAYING, WELL,
YOU KNOW, MY PARENTS WERE ALWAYS ON ME TO GET THE CHORES DONE.
PEOPLE IN THE CONTROL GROUP TALKING ABOUT WITNESSES VIOLENCE
IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD OR IN THEIR HOME ENVIRONMENT.
SIMILAR DIFFERENCE THAT WE SAW WITH DEATH.
SO PEOPLE USED IN THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP, MORE TALKING
ABOUT NATURAL DEATH THAT HAPPENED IN THEIR FAMILY.
THOSE IN THE CONTROL GROUP MORE LIKELY TO TALK ABOUT DEATH FROM
VIOLENCE OR FROM DRUG-RELATED DEATHS.
ANGER WAS ALSO A MENTAL HEALTH ISSUE THAT SPRANG UP
SPONTANEOUSLY FROM THE INTERVIEWS.
WE DIDN'T ASK ABOUT IT IN THE 2003-04 STUDY.
SIGNIFICANTLY NO EXPERIMENTAL TEAM TALKED ABOUT HAVING SERIOUS
ISSUES WITH ANGER. 40% OF THE MALES IN THE CONTROL
GROUP TALKED ABOUT THIS. IN TERMS OF EXPOSURE TO
VIOLENCE. MORE WERE REPORTING MORE INTENSE
DRUG TRAFFICKING AND VIOLENCE IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS.
I HAVE A STORY FROM A YOUNG WOMAN THAT WAS IN THE CONTROL
GROUP IN BALTIMORE. SHE SAID SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT
HER SHOOTING THAT HAPPENED IN FRONT OF HER HOUSE FAIRLY SOON
BEFORE WE INTERVIEWED HER. SHE SAID "WE SAW HIM WALK PAST
US. THEY SAID HE WAS TRYING TO BUY
SOMETHING. THE MAN DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING.
SO HE SHOT HIM IN THE FACE. EVERYBODY WAS SCREAMING AND
HOLLERING, TRYING TO GET IN THEIR HOUSE.
WE WERE SITTING THERE. THE BOY WALKED.
AFTER HE SHOT HIM, HE WALKED TOWARD US.
OUT OF FEAR OF RETRIBUTION, THE MOTHER SAID NOT TO SAY ANYTHING
TO POLICE AND TOLD POLICE THAT SHE DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING.
SHE SAW THE SHOOTER A FEW WEEKS LATER WALKING ON THE STREET."
THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN WE TALK
ABOUT EXPOSURE TO COMMUNITY VIOLENCE.
PEOPLE WERE IN NEIGHBORHOODS THAT EXPOSED THEM TO MORE
VIOLENCE AND SHOOTING. THIS MIGHT HAVE CONSEQUENCES FOR
THEIR MENTAL HEALTH. WE FROM OTHER RESEARCH STUDIES,
THERE'S A CONNECTION BETWEEN EXPOSURE TO COMMUNITY VIOLENCE
AND DISORDER AND MENTAL HEALTH OUTCOMES LIKE ANGER, ANXIETY AND
DEPRESSION. SO LET'S STAY WITH THE TEENS AND
TALK ABOUT ADOLESCENT RISK BEHAVIOR.
THE SURVEY FINDINGS ON RISK BEHAVIOR FOR ADOLESCENTS,
ESPECIALLY THE FINDINGS BACK AT THE INTERIM REVALUATION POINT TO
A SIMILAR PATTERN AS MENTAL HEALTH.
THAT LOW INCOME GIRLS WERE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS MOVE
TO A LOW POVERTY NEIGHBORHOOD IN A WAY THAT BOYS WEREN'T.
SO TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND WHAT SOCIAL PROCESSES MIGHT UNDERLIE
THIS TREATMENT GROUP BY GENDER INTERACTION, A RESEARCH TEAM
ANALYZED IN DEPTH INTERVIEWS IN A SUBSAMPLE OF 86 BALTIMORE
TEAMS FROM BALTIMORE AND CHICAGO.
FROM EXPERIMENTAL FAMILIES THAT MOVED TO LOW POVERTY
NEIGHBORHOODS. WE FOUND THAT HANGING OUT
ROUTINES, BOYS HAD A GROWN ACCUSTOMED TO IN THE HIGH
POVERTY NEIGHBORHOODS DIDN'T FIT INTO THE LOW POVERTY ENVIRONMENT
THEY WERE IN. IN FACT, THEIR ROUTINES OF
HANGING OUT IN PUBLIC SPACE LIKE A CORNER OR A BEEN COURT MAY
HAVE MADE THEM SUBJECT TO INCREASE SURVEILLANCE BY POLICE
AND BY NEIGHBORS. IN CONTRACT, GIRLS HANGING OUT
ROUTINE, WHICH WERE FOCUSED ON THE HANGING OUT ON THEIR PORCH
OR IN THEIR FRIENDS LIVING ROOMS OR TALKING ON THE PHONE OR GOING
TO THE MALL OR GOING TO THE INNER HARBOR, DIDN'T CONFLICT
WITH NORMS OF LOW POVERTY NEIGHBORHOODS.
OF COURSE, AS WE SAW IN THE DATA, MOST OF THE -- MANY OF THE
FAMILIES IN THE MTO EXPERIMENTAL GROUP DIDN'T STAY IN THEIR LOW
POVERTY NEIGHBORHOODS. THEY MOVED BACK TO HIGHER
POVERTY NEIGHBORHOODS, ALTHOUGH CERTAINLY NOT THE SAME AS THEY
WERE EXPOSED TO AT THE BASELINE. WE FOUND EVIDENCE THAT THE
EXPERIMENTAL BOYS MAY NOT HAVE HAD AS MANY FINALLY-HONED SKILLS
OF NAVIGATING THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS AS THE CONTROL
BOYS DID. SO SOMETIMES IN CERTAIN
NEIGHBORHOODS, KNOWING HOW TO NAVIGATE THE NEIGHBORHOOD,
KNOWING HOW TO GET AROUND CAN BE A MATTER OF LIFE OR DEATH OR
CERTAINLY GETTING INVOLVED IN RISK BEHAVIOR.
I HAVE AN EXAMPLE OF A YOUNG MAN NAMED SCOTT WHO IS A 16-YEAR-OLD
BOY IN THE CONTROL GROUP. HE LIVED IN HIS LOW-RISE HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT IN BALTIMORE ALL OF HIS LIFE.
HE HAD A PRETTY GOOD SENSE OF THE GEOGRAPHY OF DANGER ON THE
CORNERS OR CART YARDS OF HIS DEVELOPMENT AND ALSO HAD A
STRICT MOTHER THAT HELPED TO ENCOURAGE HIM TO STEER CLEAR OF
THESE AREAS. HE SAID I KNOW THE GUYS ON THE
CORNERS, BUT THEY'RE NOT MY FRIENDS.
THEY'RE INTO DRUGS AND LOITER AND STUFF LIKE I DON'T DO.
