Presentation on theme: "Members of The Pathways from Poverty Consortium"— Presentation transcript:
1Members of The Pathways from Poverty Consortium Unpacking Poverty and Its Impact on Student Success: Colloquium II Concentrated Neighborhood Poverty Tuesday, March 10, 2015Members of The Pathways from Poverty ConsortiumRobert Balfanz, Ph.D., Research Scientist, Co-Director, Center for Social Organization of Schools (CSOS)Maxine Wood, Ed.D, Director/Senior Advisor, Pathways from PovertyRichard Lofton, Ph.D. Post-doctoral fellowDaniel Princiotta, Ph.D. candidatePresented at the Colloquium II on Unpacking Poverty and Its Impact on Student Success, organized by the Pathways from Poverty Consortium -- Baltimore, MD
2Overview of Presentation- A Three-Act Play with a Prelude Prelude - Defining Poverty at Individual and Neighborhood LevelsAct 1 - What is Concentrated Poverty, Who Experiences it and Where is it Found?Act 2 - How Does Concentrated Poverty Impact Student Success and Which Districts and Schools Face the Biggest Challenges?Act 3 - What Do We Know About Solutions at the School and Neighborhood Levels?
3Prelude: Thinking About How We Define Poverty and How This Informs Our Perceptions and Actions
4Poverty can be both an individual/family experience and a group/neighborhood experience
5Poverty at individual/family level means not having enough money to provide/acquire the basics (food, shelter, clothing, heat, medicine, etc.) and/or to live in a safe and healthy environment.
6Poverty at Group/Neighborhood Level means living in areas where many other people are poor as well, or, as the census defines it, in ‘a spatial density of socio-economic deprivation’.
7Poverty and Low Income are not the same thing, though in the media, policy reports, and daily conversation they are often used interchangeably.*See handout for example
8Defining Economic Hardship Federal/Census Definitions of Individual/Family Economic HardshipLow-income: Less than 200% of the Federal Poverty Level (Household of 4 is $48,500 or below)Poverty: Less than 100% of the Federal Poverty Level(Household of 4 is $24,250 or below)Extreme Poverty: Less than 50% of the Federal Poverty Level (Household of 4 is $12,125 or below)U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, 2015
9How Many People and Children Experience Economic Hardship? Economic Hardship Status(Percent of Poverty Level)Total Persons Who Experience in USIncome Range for Family of FourTotal Number and Percent of All Children Who Experience in USLow Income(100%-199% )60 million$24,251- $48,50016 Million (22%)Poverty(50% to 99%)25.6 million$12,125- $24,2508.6 Million (12%)Extreme Poverty(< 50%)20.4 million0$- $12,1257.2 Million (10%)Total All Economic Hardship Status106 million31.8 Million (44%)
10Percentage of Children in Low-Income and Poor Families by Race/Ethnicity
11Defining Economic Hardship In Schools Free and Reduced Lunch Income Eligibility 1Free Meals--at or below 130% of the federal poverty level (A household of 4 annual income is $30,615 or below)Reduced Price Meals-up to 185% of federal poverty level (A household of 4 annual income is $44,123)1 Federal Register, 2014: Effective from July 1, 2014-June 30, 2015
12Thus, when school free and reduced price lunch levels are used as a measure of “poverty,” it combines students who live in poverty with a sub-set of low-income students
13This means that two schools with equal numbers of economically disadvantaged students, as measured by free and reduced price lunch levels, can serve two very different sets of students.
14At the Extreme: Two Schools with 50% FRPL Student Populations School A-50% FRPL PopulationSchool B-50% FRPL PopulationTwo -thirds of families have incomes of $35,000 or moreOne-third of families have incomes of less than $24,00015% of all students in school live in povertyHalf of the families have incomes below $12,500Half of the families have incomes between $12,500 and $24,00050% of all students in school live in poverty
15Defining Poverty by Place High-Poverty Neighborhoods-census tracts with a poverty rate of at least 20% in a given year.Distressed Neighborhoods-census tracts with a poverty rate of at least 40% in a given year.Bureau of the Census, 1970
16Why Were These Thresholds Chosen? Available evidence shows that at the 20% threshold one begins to see impacts of living in a neighborhood of socio-economic deprivation, above and beyond the individual impacts of poverty, controlling for other individual and group characteristics.Impacts of neighborhood poverty accelerate as concentrations climb from 20% to 40% when they appear to max out. When it was established in the 1970s, the 40% threshold also corresponded to what were commonly seen as “ghetto” neighborhoods.
