The Moving To Opportunity randomized housing voucher demonstration finds virtually no significant
effects on employment or earnings of adults. Using qualitative data from in-depth, semi-structured
interviews with 67 participants in Baltimore, we find that although the voucher and control groups have
similar rates of employment and earnings, respondents’ relationship to the labor market does differ by
program group. Our analysis suggests that the voucher group did not experience employment or earnings
gains in part because of human capital barriers that existed prior to moving to a low-poverty
neighborhood. In addition, employed respondents in all groups were heavily concentrated in retail and
health care jobs. To secure or maintain employment, they relied heavily on a particular job search strategy
– informal referrals from similarly skilled and credentialed acquaintances who already held jobs in these
sectors. Though experimentals were more likely to have employed neighbors, few of their neighbors held
jobs in these sectors and could not provide such referrals. Thus controls had an easier time garnering
such referrals. Additionally, the configuration of the metropolitan area’s public transportation routes in
relationship to the locations of hospitals, nursing homes, and malls posed additional transportation
challenges to experimentals as they searched for employment – challenges controls were less likely to
face.

We estimate the post-release economic effects of participation in prison-based General
Educational Development (GED) programs using a panel of earnings records and a rich set of
individual information from administrative data in the state of Florida. Fixed effects estimates of
the impact of participating in the GED education program show post-release quarterly earnings
gains of about 15 percent for program participants relative to observationally similar nonparticipants.
We also show, however, that these earnings gains accrue only to racial/ethnic
minority offenders and any GED-related earnings gains for this group seem to fade in the third
year after release from prison. Estimates comparing offenders who obtained a GED to those who
participated in GED-related prison education programs but left prison without a GED show no
systematic evidence of an independent impact of the credential itself on post-release quarterly
earnings.

We study adult economic and health outcomes in the Moving to Opportunity (MTO)
demonstration, a randomized housing mobility experiment in which families living in highpoverty
U.S. public housing projects in five cities were given vouchers to help them move to
private housing units in lower-poverty neighborhoods. An “experimental” group was offered
vouchers valid only in a low-poverty neighborhood; a “Section 8” group was offered traditional
housing vouchers without geographic restriction; a control group was not offered vouchers. Our
sample consists largely of black and Hispanic female household heads with children.
Five years after random assignment, the families offered housing vouchers through MTO
lived in safer neighborhoods that had significantly lower poverty rates than those of the control
group not offered vouchers. However, we find no significant overall effects on adult
employment, earnings, or public assistance receipt -- though our sample sizes are not sufficiently
large to rule out moderate effects in either direction. In contrast, we do find significant mental
health benefits of the MTO intervention for the experimental group. We also demonstrate a more
general pattern for the mental health results using both treatment groups of systematically larger
effect sizes for groups experiencing larger changes in neighborhood poverty rates. In our
analysis of physical health outcomes, we find a significant reduction in obesity, but no
significant effects on four other aspects of physical health (general health, asthma, physical
limitations, and hypertension), and our summary measure of physical health was not significantly
affected by the MTO treatment for the overall sample.

The Moving to Opportunity (MTO) demonstration assigned housing vouchers via random
lottery to low-income public housing residents in five cities. We use the exogenous variation in
residential locations generated by the MTO demonstration to estimate the effects of
neighborhoods on youth crime and delinquency. We find that the offer to relocate to lowerpoverty
areas reduces the incidence of arrests among female youth for violent crimes and
property crimes, and increases self-reported problem behaviors and property crime arrests for
male youth -- relative to a control group. Female and male youth move through MTO into
similar types of neighborhoods, so the gender difference in MTO treatment effects seems to
reflect differences in responses to similar neighborhoods. Within-family analyses similarly show
that brothers and sisters respond differentially to the same new neighborhood environments with
more adverse effects for males. Males show some short-term improvements in delinquent
behaviors from moves to lower-poverty areas, but these effects are reversed and gender
differences in MTO treatment effects become pronounced by 3 to 4 years after random
assignment.

We estimate that permitting inmate labor would likely increase national output, but by
less than 0.2 percent of Gross Domestic Product. The largest social benefits from inmate labor
are likely to come about from decreased recidivism, although the effect of inmate labor on
subsequent crime and recidivism rates has not been adequately studied. The potential inmate
workforce is low skilled. We estimate that permitting inmate labor could reduce wages of high
school dropouts in the private workforce by 5 percent. To improve the economic contribution of
inmate labor, we propose that private firms be allowed to bid for inmate labor, and that inmate
workers be subject to all relevant labor legislation, including the right to collective
representation. Alternative strategies for reducing recidivism and integrating offenders into
mainstream society upon release, such as education and training, should also be considered,
perhaps in conjunction with inmate labor.