I MIND MY BUSINESS. SO HIS QUOTE HERE IS REALLY AN
ILLUSTRATION OF HOW CONTROL BOYS WERE MORE LIKELY THAN THE
EXPERIMENTAL BOY WOULD PLOY A STRATEGY OF THE STAYING TO
MYSELF WHERE BOYS SPECIFICALLY AVOIDED ASSOCIATING WITH OTHERS
TO STAY AWAY FROM TROUBLE. BUT THE LESSON TO DRAW FROM THIS
RESEARCH IS THAT BOYS AND GIRLS FROM SIMILAR BACKGROUND LIVE IN
DIFFERENT SOCIAL WORLDS. SO THESE UNDERLYING DIFFERENCES
MAY CREATE DRAMATICALLY VARIED RISK AND OPPORTUNITIES.
THE LAST TOPIC THAT I WANTED TO ADDRESS WAS CHILDREN'S
EDUCATIONAL ACHIEVEMENT. TO JUST DIG A LITTLE BIT BENEATH
THE NUMBERS IN THINKING ABOUT WHAT WAS GOING ON HERE, WHY WE
DIDN'T FIND SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCES IN ACADEMIC
ACHIEVEMENT. AS LARRY MENTIONED, THERE
WEREN'T REALLY DRAMATIC DIFFERENCES IN THE ACTUAL SCHOOL
ENVIRONMENT. ESPECIALLY WHEN WE COMPARE WITH
THE DIFFERENCES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ENVIRONMENTS.
BETWEEN THE EXPERIMENTAL AND THE CONTROL GROUPS.
SO WHAT HAPPENED? THE SHORT ANSWER IS THAT A MOVE
TO A LOW POVERTY NEIGHBORHOOD DISTINCTION ALWAYS TRANSLATE
INTO AN INCREASE IN SCHOOL QUALITY FOR KIDS.
MANY CASES, KIDS WERE STILL GOING TO SCHOOL IN THE SAME POOR
QUALITY SCHOOL DISTRICT THAT THEY WERE IN WHEN THEY WERE
LIVING IN A HIGH POVERTY NEIGHBORHOOD.
EVEN THOUGH WE HAVE SCHOOL VARIATION WITHIN THE SCHOOL
DISTRICTS, YOU'RE STILL IN A POOR QUALITY SCHOOL DISTRICT.
THE BARRIERS TO LEASE UP IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WITH A HIGH QUALITY
SCHOOL WERE QUITE PLENTIFUL. THIS RESIDENTIAL CHOICE THEN
CIRCUMSCRIBED THEIR SCHOOL CHOICE.
THE LONGER ANSWER INVOLVES PARENTAL DECISION MAKING AROUND
SCHOOLS. THE MTO THREE-CITY STUDY AND
ALSO THE QUALITATIVE RESEARCH TEAM FOR BALTIMORE EXPLORED THE
DECISION MAKING OF PARENTS IN THE EXPERIMENTAL GROUP AND CAME
UP WITH SIMILAR FINDINGS. PARENTS OFTEN DIDN'T HAVE GOOD
INFORMATION WITH WHICH TO MAKE DECISIONS ABOUT THE ACADEMIC
QUALITY OF THE SCHOOLS THAT THEIR KIDS WOULD BE GOING TO, IF
THERE WAS A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF LATITUDE OF CHOICE.
THEY RELIED ON THEIR OWN EXPERIENCES OR THE EXPERIENCES
OF THEIR NETWORKS TO LEARN ABOUT SCHOOLS.
AND SINCE A LARGE PORTION OF THE MTO SAMPLE HAS NOT GRADUATED
FROM HIGH SCHOOL OR HAD ATTENDED POOR QUALITY SCHOOLS THEMSELVES,
MANY WERE MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT SCHOOLS FOR THEIR KIDS WITH AN
INFORMATION SET ABOUT SCHOOLS THAT DIDN'T ALWAYS INCLUDE
ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE. FOR MANY PARENTS, UNDERSTANDABLY
SAFETY WAS THE KEY CONCERN. AND ONCE THAT STANDARD WAS MET,
THEY FELT COMFORTABLE ABOUT THE SCHOOL THEIR CHILD ATTENDED.
FOR EXAMPLE, IN THE THREE-CITY STUDY, SOME PARENTS REPORTED
KEEPING THEIR CHILDREN AT THEIR ORIGINAL SCHOOLS BECAUSE THEY
WERE FAMILIAR WITH THE GANG GUIDELINES AT THE SCHOOL.
SO THEY KNEW WHAT KIND OF COLORS TO WEAR OR NOT TO WEAR.
AND THEY DIDN'T WANT -- THEY WORRIED ABOUT PUTTING THEIR
CHILD IN AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE THEY WOULD HAVE TO RELEARN
DIFFERENT RULES. AN ANALYSIS OF THE INTERVIEW
DATA IN BALTIMORE FOUND THAT MOST PARENTS IN THE MTO SAMPLE
FOCUSED LESS ON ACADEMICS AND MORE ABOUT OTHER CHARACTERISTICS
OF SCHOOLS. SUCH AS HOW CLOSE THE SCHOOL WAS
TO THEIR HOUSE OR TO THEIR FAMILIES HOUSE WHERE THEY MIGHT
BE STAYING DURING THE WEEK OR TO WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAD SCHOOL
UNIFORMS OR OTHER KIND OF INDICATORS OF DISCIPLINE AT THE
SCHOOL. MOREOVER, THE INSTABILITY IN
THEIR LIVES EITHER RANGING FROM MOVING OR FROM DEATHS IN THE
FAMILY MADE IT SO THAT IT WAS DIFFICULT DEALING WITH THE
SCHOOL BUREAUCRACY FOR THAT KIND OF CHANGE.
PARENTS ALSO TALKED ABOUT HOW LOOK, WE HAVE SO MUCH
INSTABILITY THIS AREA OF OUR LIVES.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE KIDS STAY AT THE SAME SCHOOL.
THAT'S ONE AREA OF STABILITY FOR THEM.
THERE WERE A LOT OF THINGS GOING ON HERE.
DESPITE THE CONSTRAINED RESIDENTIAL CHOICES AND THE
LIMITED INFORMATION SET FOR MANY PARENTS, SOME WERE VERY EXPLICIT
TO THE INTERVIEWERS AND HOW TO CHANGE THE ACADEMIC
OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE BETTER. ONE EXAMPLE IS BARBARA.
SHE WAS HAPPY WITH THE INCREASED EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES
ANOTHER HER CHILD'S NEW SCHOOL. SHE WANTED TO MAKE THE MOVE.
SHE WAS WORRIED IF SHE DIDN'T GET HER DAUGHTER OUT OF CITY
SCHOOLS "SHE WOULDN'T MAKE IT." SO THESE QUALITATIVE FINDINGS
SHOWS SCHOOL CHOICES NEED TO BE A MORE EXPLICIT PART OF MOBILITY
HOUSING IF THAT'S A GOAL. MOVING TO A LESS POOR
NEIGHBORHOOD DOES NOT EQUAL A BETTER SCHOOL.
INSTEAD LIKE ALL OF THESE DOMAINS THAT I'VE DISCUSSED,
THERE'S COMPLICATED ISSUES THAT MAKE THIS OUTCOME LESS LIKELY.
THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SUSAN.
MIKE, DO YOU WANT TO SIT OR -- >> ABSOLUTELY.
>> MIKE REALLY NEEDS NO INTRODUCTION.
>> YOU KNOW I JUST DON'T EVER TURN DOWN AN INVITATION TO COME
BACK TO HUD AND VISIT. SO I APPRECIATE BEING HERE.