17Being Low-Income or Poor in a High-Poverty Neighborhood Creates a Double Burden Living in communities with a large concentration of poverty causes additional burdens on residentsBeyond their own family circumstancesMust confront the poverty of those around themAdditional burdens that are associated with povertyHigher crime rates, poor housing conditions, fewer job opportunities and more limited access to healthy foodThe Enduring Challenge of Concentrated Poverty in America, 2008
18Neighborhood Poverty Has Increased Substantially in the Past Decade Brookings Institute Report on Growth and Spread of Concentrated Poverty…. as poverty has spread, it has not done so evenly. Instead, it has also become more clustered and concentrated in distressed and high-poverty neighborhoods, eroding the brief progress made against concentrated poverty during the late 1990s.The challenges of poor neighborhoods—including worse health outcomes, higher crime rates, failing schools, and fewer job opportunities—make it that much harder for individuals and families to escape poverty and often perpetuate and entrench poverty across generations.22 Reserve System and the Brookings Institution, “The Enduring Challenge of Concentrated Poverty in America. For a review of the literature on the effects of concentrated poverty, see the Federal: Case Studies from Communities Across the U.S.” (Richmond, VA: 2008); and Patrick Sharkey, Stuck in Place: Urban Neighborhoods and the End of Progress Toward Racial Equality (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2013).
19Number of People Who Experience Neighborhood Poverty Percent of People in Census Track who Live in PovertyNumber of Census TractsTotal Number Living There (Millions)Percent of US Population Living TherePercent of Poor Living ThereNumber of Poor Living ThereNumber and Percent of Children Living There20% +77.4 million25.7%53.5%23.9 million20.3 Million(28%)30% +30 million10%27.8%10.1 Million (14%)40% +357011.6 million4%12.2%5.4 million
20Complex takeaway: At least half of the people in high-poverty/distressed neighborhoods are not poor, but given what we know about residential segregation, most are likely low income, especially in distressed neighborhoods (nationally 75% poor or low income). Thus, low-income students in these neighborhoods are affected by living in concentrated poverty as well as students living in poverty. The key metric in terms of impact on student success is the percent of students living in these neighborhoods, and the concentration of them within schools.
21Thus, the growth of neighborhood poverty over the past decade suggests that the scale and intensity of student needs have likely increased in the schools that serve these areas. Mapping the growth of neighborhood poverty shows that this impact has been unevenly felt across states and regions.
24Our focus will be on the students and schools that experience concentrated poverty at its most extreme--those who live in neighborhoods with 40% or higher poverty rates
25Concentrated Poverty and Student Success in Three Acts Act 1 - Who, What, Where?Who is affected?Trace the historical and contemporary routesHighlight the impacts of social and cultural IsolationExamine multi-generational impactsAct 2 - Impact on Students and SchoolsWhat are the educational consequences?How many schools and districts experience the impacts of students living in concentrated poverty, and at what magnitude?Act 3 - What Can Be Done?Examine what we know about solutions
26Act 1 Concentrated Neighborhood Poverty: Who Experiences it, Where is it Located, How Does it Impact its Residents?
