Reviewing prior studies of two residential mobility programs, the Gautreaux and Moving to Opportunity (MTO) programs, this paper examines whether program design elements may explain differences in neighborhood placements, which in turn may explain the programs' different individual outcomes. While MTO has a stronger research design than Gautreaux, it creates more modest changes in environment. Specifically, we find that the two programs create very different kinds of neighborhood placements. Compared with Gautreaux, MTO moves were shorter distances and to census tracts with higher poverty rates, larger minority populations, worse schools, and lower employment rates. These differences in neighborhood placements may explain why Gautreaux found larger impact than MTO in education and employment outcomes and in duration of moves. Although often ignored, design elements may be crucial to the success of programs, and several design elements may explain these different placements.
- Low-income housing
- Poverty or neighborhood
ASJC Scopus subject areas
- Urban Studies
- Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law