I'D LIKE TO START BY SAYING HELLO REGIONAL ECONOMISTS!
WHEN I WAS LAST HERE, YOU GUYS PLAYED AN ENORMOUSLY IMPORTANT
ROLE IN THE DEPARTMENT. I REMEMBER ONE OF MY FIRST
ASSIGNMENTS FROM THE SECRETARY THAT SAT ON THE DALLAS FEDERAL
RESERVE BOARD. HE SAID WE SHOULD HAVE A HOUSING
MARKET REPORT LIKE THE FED BEIGE BOOK.
THAT'S THE GENESIS OF HOUSING MARKET CONDITIONS.
I'M ENORMOUSLY PROUD THAT THAT PUBLICATION CONTINUES TO EXIST
TODAY AND IT COULD NOT WITHOUT THE TREMENDOUS WORK OF YOU FOLKS
OUT THERE. SO CONGRATULATIONS.
I'M HERE IN A PECULIAR CAPACITY. SO I HAVE TO START BY -- THIS
HAS TO DO WITH MY NEVER TURNING AN INVITATION DOWN TO COME BACK.
I'M NOW IN THIS PECULIAR CAPACITY IN WHICH I AM A MEMBER
OF THE ADMINISTRATION AND I'M A TREASURY WORKING ON PRETTY
SIGNIFICANT HOUSING ISSUES. BUT I'M HERE REALLY BECAUSE OF A
PRIOR ROLE I'VE PLAYED. SO NORMALLY I'M TALKING ABOUT --
A, WITH PREPARED REMARKS. B, I'M SPEAKING ABOUT POLICY OF
THE ADMINISTRATION. THAT'S NOT THE CASE REALLY
TODAY. I'M ASKED TO REFLECT ON SOME
THINGS ABOUT MY ROLE IN MTO AND SOME DECISIONS WE MADE KIND OF
EARLY ON. SO I HAVE TO SAY THAT THESE
REALLY ARE MY OWN OPINIONS AND NOT THOSE OF THE ADMINISTRATION.
AND I'M GOING TO TALK FROM KIND OF THREE PERSPECTIVES.
YOU KNOW, ONE AS A GRANT MAKER REALLY FROM THE McARTHUR
FOUNDATION, ONE AS SOMEBODY THAT WAS HERE AT THE TIME MTO BEGAN
AND JUST REFLECTING ON A COUPLE OF THE FINDINGS.
I WILL NOT COMMENT ON FUTURE POLICIES OR WHATEVER.
IT'S JUST NOT APPROPRIATE FOR ME HERE.
BUT I DO WANT TO START WITH A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.
ONE ABOUT TODD AND THE OTHER ABOUT ERIKA.
IF THAT RAPID FIRE PRESENTATION OF MARKET BY MARKET HOUSING DATA
IS LIKE CANDY TO YOU, TODD, YOU MUST HAVE A HELL OF A SWEET
TOOTH. IT'S REALLY RICH.
IT'S HARD TO REALLY DIGEST IT ALL.
BUT BOY, WHEN YOU LOOK AT THAT QUARTERLY NEWSLETTER
PARTICULARLY DURING TIMES LIKE THIS, WITH WHAT IS HAPPENING IN
RENTS AND HOUSING PRICES AND ALL, INCREDIBLY VALUABLE.
I REALLY APPRECIATE IT. THE OTHER IS ABOUT ERIKA.
IT IS TRUE. I WAS DIRECTOR OF HOUSING AND
POLICY AT McARTHUR BUT IT WAS ERIKA THAT BROUGHT THE
OPPORTUNITY TO ME. SHE DIDN'T KNOW I HAD ANYTHING
TO DO WITH IT WHEN I WAS AT HUD. SO IT'S NOT THAT I WOULDN'T HAVE
SUPPORTED IT. I WAS BRAND NEW AT McARTHUR AND
DIDN'T KNOW HOW TO ENGINEER SOMETHING AS BIG AND AS
COMPLICATED A GRANT THROUGH THE PROCESS, THE INTERNAL PROCESS
AND THE BOARD AND THE WORK WITH A FEDERAL AGENCY AND A COUPLE OF
OTHER FEDERAL AGENCIES. IT WAS REALLY ERIKA THAT DID IT.
I WANTED TO ADD MY THANKS AND CONGRATULATIONS TO HER.
THE SECOND THING THAT TODD DID NOT MENTION, YOU KNOW, THE
McARTHUR SUPPORT FROM MTO IS IN TWO GRANTS.
THE FIRST WAS MADE AND TODD CAME BACK TO ERIKA AND SAID I THINK
WE HAVE A CHANCE OF COLLECTING SOME HEALTH DATA THROUGH BIO
MARKERS. THIS IS REALLY AN INCREDIBLE
OPPORTUNITY, NOT CHEAP. AND I'M NOT SURE THAT HUD HAD
EVER DONE THIS BEFORE. AND TODD CAME TO US.
ERIKA. WE WORKED THROUGH THE PROCESS OF
HOW HUD WITH THE GENERAL COUNSEL AND THE ETHICS ISSUES OF
COLLECTING BIO MARKER DATA AND SO ON.
TURNS OUT OF COURSE TO HAVE BEEN REALLY TREMENDOUSLY IMPORTANT.
THAT AGAIN WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED WITHOUT ERIKA'S
PERSISTENCE AND ALL THE SUPPORT THAT WE GOT FROM TODD AND HUD.
SO I WANT TO START THERE. THE POLICY CONTEXT.
HENRY SPENT A LOT OF TIME SPENDING EVENINGS AND SLEEPING
IN PUBLIC HOUSING UNITS WITH FAMILIES, GETTING TO KNOW WHAT
THEIR LIVES WERE LIKE. I JUST WANT TO START WITH A
QUOTE FROM HENRY AND ONE OF HIS SPEECHES ABOUT THE HOUSING.
THIS HAPPENS TO BE CHICAGO. IT HAPPENS TO BE AFTER SPENDING
A COUPLE OF NIGHTS SLEEPING WITH A FAMILY IN TAYLOR -- ROBERT
TAYLOR HOMES. THIS IS REALLY THE KIND OF
BEGINNING OF THE GUITRO AND SO ON.
THIS IS HOW HE SURVIVED IT. IN THESE ENCLAVES OF POVERTY,
PEOPLE HAVE BEEN LITERALLY CUT OFF FROM THE REST OF SOCIETY
WITH LOW WAGE OR NO JOBS, LIVING WHERE GANGS AND DRUG DEALERS
CONTROL THE STAIRWELLS, WHERE CHILDREN CAN'T GO OUTSIDE TO
PLACE. WHERE MOTHERS PUT THEIR INFANTS
TO BED IN BATHTUBS AND PUT MATTRESSES AT NIGHT TO PROTECT
FROM STRAY BULLETS. THIS IS WHAT WE HEARD THAT
FAMILIES WERE INTERESTED IN GETTING AWAY FROM WITH MOVING TO
OPPORTUNITY. IF YOU FAST FORWARD TO McARTHUR
FOR A MINUTE, YOU KNOW AT FOUNDATIONS YOU DON'T MAKE
INDIVIDUAL GRANTS FROM YOUR STANDPOINT, FROM LARRY'S
STANDPOINT, FROM SUSAN'S STANDPOINT, IT'S A BIG DEAL.