27Who is Confronted with Concentrated Poverty? Almost 12 million Americans live in concentrated poverty 1Increase of 5 million fromNearly 40 percent of people living in areas of concentrated poverty are African American 3Nearly 40 percent of the total population living in communities of concentrated poverty are Hispanic 3Almost three out of four African American families living in today’s most segregated, poorest neighborhoods are the same families that lived in the concentrated poverty of the 1970s 4Mead’s work looks at 40 percent poverty in census tract and 30 percent zip code to be considered concentrated poverty1 2013; 2 Kneebone, 2014; 3Meade, 2014; 4 Sharkey, 2013
29How Were These Neighborhoods Formed? (Rural) Small southern African Americans towns that were once slave plantations, then sharecropping/debt peonage (African American Belt- Arkansas to North Carolina; the Mississippi Delta)More than one-half of residents in many American Indian reservation communities are poor (Desert Southwest and the upper Great Plains)Lichter & Domenico, 2008
30How Were These Neighborhoods Formed? (Urban) African AmericansGreat Migration – push and pull factors 1Construction and maintenance of ghettos 2Redlining policies and practicesWhite flightActs of terrorRestrictive covenantsDeprived of resources and investmentsHispanics- Settled in gateway cities3 (Los Angeles, New York City, Chicago, Miami, San Diego )These established enclaves continue to receive new waves of immigrantsPuerto Rican & Dominicans lived in concentrated poverty in Boston, Providence, Philadelphia and New York.Mexicans often in urban clusters in the WestOne in three individuals in major cities who lives in concentrated poverty is in a household in which English is not spoken at home41 Wilson, 1987; Wilkerson, 2010; 2 Massey & Denton, 1998; 3Patterson, 2002; 4Mead, 2014
31How Were These Neighborhoods Formed? (Suburbs) Between 2000 and , the number of poor suburban residents living in concentrated poverty grew by 139 percent - almost three times the pace of growth in citiesWhile African Americans have been moving to the suburbs since the 1970s, there has been an increase in the last 15 years, often settling in pockets of concentrated poverty1Example: Ferguson, St. Louis2Larman Williams in 1968, first African American to buy a homeBy 1980, 14 % African American; 1990, 24%; 2000, 52%; 2010, 67%Between 2000 and 2012, Ferguson’s poor population doubledOne in four lived below the federal poverty line and 44 percent of them fell below twice that levelSoutheast corner isolated geographically from the rest of the city38th poorest census tract in the state; 95 percent are African AmericanWhile race changed in the suburbs, the power structure remained the samePolice department, fire department, leadership class, school administrators and teachers1 Kneebone, 2014; 2Rothstein, 2015; 3Casselman, 2014
32How Does Concentrated Neighborhood Poverty Impact the People who Live There?
33Exposure to Neighborhood Inequalities Increase of violenceIncrease of crimeDifferent forms of policingHyper-incarcerationLimited access to private services/poor public servicesAbundance of liquor storesExcess of fast food/dood desertsHigher banking expensesUnhealthy environmentPoor housingUnderground economyDecayed physical conditions of the built environmentHigher rates of unemployment/limited employment opportunities1/3 adults are HS dropouts vs. 12% college gradsWacquant, L. (2001); Sharkey, P. (2013); Wilson, W. (1987); Quane, J.M., Wilson, W.J. & Hwang, J. (2015); Jensen, E. (2009); Harding, D.J. (2003); Venkatesh, S.A. (2006)
34Social and Cultural Isolation Social Isolation-lack of contact or sustained interaction with individuals and institutions that represent mainstream societyFriends, relatives and community members do not introduce individuals to jobs, resources and opportunitiesInability to gain access and embody certain behaviors, norms and skills that help people understand/read/navigate the global worldLack of diverse role modelsMistrust and betrayal of institutionsYoung, A.A. (2003); Small, M.L. (2009); Patillo, M. (2003); Wilson, W.J. (1987); Royster, D. (2003); Ditomaso, N. (2013); Atkinson & Kintrea, (2004).
35Intangible Struggles in Concentrated Poverty Preferential treatment to those who do not live in concentrated poverty, which maintains social isolation1Hoarding of social resources and opportunitiesNegative reputations of schools and communities in concentrated povertySocial stigma of neighborhoods and familiesStereotypes held by institutions and social actors about residents who live in concentrated poverty1Royster, D. (2003); Ditomaso, N. (2013).