We analyze the effects of neighborhood characteristics on the mortality of black male
youth in families relocated through the Gautreaux program, a residential mobility program
implemented in Chicago in 1976. While we find significant evidence of neighborhood selfselection
by families participating in Gautreaux, we nonetheless find evidence that certain
placement neighborhood characteristics were associated with lower male youth mortality rates
after controlling for household and origin neighborhood characteristics. Placement
neighborhood characteristics related to human capital and work were more important predictors
of male youth mortality than characteristics related to race, poverty, or family composition.

Several important social science literatures hinge on the functional relationship between
neighborhood characteristics and individual outcomes. Although there have been numerous
non-experimental estimates of these relationships, there are serious concerns about their
reliability because individuals self-select into neighborhoods. This paper uses data from HUD’s
Moving to Opportunity (MTO) randomized housing voucher experiment to estimate the
relationship between neighborhood poverty and individual outcomes using experimental
variation. In addition, it assesses the reliability of non-experimental estimates by comparing
them to experimental estimates.
We find that our method for using experimental variation to estimate the relationship
between neighborhood poverty and individual outcomes – instrumenting for neighborhood
poverty with site-by-treatment group interactions – produces precise estimates in models in
which poverty enters linearly. Our estimates of nonlinear and threshold models are not precise
enough to be conclusive, though many of our point estimates suggest little, if any, deviation from
linearity. Our non-experimental estimates are inconsistent with our experimental estimates,
suggesting that non-experimental estimates are not reliable. Moreover, the selection pattern that
reconciles the experimental and non-experimental results is complex, suggesting that common
assumptions about the direction of bias in non-experimental estimates may be incorrect.

The Moving to Opportunity (MTO) experiment offered over 4,000 public housing
residents in five U.S. cities the opportunity to move to very low poverty neighborhoods. Results
from a survey conducted four to seven years after random assignment showed that boys in the
experimental group fared no better or worse on measures of risk behavior than their controlgroup
counterparts, while girls in the experimental group demonstrated better mental health and
lower risk behavior relative to control group girls. We seek to understand these differences by
analyzing data from the survey and from in-depth interviews conducted with a random
subsample of 86 teens 14 to 19 years old in Baltimore and Chicago. We find that control group
boys, especially in Baltimore, deployed conscious strategies for avoiding neighborhood trouble,
in contrast to many experimental boys who had subsequently moved back to higher poverty
neighborhoods. Second, experimental group girls’ patterns of activity fit in more easily in lowpoverty
neighborhoods than boys’, whose routines tended to draw negative reactions from
community members and agents of social control. Third, experimental boys were far less likely
to have strong connections to non-biological father figures than controls, which may have
contributed to behavioral and mental health problems.

Understanding whether criminal behavior is “contagious” is important for law enforcement and
for policies that affect how people are sorted across social settings. We test the hypothesis that
criminal behavior is contagious by using data from the Moving to Opportunity (MTO)
randomized housing-mobility experiment to examine the extent to which lower local-area crime
rates decrease arrest rates among individuals. Our analysis exploits the fact that the effect of
treatment group assignment yields different types of neighborhood changes across the five MTO
demonstration sites. We use treatment-site interactions to instrument for measures of
neighborhood crime rates, poverty and racial segregation in our analysis of individual arrest
outcomes. We are unable to detect evidence in support of the contagion hypothesis.
Neighborhood racial segregation appears to be the most important explanation for acrossneighborhood
variation in arrests for violent crimes in our sample, perhaps because drug market
activity is more common in high-minority neighborhoods.

We examine the effects of moving out of high-poverty neighborhoods on the outcomes of
teenage youth, a population often seen as most at risk from the adverse effects of such
neighborhoods. The randomized design of the Moving To Opportunity demonstration allows us
to compare groups of youth, initially similar and living in high-poverty public housing. An
“experimental” group was offered vouchers valid only in a low-poverty neighborhood; a
“Section 8” group was offered traditional vouchers without geographic restriction; and a control
group was not offered vouchers.
We study outcomes in four domains: education, risky behavior, mental health, and
physical health. Aggregating effect sizes over all of the outcomes, females in both treatment
groups benefited from the moves, while males in both treatment groups experienced worse
outcomes. Females in the experimental group experienced improvements in education and
mental health and were less likely to engage in risky behaviors. Females in the traditional
voucher group experienced improvements in mental health. Males in both treatment groups were
more likely than controls to engage in risky behaviors and to experience physical health
problems. We adopt a multiple-testing framework to account for the large number of estimates
considered. We show that the overall effects on females in the experimental group and the
effects on mental health for females in both treatment groups were least likely to be due to
sampling variation.
Families with female children and families with male children moved to similar
neighborhoods, suggesting that their outcomes differ not because of exposure to different types
of neighborhoods but because male and female youth respond to their environments in different
ways.