THIS IS "THE GRANT." BUT YOU DON'T HAVE A BIG BUCKET
OF MONEY TO MAKE INDIVIDUAL GRANTS.
GRANTS ARE REALLY PART -- INDIVIDUAL PROJECTS APART OF
WHAT WE CALL GRANT-MAKING STRATEGIES.
SO THE QUESTION IS WHERE DOES MOVING TO OPPORTUNITY HAVE A
HOME IN THE GRANT PROGRAM. THE DOMESTIC HOUSING PROGRAM.
REALLY IT'S ABOUT -- FROM MY STANDPOINT, IT'S ABOUT MIXED
INCOME HOUSING POLICY. YOU CAN THINK ABOUT MIXED INCOME
HOUSING POLICY FROM BOTH THE SUPPLY AND DEMAND SIDES.
YOU CAN TRY TO -- THROUGH INTERVENTIONS LIKE MOBILITY
ORIENTED AND CHOICE ORIENTED VOUCHER PROGRAMS LIKE MTO AND
GIVE PEOPLE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MOVE TO AREAS THAT ARE LOW
POVERTY AND MORE ECONOMICALLY DIVERSE.
YOU CAN BUILD LIKE HOPE 6 AND CHOICE NEIGHBORHOODS AND TRY TO
DEVELOP SUPPLY SIDE MIXED INCOME.
BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER, I SAW MTO AS PART OF THIS LARGER
MIXED INCOME ISSUE WHERE WE WERE MAKING INCREDIBLY AMBITIOUS -- I
DON'T KNOW IF WE CALL THEM ASSERTIONS, PROPOSITIONS ABOUT
THE BENEFITS OF FAMILIES OF MOVING INTO THIS AREAS, THIS IS
WHY THE ECONOMIC EFFECTS REALLY WE TALK ABOUT AS BEING KIND OF
DISAPPOINTING. BECAUSE THERE WERE REALLY
ECONOMIC HYPOTHESES ABOUT HOW MOVING TO THESE AREAS WOULD HAVE
JOBS AND INCOMES AND SO ON. SO WE SUPPORTED MOVING TO
OPPORTUNITY AS PART OF THIS KIND OF LARGER AREA OF INTEREST.
IT STRUCK ME AND IT STRIKES ME TO THIS DAY THAT A, THESE
HYPOTHESES ARE UNDERTESTED AND WHERE WE DO HAVE AN EMPIRICAL
KIND OF EVIDENCE, THE RESULTS ARE MIXED.
AND SO WE REALLY NEED TO CONTINUE THESE KINDS OF
INQUIRIES. EVERY ONE OF OUR MIXED IN MY
VIEW, AGAIN, PERSONAL, IN MY VIEW, ALL OF OUR MIXED INCOME,
WHETHER THEY'RE SUPPLY OR DEMAND SIDE, THERE ARE ADDED COSTS.
IF YOU THINK ABOUT THE COUNTER FACTUAL, WHETHER IT'S
CONVENTIONAL PUBLIC HOUSING OR CONVENTIONAL CHOICE HOUSING,
CHOICE VOUCHERS, THOSE VOUCHER COSTS IN THE MAIN PROGRAM ARE
LESS THAN WHEN YOU COMBINE THE SEARCH DATA OR IF YOU THINK
ABOUT THE UNIQUE COSTS OF A HOPE 6 DEVELOPMENT.
THE QUESTION IS, ARE THE ADDED COSTS -- ARE THE BENEFITS THAT
FLOW TO FAMILIES AND COMMUNITIES, DO THEY AT LEAST
EQUAL OR EXCEED THE ADDITIONAL COSTS.
THESE QUESTIONS WILL BECOME INCREASINGLY IMPORTANT AS FISCAL
CONSOLIDATION GETS MORE INTENSE. SO I THINK WE JUST NEED TO
REALLY HAVE MORE RIGOROUS AND ROBUST RESEARCH LIKE THIS.
I REALLY APPRECIATE THE QUALITY AND ROBUSTNESS OF THIS PROGRAM.
I TOLD TODD THAT I HAD NEITHER THE TIME NOR GIVEN MY AGE THE
MEMORY CAPABILITY OF THE DECISIONS WE MADE AND WHY AND
THERE'S BOOKS ON IT. SO THAT I WON'T DWELL ON IT.
BUT AS THIS EVENT CAME CLOSER, I TRIED TO KIND OF GO AND SEE IF I
HAD SOME NOTES AND THINK ABOUT THINGS.
SO I WILL JUST GIVE YOU A VERY QUICK SENSE OF MY RECOLLECTIONS
OF WHY WE DID CERTAIN THINGS OR DIDN'T.
FIRSTLY, I FOUND OUT AS I WENT BACK AND THOUGHT ABOUT THIS,
EVEN THOUGH IT WAS THE 92 ACT AND THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION
REALLY IMPLEMENTED MOVING TO OPPORTUNITY, THE IDEA FOR IT AND
THE LOBBYING EFFORTS BY ALEX POLICOFF IN CHICAGO WHO IS A
PUBLIC INTEREST LAWYER, VERY, VERY -- WAS REALLY THE SPEAR
HEAD FOR THE GUITRO LITIGATION AND SO ON, HE BROUGHT THE
ORIGINAL GUITRO LAWSUIT AND ALSO BROUGHT TO HUD THIS IDEA.
IT WAS REALLY JACK CAMP AND THE PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION THAT
REALLY HAD AN INTEREST IN IT. WE IN THE CLINTON ADMINISTRATION
ACTUALLY, IT BECAME PART OF THE LEGISLATION.
BUT IT REALLY HAS KIND OF BIPARTISAN ROOTS TO IT, WHICH IS
INTERESTING TO KEEP IN MIND. THE RESEARCH MOTIVATION WAS
REALLY TO DO A MORE FORMAL RIGOROUS TEST OF WHAT -- OF THE
GUITRO DEMONSTRATION, WHICH WAS COURT ORDERED IN THE CHICAGO
METROPOLITAN AREA WHERE THERE WERE SOME VERY POSITIVE
OUTCOMES, BUT UNCLEAR WHETHER OR NOT YOU COULD A TRIBUTE THEM TO
THE FAMILIES MOVING TO CHICAGO SUBURBS.
SO THE IDEA HERE WAS TO BE MUCH MORE FORMAL AND RIGOROUS WITH A
RANDOM CONTROL TRIAL, WHICH THEGUITRO PILOT WAS NOT.
SO THE FIRST QUESTION IS WHAT KIND OF NEIGHBORHOODS SHOULD BE
THE TREATMENT NEIGHBORHOODS. AND BIG DEBATES.
REMEMBER GUITRO WAS COURT ORDERED.
AND SO RACE IS AN ALLOWABLE IN THAT REMEDY.
RACE IS -- YOU'RE ABLE TO DEFINE ELIGIBLE NEIGHBORHOODS RACIALLY
AND ETHNICALLY AND SO ON. WE WERE TOLD BY -- AS I RECALL,
BY OUR GENERAL COUNSEL, THAT WE COULD NOT USE RACE OR ETHNICITY
TO IDENTIFY ELIGIBLE NEIGHBORHOODS.