36Multi-Generational Impacts “The American ghetto appears to be inherited…the neighborhood environments in which African American and white Americans live have been passed down across generations.” (Sharkey, 2013 p. 9)Children grow up and remain in the same type of environmentChildhood exposure to neighborhood inequalities maintains concentrated povertyChildhood exposure is not felt only in a single lifetime, but affects the next generationInequality is something that occurs over long periods of time and structures the opportunities available to families over multiple generationsSharkey, 2013
37Agency in the Midst of Concentrated Poverty African Americans and Latinos in these areas do have meaningful social networksChurchesCommunity centersSocial tiesLocal clubsStrong relationshipsSafe spacesBeauty shops, barber shops, homesStack, C. (1974); Ladner, J. (2000); Lofton, R. (2015); Wacquant, L.J.D. (1997)
38ACT 2 What is the Impact of Concentrated Neighborhood Poverty on Students and Schools?
39Concentrated Poverty and Schools “A school’s socioeconomic background is a strong determinant of its students’ achievement”-- Coleman Report, 1966Mary Kennedy in 1986 found that the relationship between school poverty concentrations and student achievement averages is stronger than the relationship between family poverty status and student achievement.1 Among children who experience poverty, live in areas of concentrated poverty, and are not reading proficiently by third grade, 35% fail to graduate from high school by age 19.21Kennedy, 1986; 2Hernandez, 2012
40Concentrated Poverty and Schools When half a student body is poor, all students’ achievement will be depressedWhen 75% are poor, all students’ achievement will be seriously depressedA district with more than 60% poor children can no longer rely solely on its own internal efforts to avoid failurePuma, M. et al, 1997; PPRAC
41When both students and their parents grow up in concentrated neighborhood poverty, the impact on school success is magnified.
42Sharkey’s thesis- the exposure of the ghetto over generations PSID which began in 1968Average scores on a reading/language test and an applied problem test, among children from four different groups of familiesNever in poor neighborhoodsParent in poor neighborhoodChild in poor neighborhoodAlways in poor neighborhoodSharkey, 2013
43What are some of the mechanisms through which concentrated neighborhood poverty impacts student and school success?
44Students who live in neighborhoods of concentrated poverty attend school less frequently. They have higher rates of absenteeism and chronic absenteeism.
45A Better Picture of Poverty: What chronic absenteeism and risk load reveal about NYC's lowest income elementary schoolsFound 130 elementary schools in NYC in which more than one- third of the children were chronically absent for five years in a row.These schools have very low levels of academic achievement as measured by standardized tests.Chronic absenteeism correlates with deep poverty--high rates of homelessness, child abuse reports, male unemployment, and low levels of parental education.In fact, the report states, chronic absenteeism is a much better index of poverty than the traditional measure of the number of children eligible for free lunch.
46Chronic stress associated with living in poverty has been shown to adversely affect children’s concentration and memory which may impact their ability to learn. (American Psychological Association) The number of students being distracted and stressed by out-of-school struggles is 2-to-3 times higher in areas of concentrated poverty and reaches a level where it can impact the whole class (8-10 students or more in a class).
48Concentrated Poverty Leads to Less Learning Time in School UCLA Institute for Democracy conducted a statewide survey in California in November and December of 2013783 California high school teachers completed minute online survey3-5 teachers nested within 193 high schoolsLow-concentration poverty school %Low- and mixed-concentration poverty schools %High-concentration poverty schools %
49Concentrated Poverty Leads to Less Learning Time The lack of qualified substitutesInsufficient access to school libraries or computersExtra time spent on testingEmergency lockdownsDisrupted days for non-instructional assembliesMore likely to be interrupted during classSurveyed 800 California High school teachersRogers, J. & Mirra, N., 2014
50Concentrated Poverty Leads to Less Learning Time Lose 5 minutes on average in every instructional period compared to low-poverty schools (30 minutes per day)In total, high-poverty schools lost 12.4% of their instructional days for these reasons, compared to 7% in low-poverty schoolsAlso higher rates of teacher absenteeism (which led to higher rates of teachers providing class coverage, instead of preparing for their classes or giving students extra help)Rogers, J. & Mirra, N, 2014
51Schools that Serve Neighborhoods of Concentrated Poverty Also... Have higher suspension and expulsion ratesHave higher principal and teacher turnoverAre often staffed by less-experienced principals and teachersAs a result, greater student need is met with transient and less-experienced adults.
52New analyses of the influence of concentrated neighborhood poverty on schools, districts, and student success nationwideWhat is the size, scope, and location of the problem for schools and districts nationwideMake preliminary investigations into concentrated poverty and student and school outcomes
53School and student research questions How many elementary, middle, and high schools are located in concentrated poverty neighborhoods?How many students do these schools serve?How do the elementary and middle school reading and math proficiency rates and high school graduation rates of public schools located in neighborhoods of concentrated poverty (at the 40% level) compare to rates in schools not located in these neighborhoods?Does this analysis provide evidence of the double burden on student success of being economically disadvantaged and living in a neighborhood of concentrated poverty (at the 40% level)?
54Methods Map school locations and school district boundaries Overlay neighborhood (Census tract) boundariesAssociate characteristics of neighborhoods with schoolsAssociate and aggregate characteristics of neighborhoods with school districtsRun descriptive analyses
55Data and SourcesAmerican Community Survey ( ): neighborhood poverty, number of childrenCensus TIGER/Line Shapefiles (2013): neighborhood boundaries, elementary and unified school district boundariesCommon Core of Data (2012): school locations (longitude and latitude), school level, number of studentsEDFacts ( ): school math and reading proficiency rates, graduation rates
56Number of schools located in neighborhoods of concentrated poverty (at the 40% level) and students served by these schoolsSchool levelSchoolsStudentsN% of totalTotal6,6456.42,594,0005.2Elementary3,4531,403,0005.8Middle8475.0379,0004.0High1,1855.6609,0004.3Other70710.1204,00010.7
57Grade 5 math and reading proficiency rates by neighborhood concentrated poverty (at 40% level)
58Grade 5 economically disadvantaged students’ math and reading proficiency rates by neighborhood concentrated poverty (at 40% level)Evidence of double burden!
59Grade 8 math and reading proficiency rates by neighborhood concentrated poverty (at 40% level)
60Grade 8 economically disadvantaged students’ math and reading proficiency rates by neighborhood concentrated poverty (at 40% level)Evidence of double burden!
61High school graduation rates by neighborhood concentrated poverty (at 40% level)
62Economically disadvantaged students’ high school graduation rates by neighborhood concentrated poverty (at 40% level)Evidence of double burden!
63School district research questions Across the nation, what levels of neighborhood poverty do school districts face?Which school districts serve children in concentrated poverty, and where are the districts located?Which school districts serve large numbers or percentages of students living in concentrated poverty?
64Percentage of school districts facing various levels of neighborhood poverty 47 percent of districts have at least one neighborhood with 20%+ poverty21 percent of districts have at least one neighborhood with 30%+ poverty10 percent of districts have at least one neighborhood with 40%+ poverty (concentrated poverty)64
65Neighborhood poverty levels in Baltimore City Public School district 65
66Neighborhood poverty levels in Detroit Public Schools district 66
68School districts by the percentage of children in 30%+ poverty neighborhoods 68
69School districts by the percentage of children in concentrated (40%+) poverty neighborhoods About 13,000 elementary and unified school districts (excludes 4 percent of districts that are secondary only)Relatively equally distributed: Around 2-3 percent of districts per category2.75 million children in concentrated poverty (5 percent of all children)About 80 percent of that number (2.25 million) in top two categories, roughly evenly splitp_conpovkid |s_cat | Freq. Percent Cum.0 | ,1 |2 |3 |4 |Total | ,. tab p_conpovkids_cat [iweight=n_conpovkids]1 | 171,2 | 325,3 | 1,101,4 | 1,152,Total | 2,751,69