SO POVERTY BECAME THE PROXY. WE KIND OF LOOKED AT THIS
CORRELATION AND SO ON. BUT IT'S INTERESTING TO HEAR,
LARRY, BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE IN THE APAM RESULTS, MAYBE I JUST
DIDN'T HEAR IT, BUT THERE IS SOMETHING KIND OF RE-ASSURING IN
A WAY ON YOUR FINDINGS THAT WHETHER IT WAS DEFINED RACIALLY
OR BY POVERTY, YOU DIDN'T SEE THE CONNECTION.
I HADN'T AT LEAST PICKED THAT UP BEFORE BECAUSE REALLY THE
QUESTION THEN BECOMES ONE OF, OKAY, WE CAN'T USE RACE, SO
FORGET THAT. BUT WHAT POVERTY LEVEL DO WE SET
FOR TREATMENT NEIGHBORHOODS? AND I DO REMEMBER THIS
CONVERSATION AND HOW WE ARRIVED AT MY RECOLLECTION OF THE 10%
LIMIT. SOME PEOPLE WANTED TO GO DOWN
EVEN FAR BELOW THAT. SOME REALLY WOULD BE CONTENT TO
BE A LITTLE HIGHER THAN 10. AS I RECALL IT, AND I COULD BE
WRONG, BUT AS I RECALL IT, THE QUESTION WAS CAN BE HAVE A
REASONABLE SUPPLY OF UNITS IN THESE TREATMENT NEIGHBORHOODS
THAT FAMILIES COULD ACTUALLY FIND WITHIN THE FMR OR THE
EXCEPTION ENDS. SO YOU COULD SAY 5%, YOU COULD
SAY 2% POVERTY. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER THERE IS
A UNTIL HOUSING INVENTORY THERE. SO YOU'RE BALANCING.
YOU WANT PEOPLE TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO FIND HOUSING IN
THESE NEIGHBORHOODS. SO THAT WAS KIND OF THE 10%
ISSUE THAT I REMEMBER. ANOTHER ONE THAT I KIND OF
REMEMBER BUT I DON'T REALLY HAVE A GREAT IN DEPTH RECOLLECTION OF
THIS, BUT THERE IS A PARADOX OF HOW LONG A PERSON YOU'RE TESTING
TO NEIGHBORHOOD EFFECTS, SO THE QUESTION IS SHOULD A MOBILITY
CHOICE DESIGN HOUSING PROGRAM LIMIT CHOICE AND MOBILITY?
RIGHT? THAT QUESTION COMES UP IN HOW
LONG SHOULD WE REQUIRE A FAMILY TO LIVE IN A NONE POVERTY
NEIGHBORHOOD BEFORE THEY CAN MOVE BETWEEN A NEIGHBORHOOD OF
THEIR CHOICE, EVEN IF IT VIOLATES THE 10%.
SO THIS YEAR ISSUE BECAME, YOU KNOW -- I HAVE SEEN CRITIQUES OF
MTO AND MOBILITY ORIENTED VOUCHER PROGRAMS ABOUT WHETHER
WE SHOULD HAVE LIMITED -- MADE SURE PEOPLE LIVED THERE A COUPLE
OF YEARS MORE. THERE'S STILL IDEAS THAT GET
FLOATED UP THAT WE SHOULD HAVE A CHOICE, YOU KNOW, WHETHER IT'S A
PORTION OF THE PROGRAM, BUT REALLY MANDATE LONG-TERM
REQUIREMENTS FOR PEOPLE AND SO ON.
BUT THE ONE YEAR WAS, YOU KNOW, KIND OF A DESIGN DECISION.
THE THIRD ONE WAS REALLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE I STILL
BELIEVE LARRY, TO THIS DAY, THAT I DIDN'T GET A JOB OFFER FROM
HARVARD BECAUSE OF MY ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION.
SHORTLY AFTER I LEFT THE DIDN'T, I WAS INVITED BY DAVID ELWOOD
WHO WAS BACK AT HARVARD FOR INTERVIEW FOR A POSITION IN THE
SCHOOL DESIGN AND KENNEDY SCHOOL, I DECIDED TO GIVE MY
KIND OF JOB LECTURE. HERE I HAD BEEN TEACHING FOR 100
YEARS BEFORE THAT. CAME -- WAS IN THE
ADMINISTRATION. I GO AND GIVE THIS TALK.
IT GETS INTO CONTROL GROUP QUESTIONS.
THE SOCIAL SCIENTISTS IN THE ROOM REALLY COULD NOT UNDERSTAND
WHY WE DID NOT HAVE A CONTROL GROUP FROM THE VOUCHER LIST
NONPUBLIC HOUSING, WHY IT WAS LIMITED TO PUBLIC HOUSING.
THAT TURNS OUT, OF COURSE, TO BE AN IMPORTANT ISSUE BECAUSE YOU
REALLY CAN GENERALIZE THE RESULTS OF MTO TO THE GENERAL
VOUCHER POPULATION FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS.
AND I TALKED ABOUT GUITRO AND I TALKED ABOUT THIS BEING, YOU
KNOW, A DERIVATIVE OF THAT AND THE LEGISLATION.
YOU KNOW, SOCIAL SCIENCE SCHOLARS FIND THOSE THINGS NOT
TERRIBLY GOOD REASONS. IF YOU DON'T HAVE A GOOD
THEORETICAL REASONS. I STILL THINK TO THIS DAY, I
WOULD HAVE BEEN AT HARVARD HAD IT NOT BEEN FOR NOT HAVING A
CONTROL GROUP FROM THE GENERAL POPULATION.
THE LAST THING THAT I KIND OF REMEMBER IS THE MOBILITY
COUNSELLING ISSUE. WE PROBABLY COULD HAVE DONE A
BETTER JOB STANDARDIZING OR STUDYING SEPARATELY THE WAY
MOBILITY PLAYED IN HOUSING CHOICES.
THE PROGRAMS WERE DIFFERENT AND SO ON.
JUST TO GIVE YOU A SENSE, WE TALK ABOUT TREATMENT AND WE TALK
ABOUT CONTROLS AND WE TALK ABOUT PERCENTAGES.
BUT THERE WAS A MOBILITY COUNSELLING COMPONENT TO THE
GUITRO COURT ORDER LITIGATION. HERE'S A QUESTION FROM A
MOBILITY COUNSELOR IN CHICAGO. THE PRECURSOR TO MTO.
THESE ARE MOSTLY AFRICAN AMERICAN MOTHERS WITH YOUNG
CHILDREN, WHICH IS EXACTLY REALLY WHAT THE POPULATION WAS
IN MTO. THIS IS IN THE GUITRO
DEMONSTRATION. HERE'S THE QUOTE.
THIS IS THE HARDEST THING MOST OF THESE WOMEN HAVE EVER BEEN
ASKED TO DO. THEY ARE SO USED TO BEING TALKED
DOWN TO, SHOWN NO RESPECT THAT OUR COUNSELORS HAVE TO MAKE THEM
FEEL WORTHY, HAVE CONFIDENCE IN THEMSELVES BEFORE THEY GO OUT
AND TRY TO SELL THEMSELVES TO LANDLORDS AS PERSPECTIVE
TENANTS. WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT FOR
YOU. YOU HAVE TO DO IT YOURSELF OR IT
WON'T MEAN ANYTHING TO YOU, WE SAID.
BUT IF YOU STAND UP, WE'LL BE THERE WITH YOU AND WE ARE.
I MEAN, IT REALLY JUST GIVES YOU A SENSE OF WHAT FAMILIES WERE
FACING AS THEY SIGNED UP TO BE RANDOMIZED INTO THIS PROGRAM.
AND IT MAKES YOU THINK ABOUT THE IMPORTANCE OF THE SUPPORT THAT
THESE PROGRAMS PROVIDE. I SUSPECT THERE'S SOMETHING THAT
WE CAN DO MORE THERE. I ALSO RECALL AND SOME OF YOU
MAY THE INCREDIBLY CONTENTIOUS NATIONAL AND -- I MEAN TO TALK
ABOUT A CONTENTION NATIONAL POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT SOUNDS,
YEAH, RIGHT. BUT IF YOU GO BACK 1994,
CONTRACT WITH AMERICA, THE FIRST REPUBLICAN MAJORITY IN THE HOUSE
IN 44 YEARS, THIS DEPARTMENT WAS ON THE CHOPPING BLOCK.
VERY CONTENTIOUS. AND SO WE HAVE A CONFLATION OF
NATIONAL POLITICAL FORCES AND ALSO I DON'T KNOW IF MANY OF YOU
REMEMBER, BUT AS WE WERE GETTING READY AND IN THE VERY EARLY
STAGES OF IMPLEMENTING TO MOVING TO OPPORTUNITY, HUD WAS ALSO IN
THE EARLY STAGES OF WE HAD JUST ELIMINATED A -- CONGRESS JUST
ELIMINATED AS PART OF THE ADMINISTRATION'S REQUEST ONE FOR
ONE REPLACEMENT. A LOT OF THIS TERRIBLE HOUSING,
MUCH OF WHICH WAS REALLY VACANT AND BOARDED UP.
COULD NOW BE DEMOLISHED. AN ANNOUNCEMENT WAS MADE IN
BALTIMORE THAT THESE PUBLIC HOUSING -- THEY'RE NOT HIGH
RISES, MOST OF THEM. BUT THESE PUBLIC HOUSES
COMPLEXES ALONG THE OUTER RIM OF CENTER CITY WERE GOING TO BE
COMING DOWN. THIS IS AT A TIME WHERE
BALTIMORE IS A SIDE OF MOVING TO OPPORTUNITY, 285 FAMILY.
VERY SMALL NUMBERS OF FAMILIES. ALL OF A SUDDEN, MTO BECOMES
PART OF MARYLAND POLITICS. QUITE VICIOUS AND VERY, VERY
DIFFICULT AT TIMES. SO THE EXPANSION OF THE PROGRAM
WAS LIMITED. WE FOUND SOME RESOURCES TO KEEP
THE PROGRAM ALIVE IN BALTIMORE. BUT YOU HAVE TO APPRECIATE, THIS
WAS KIND OF A PRECURSOR TO HOPE 6.
ALL OF THESE KIND OF ISSUES CAME TO THE FORE.
AND HUD AND THE PROGRAM WAS SUBJECTED TO ENORMOUS PRESSURES.
SO FINALLY, LET ME MAKE THREE KIND OF CONCLUDING POINTS.
TWO SUBSTANTIVE AND A THIRD KIND OF SUMMARY.
EVEN THOUGH IT WASN'T PART OF THE ORIGINAL DESIGN, REALLY MTO
HAS BEGUN TO SEED A HEALTH BASED RATIONALE FOR THIS KIND OF
HOUSING AND THIS KIND OF INTERVENTION.
I THINK IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT. AND IT'S EASY FOR ME TO ASK THE
QUESTION THAT I'M GOING TO ASK. IT'S INCREDIBLY HARD TO ANSWER
IT IN A WAY THAT WOULD HAVE RESOURCE IMPLICATIONS.
BUT THE QUESTION AS SIMPLY PUT AS I CAN PUT IT OUT, DO THE
HEALTH BENEFITS THAT LARRY KATZ TALKED ABOUT ON SIGNIFICANT
REDUCTIONS IN EXTREME OBESITY AND THE REDUCTION IN THE
INCIDENCE OF TYPE 2 DIABETES, DO THOSE HEALTH BENEFITS REDUCE THE
MEDICARE COSTS THAT THESE FAMILIES WOULD IMPOSE THESE
INDIVIDUALS WOULD IMPOSE ON THE SYSTEM TO MORE THAN PAY FOR THE
COST OF THEIR HOUSING ASSISTANCE?
THIS ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT HOUSING AS AN INTERVENTION
REALLY HELPS CREATE OR ACCELERATE OR MAGNIFIES BENEFITS
IN OTHER AREAS IN WHICH THE GOVERNMENT IS PROVIDING SUPPORT
TO FAMILIES I THINK IS A VERY IMPORTANT QUESTION.
A VERY COMPLICATED TO ADDRESS. THERE ALSO IS -- FOR THOSE OF
YOU WHO REALLY -- WE DID IT AT McARTHUR WHEN WE HAD A GRANT
PROGRAM CALLED HOUSING MATTERS AS COMMUNITIES.
YOU HAVE HOUSING AS A PLATFORMED THEME.
I THINK BURIED IN THE FINDINGS OF THE MTO REPORT IS SUPPORT FOR
HUD'S HOUSING AS A PLATFORM STRATEGY.
I WILL QUOTE FROM THE REPORT. THIS REALLY COMES OUT WHERE
THERE WERE NOT A LOT OF ECONOMIC BENEFITS.
"FOR ADULTS, IT APPEARS THAT TRAINING, EDUCATION AND
EMPLOYMENT SERVICES DIRECTLY ENHANCE MARKETABLE SKILLS AND
CHANGES IN WORK INCENTIVES MORE DIRECTLY AFFECT LABOR MARKET AND
ECONOMIC OUTCOMES OF LOW INCOME ADULTS THAN DO THE INDIRECT
CHANGES OF NEIGHBORHOOD ENVIRONMENTS AT LEAST IN THE
RANGE OBSERVED IN THE MTO DEMONSTRATION."
SO THE POINT I THINK AS I READ THAT IS THAT YOU REALLY NEED TO
LINK KIND OF HUMAN CAPITAL PROGRAMS WITH THESE KIND OF
MOBILITY PROGRAMS IF YOU HAVE A HOPE OF REALLY INCREASING
MARKETABLE SKILLS AND INCOMES AND HUMAN CAPITOL.
SO THAT'S IMPORTANT. IT'S NOT REALLY A HEADLINE
RESULT. FINALLY, AS GOOD AS THIS WORK IS
AND AS PROUD AS I'D AM TO BE LINKED WITH IT, EVEN IF IT'S
JUST AS A POLITICAL PERSON AS A FUNDER, NOT SOME -- THAT'S NOT
EVERYBODY WHO HAS MADE REALLY INTELLECTUAL CONTRIBUTIONS HERE
FOR IT. I WILL SAY THIS.