70Northeastern districts by the percentage of children in concentrated (40%+) poverty neighborhoods 70
71Southeastern districts by the percentage of children in concentrated (40%+) poverty neighborhoods 71
72Midwestern districts by the percentage of children in concentrated (40%+) poverty neighborhoods 72
73Michigan districts by the percentage of children in concentrated (40%+) poverty neighborhoods 73
74Southwestern districts by the percentage of children in concentrated (40%+) poverty neighborhoods 74
75Western districts by the percentage of children in concentrated (40%+) poverty neighborhoods 75
76Top 10 school districts with the highest numbers of in-boundary children in concentrated (40%+) poverty40%+ PovertyDistrictStateTotal N%NNew York City Department Of EducationNY1,240,86114.5180,176Los Angeles Unified School DistrictCA759,38911.688,065Chicago Public School District 299IL427,89218.478,690Detroit City School DistrictMI134,30254.072,587Philadelphia City School DistrictPA239,99225.861,933Milwaukee School DistrictWI112,74832.036,042Fresno Unified School District78,38545.335,484Houston Independent School DistrictTX218,46214.331,292Dade County School DistrictFL394,2287.931,023Memphis City School DistrictTN116,49425.029,174
77Most children living in concentrated poverty are in a very small number of districts The top 10 school districts with the highest numbers of children living in concentrated poverty contain 23 percent of the nation’s totalJust 69 school districts contain more than half the nation’s children living in concentrated povertyThat said, there are small pockets of concentrated poverty (40%+) throughout the countryAbout 1,250 school districts have at least some concentrated povertySome of these districts face very substantial poverty rates
78Top 10 school districts with the highest percentages of in-boundary children in concentrated (40%+) poverty40%+ PovertyDistrictStateTotal N%NKiryas Joel Village Union Free School DistrictNY5,309100.0Shannon County School District 65-1SD3,669Earlimart Elementary School DistrictCA2,692Whiteriver Unified DistrictAZ2,587Fabens Independent School DistrictTX2,233Zuni Public SchoolsNM1,559Tornillo Independent School District1,397Sacaton Elementary District1,188La Villa Independent School District845Progreso Independent School District7204 BIA schools4 Border towns w/ Mexico1 children of Hispanic farm workers and fruit packers (migrant?)Oddly enough, 1 orthodox24 districts nationally w/ 100% of kids in 40% plus povertyOrthodoxBureau of Indian Affairs American IndianHispanic (Farm workers packing houses)American IndianBorder TownBorder townNear a border town
79Top 10 school districts (highest n) with more than half of in-boundary children in concentrated (40%+) poverty40%+ PovertyDistrictStateTotal N%NDetroit City School DistrictMI134,3005472,600Laredo Independent School DistrictTX22,0006915,100Alhambra Elementary DistrictAZ22,4006113,600Syracuse City School DistrictNY23,0005713,200La Joya Independent School District23,5005513,000Donna Independent School District18,9006612,400Dearborn City School District5211,600Flint City School District18,5005610,400Reading School DistrictPA18,80010,200Coachella Valley Unified School DistrictCA19,700509,9005 rust belt cities dead manufacturing cities3 border cities2 poor mainly Hispanic communitiesDetroit (dead manufacturing)Border cityPhoenix/Glendale carve outManufacturingDetroit metro dead manufacturingFlint, dead manufacturingReading, dead manufacturing Rail roadsTrailer parks & migrant workers among others?