I DON'T THINK ANY STUDY, NO MATTER HOW WELL-DESIGNED IN THIS
COMPLEX AREA WITH WHICH WE'RE WORKING IS ENOUGH TO MOVE THE
DIAL OF POLICY SIGNIFICANTLY. REALLY WHAT WE LOOK FOR IS THE
CENTER OF GRAVITY OF LOTS OF STUDIES THAT EITHER KIND OF
BEGIN TO SURROUND KIND OF A FINDING OR A CONSENSUS SO THAT I
THINK WE DO NEED AND I'M REALLY THRILLED TO SEE HUD IS INVOLVED
WITH MANY MORE NOW RANDOM CONTROL TRIALS, WHICH I THINK
ARE HUGELY IMPORTANT THAT WOULD NOT HAVE HAPPENED WITHOUT THE
LEGACY OF MTO. I JUST WANT TO BRING ONE GRANT
THAT I MADE THAT YOU MAY NOT BE AWARE OF IN THE RESULTS OF IT.
AND I WILL CONCLUDE WITH THIS. I SUPPORTED AND IT HAS BEEN
PUBLISHED NOW IN A NEW BOOK BY DOUG MASSEY, WOODROW WILSON
SCHOOL, IT'S CALLED "CLIMBING MOUNT LAUREL."
AND IT REALLY IS ABOUT THE LOW INCOME HOUSING THAT WAS BUILT IN
MOUNT LAUREL AS A RESULT OF A SERIES OF THREE NEW JERSEY
SUPREME COURT CASES. BUT DOUG, THIS WAS LOTTERY
ASSIGNMENT. DOUG HAD THE ORIGINAL LOTTERY
ASSIGNMENTS FROM MOUNT LAUREL AND WAS ACTUALLY ABLE TO DO A
TEN-YEAR STUDY OF THE PEOPLE THAT WERE SELECTED AND MOVED
INTO THE NEW HOMES THAT FINALLY GOT BUILT.
AND THOSE WHO WERE ELIGIBLE BUT DID NOT.
AND HE HAS PUBLISHED THE RESULTS IN A BOOK.
AND VERY SIMILAR RESULTS ON MENTAL HEALTH, VERY SIMILAR
RESULTS ON CRIME AND VICTIMIZATION AND FEARS AND
PERCEPTIONS AND SO ON. THE ONE THING THOUGH THAT IS
HUGELY DIFFERENT IS THEY FOUND VERY SIGNIFICANT LABOR MARKET
EARNINGS AND WORK BENEFITS. AND SO THAT'S THE FIRST KIND OF
MIXED INCOME STUDY THAT I HAVE SEEN OF SIGNIFICANT ECONOMIC
BENEFITS. AND I SUPPORTED A GOOD BIT OF
PANEL DATA STUDIES ON ECONOMIC EFFECTS OF VOUCHERS.
AND I HAD NOT SEEN IT BEFORE. I JUST WANT TO BRING YOUR
ATTENTION TO THIS STUDY. IT'S CALLED CLIMBING MOUNT
LAUREL. WITH THAT, I'LL CLOSE AND THANK
YOU. >> THANK YOU, MIKE.
SO IT'S 3:45. WE DO HAVE TO BE OUT OF HERE AT
4:00 P.M. SO IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, PLEASE
LINE UP AT THE MICROPHONE. FOR THE FOLKS THAT ARE WATCHING
THE WEBCAST, WHAT IS IT THEY NEED TO DO TO PASS ALONG A
QUESTION? >> THEY CAN SEND THEIR E-MAIL
QUERIES TO PDRQUARTERLYUPDATE@HUD.GOV.
WE WILL FIELD THEM FOR YOU. >> OKAY.
IF YOU CAN REMEMBER THAT. LET'S MOVE TO QUESTIONS HERE.
FIRST UP. >> GOOD AFTERNOON.
MY QUESTIONS IS FOR LARRY. I WAS A LITTLE SURPRISED BY YOUR
FINDING THAT ECONOMIC INTEGRATION MATTERS MORE THAN
RACIAL INTEGRATION. I SEE THAT IT'S A STUDY FINDING
BASED ON A STUDY THAT WASN'T REALLY DESIGNED TO ANSWER THIS
QUESTION. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, IF WE
EXAMINE THE FINDINGS FROM GUITRO AND COMPARE THEM WITH MTO
FINDINGS, ONE SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IS THAT GUITRO WAS A
PROGRAM THAT RESULTED IN ECONOMIC INTEGRATION AND VERY
POSITIVE EARNINGS AND SCHOOL IMPACT, ECONOMIC IMPACTS.
THE MTO DEMONSTRATION DIDN'T HAVE THOSE IMPACTS.
I'M CURIOUS TO KNOW ABOUT THE MOUNT LAUREL STUDY, WHETHER THAT
RESULTED IN GREATER RACIAL INTEGRATION IN ADDITION TO THE
MIXED INCOME SITUATION. AND I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT YET.
BUT I DO KNOW THAT THAT STUDY SHOWED GOOD SCHOOL IMPACTS IN
ADDITION TO EARNINGS. SO I THINK IT'S STILL AN OPEN
QUESTION. JUST GOING BROADLY BY
IMPRESSIONS COMPARING DIFFERENT STUDIES, ESPECIALLY COMPARING
GUITRO WITH MTO, ONE WOULD BE INCLINED TO BELIEVE THAT
ECONOMIC INTEGRATION IS VERY IMPORTANT.
I'M SORRY. THAT RACIAL INTEGRATION IS
PROBABLY EVEN MORE IMPORTANT. SO IF YOU HAVE A COMMENT ABOUT
THAT. >> YEAH.
RIGHT. THE FIRST THING TO NOTE IS THAT
THE MTO STUDY ONLY COVERS RACIAL INTEGRATION IN A LIMITED RANGE.
EVEN ON THE SITES WITH THE LARGEST CHANGES, THEY'RE PRETTY
MODEST. IF YOU LOOK ACROSS THE SITES AND
TREATMENT GROUPS, YOU FIND THE BIGGER THE CHANGE BETWEEN SORT
OF TREATMENT AND CONTROL GROUPS IN AVERAGE POVERTY, THE BIGGER
THE IMPROVEMENTS ON ALMOST RANGE OF OUTCOMES, THE BIGGER THE
CHANGE IN RACIAL INTEGRATION IS PRETTY MUCH FLAT AND
CONDITIONING ON THE ECONOMIC INTEGRATION, THE ANYTHING IT
GOES IN THE WRONG DIRECTION. GUITRO, I HAVE A COUPLE
COMMENTS. GUITRO WAS TARGET TO RACIAL
INTEGRATION BUT ALSO HAD A LOT OF ECONOMICS.
SO JUST THE FINDINGS OF GUITRO DOESN'T REALLY SEPARATE THEM
OUT. WHEN GREG DUNCAN AND HIS
COLLABORATORS HAVE DONE THE LONGER TERM A -- ANALYSIS WERE
DIFFERENT. THE LARGE IMPACTS ON KIDS
SCHOOLING AND STUFF, THE LONGER-RUN EVALUATIONS FIND
EVERYTHING MUCH MORE MUTED, WHICH APPEARS TO BE FOR A COUPLE
REASONS. ONE IS THAT THERE PROBABLY WAS
A -- THE ORIGINAL ROSENBAUM STUDY FOUND ABOUT HALF THE
PEOPLE THAT WERE TRYING TO FIND. SO THE ADMINISTRATIVE DATA HAD A
MORE REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE AND A LOT OF THE EFFECTS SEEMED TO
HAVE FADED AWAY OVER TIME. THERE'S STILL SOMETHING GOING
ON, BUT IT ISN'T ACTUALLY THAT DIFFERENT THAT MTO WHEN IT'S 15
YEARS OUT. THE OTHER THINGS NOTED, THERE'S
BEEN SEVERAL QUASI STUDIES. THE TRUE HOUSING VOUCHER RANDOM
ASSIGNMENT THAT HAS HAPPENED IN CHICAGO IN RECENT YEARS.
TORONTO HAS HAD ONE. THEY HAVE ALL -- THOSE LOOKING
AT KIDSED THAT LIMITED IMPACTS. SO I'M QUITE EAGER TO SEE THE
MOUNT LAUREL ONE, WHICH IS A NEW STUDY, WHICH SEEMS TO BE ONE
THAT IF IT REALLY IS WITH THE LOTTERY AND REALLY TRACKED THEM
UP, MIGHT BE THE FIRST COMPELLING EVIDENCE IF THAT
DIRECTION. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IT'S
TARGETED IN SEVERAL UNITS ARE VERY DIFFERENT, NOT THE MOBILITY
SPREADING OUT. IT'S A DIFFERENT MODEL BUT IT
WILL BE INTERESTING TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND THAT.
BUT YES, THERE'S A LOT OF OPEN QUESTIONS.
>> I CAN JUST FILL YOU IN JUST BRIEFLY.
THE MOUNT LAUREL IS MORE PART OF A -- WHAT I WOULD CALL A SUITE
OF RESEARCH EFFORTS AROUND INCLUSIONARY ZONING.
WE SUPPORTED WORK OF HEATHER SCHWARTZ FROM RAND IN WHICH SHE
FINDS ON -- I MEAN HAS WRITTEN AN ARTICLE ABOUT SCHOOL POLICY.
BUT WHATEVER, ON HER 11 SITE, STUDY SHOWS THAT FOLKS THAT
LIVED IN THE INCLUSIONARY ZONING UNITS, IN THESE PLACES THAT
DON'T HAVE A LOT OF AFFORDABLE UNITS ARE ATENNEDING AND IT'S
NOT AT THE STUNNED LEVEL PERFORMANCE BUT ARE ATTENDING
HIGHER, YOU KNOW, RATED SCHOOLS WHEREAS IN MTO, THEY REALLY --
DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THEY ACTUALLY DID A WHOLE LOT OF CHANGING FROM
SCHOOLS AND SCHOOL DISTRICTS. BUT ON THE -- BECAUSE LAWRENCE
HOMES ARE THE ONLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING BUILT, THERE'S MORE
INTEGRATION. SO YOU'RE RIGHT ABOUT THAT.
EVEN THOUGH THE INCOME GROWTH IS DRAMATICALLY GREATER FOR THEM
THAN THE CONTROLS, IT'S STILL A BLOCK BOX.
THAT IS THE BEAK DOESN'T REALLY TELL YOU HOW THEY GOT THEIR JOBS
AND WHAT THE NETWORKS WERE. THAT BEGS FOR MORE OF THE
QUALITATIVE WORK. I DON'T KNOW THAT.
>> SO THE NEXT QUESTIONER SHOULD GET AN INTRODUCTION.
THIS IS MARK SCHROEDER WHO HAS ACTUALLY WORKED ON MTO LONGER
THAN PROBABLY MOST ANYBODY UP ON THIS TABLE.
MAYBE MIKE WORKED ON IT LONGER. MARK WORKED ON IT FROM ITS VERY
BEGINNING WHEN IT WAS INITIALLY BEING DISCUSSED WHEN BUSH 1 WAS
HERE. >> THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO START
WITH. MIKE, WELCOME BACK TO HUD.
THE -- THIS TRAGIC OVERSIGHT AT HARVARD.
[LAUGHTER] >> IT WASN'T IN THE ECONOMICS
DEPARTMENT. >> YOU ACTUALLY NEVER HAD THE
OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THE GENERAL COMMUNITY OF LOW -- VERY LOW
POVERTY FAMILIES THAT DIDN'T LIVE IN PUBLIC HOUSING IN THE
DEMONSTRATION. THE LAW REQUIRED YOU TO HAVE
THEM FOR THAT POPULATION. AND THE -- AND WHY THAT WOULD
HAVE BEEN IS AN INTERESTING QUESTION.
BECAUSE THE PROPOSAL THAT THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION SENT OVER
JUST SAID PEOPLE LIVING IN HIGH POVERTY.
DIDN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT PUBLIC HOUSING.
AND HIGH -- THE STUFF ABOUT PUBLIC HOUSING WAS ADDED IN
NEGOTIATIONS. I'LL TELL YOU HOW TO FIND OUT
ABOUT THIS. BETWEEN TWO PEOPLE -- NEITHER
ONE ARE MEMBERS THAT ARE RESPONSIBLE IS.
BUT THIS WAS -- SINCE IT HAPPENED IN 92, YOU CAN -- I
MEAN, IT WAS A DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENT IN 92 THAN IT IS
TODAY AND PROBABLY WOULDN'T BE ADDED IF YOU WERE DOING THIS
DEMONSTRATION TODAY. BUT ON THE OTHER HAND YOU MIGHT
NOT DO THIS DEMONSTRATION TODAY. THE OTHER THING I WANTED TO SAY
IS THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A CITYSCAPE SYMPOSIUM COMING OUT
NEXT MONTH WITH A NUMBER OF MAJOR ARTICLES, INCLUDE AGO
COUPLE THAT LARRY CAN CO-AUTHOR ON.
I'M A CO AUTHOR ON ONE OF THEM. YOU CAN FIND OUT EVERYTHING YOU
WANT TO KNOW ABOUT THE HISTORY OF MTO AND WHY YOU'D NOT
NECESSARILY WANT TO COMPARE THE RESULTS OF MTO WITH SO-CALLED
QUASI EXPERIMENTS LOOK GUITRO. >> JUST ONE POINT ON THE MOUNT
LAUREL. BECAUSE FAMILIES WERE COMING NOT
FROM PUBLIC HOUSING, YOU DO HAVE INCOME EFFECTS OF MOVING INTO
ASSISTED HOUSING WHEREAS GOING FROM PUBLIC HOUSING WITH A
VOUCHER THERE REALLY ANT INCOME EFFECTS AND WHETHER THAT MAKES A
DIFFERENCE I DON'T KNOW. I THOUGHT I'D MENTION IT.
>> WE ARE OUT OF TIME FOR OUR PANEL.
PLEASE JOIN ME WITH A ROUND OF APPLAUSE.
[APPLAUSE] >> I WANTED TO THANK THE
DISTINGUISHED PANEL FOR A VERY RICH AND INFORMATIVE DISCUSSION
AND ALSO THANK YOU, TODD, FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP ON THIS AND YOUR
PRESENTATION. I ALSO WANTED TO THANK KEVIN
CAIN FOR HIS QUARTERLY BRIEFING AND THE STAFF AND RESEARCH
UTILIZATION FOR HELPING ORGANIZE THIS BRIEFING.
OUR NEXT QUARTERLY WILL BE IN SEPTEMBER.
SO PLEASE JOIN US AGAIN. AND HAVE A GREAT DAY.
SORRY WE HAD TO CUT THIS SHORT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.