80Key TakeawaysNational evidence consistent with idea of double burden existsGeography of concentrated poverty is a patchwork quilt across our nationA small number of districts faces substantial levels of concentrated povertyA very small identifiable subset of districts makes up the bulk of the problem
82Examples of Promising practices include: Chicago 5 Essentials CONCENTRATED POVERTY and Student Success Promising Responses & PracticesExamples of Promising practices include:Chicago 5 EssentialsDiplomas NowSEED SchoolsHarlem Children’s ZonePromise NeighborhoodsChoice NeighborhoodsPromise ZonesNeighborhood Revitalization Initiative (NRI)Moving to Opportunity (MTO)
83Strategy 1: Strengthen and Design Schools to Meet the Needs of Students Who Live in Concentrated Neighborhood Poverty
84Five Essential School Supports to Mitigate Neighborhood Poverty University of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research found 5 essential supports to improve academic successElementary Schools in high-poverty neighborhoods that were strong in these supports were 19 times more likely to improve learning in reading and mathematics5 essential supportsSchool LeadershipParent-Community tiesProfessional capacityStudent-centered learning environmentsInstructional guidanceIn the most impacted neighborhoods, however, these supports alone were not enoughBryk A., Sebring, P., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., Easton, J. (2010)
85Schools as Safe Spaces in Concentrated Poverty Schools are safer when teachers view parents as supportive partners in the educational processSchools are safer when students feel that their teachers listen and care about their learning and overall well-beingPunitive measures are less likely to instill a sense of safety than measures that foster respect and trustSufficient staffing needed to keep teachers and other staff members from feeling overwhelmed so they can develop positive relationships with each other and with students and familiesSteinberg, M., Allensworth, E. & Johnson, D. (2015)
86Diplomas Now Secondary School Transformation Collaboration Integrated Student SupportsWhole School ReformTargeted Support & Whole School Prevention14 CitiesStudentsBaton RougeBostonChicagoColumbusDetroitLos AngelesMiamiNew York CityPhiladelphiaSan AntonioSeattleTulsaWashington, DC32 Total Schools16 Middle Schools14 High SchoolsbuildingsBold cities implementing Randomized Control Trial by MDRCInvesting in Innovation Fund Winner1,700 Applicants49 Grantees
87Surrounding Teachers and Students with Support Diplomas Now ModelSurrounding Teachers and Students with SupportInstructional SupportsDouble dose math & EnglishExtra help labsCommon college preparatory or high school readiness curriculaOrganizational SupportsInter-disciplinary and subject focused common planning timeBi-weekly EWI meetingsOn-site school transformation facilitatorProfessional Development SupportsJob-embedded coaching - Math and English instructional coachesProfessional learning communityProfessional development linked to grade/subject instructional practiceTeacher Team (4 teachers)Data SupportsEasy access to student data on the Early Warning IndicatorsBenchmarks tied to national and state standardsOn-site facilitator to leverage EWI data3 -4 cohorts studentsStudent SupportsMulti Tiered Response to Intervention Model8 to 20 City Year AmeriCorps members: whole school and targeted academic and socio-emotional supportsCommunities In Schools on-site coordinator: case managed supports for highest need studentsInterventions to address early warning indicators ofAttendanceBehaviorCourse PerformanceWhole school attendance, positive behavior, college-going cultureStrengthening student resiliency
88Diplomas Now i3 2013-14 End-of-Year Results Off Track Prior to Final Marking PeriodOff Track at End of Final Marking PeriodGetting off-track students back on track: The progress of students flagged with an off-track indicator prior to the final marking period of the school year in all DN i3 schools.Preventing students from falling off-track : Percentage of students in all DN i3 schools not flagged with an off-track indicator prior to quarter 4 who stayed on track.Overall Success : Percentage of students who ended the year on track in all DN i3 schools for the school year.Percentage of StudentsOn TrackPercentage of StudentsOn Track*Averages based on longitudinal data as available from 82 participating grades in 29 schools in 11 urban districts.
89Concept The SEED School A safe, supportive environment for learning CONCENTRATED POVERTYPromising Responses & PracticesThe SEED SchoolConceptA school developed to provide socially and economically disadvantaged children the opportunity to learn in a safe and nurturing residential environment. Specifically offering:A safe, supportive environment for learningMostly voluntary enrollmentInvolvement of the child’s family when appropriateLimited tuition or no tuitionThe SEED Foundation, February 2002 andSEED Annual Report, 2014
90The SEED School RESULTS CONCENTRATED POVERTYPromising Responses & PracticesThe SEED SchoolRESULTS90% of SEED students who enter the ninth grade graduate from high school. For comparison: 81%of all students across the nation graduate from high school.More than 90% of SEED graduates have been accepted to a 4-year college or university.More than 90% of SEED graduates have enrolled in college. For comparison: 52% of low-income high school graduates enroll immediately in college.71% of SEED graduates have college degrees, are currently enrolled in college or an alternative post-secondary program, or are in the military. For comparison: 11% of low-income, first-generation students who enroll in college earn a bachelor’s degree within six years.
91Strategy 2: Strengthen Schools and Provide Enhanced Social, Health, and Training Supports to Parents and Students from Cradle to Career
92Early childhood programs with parent classes Public charter schools CONCENTRATED POVERTY The Harlem Children’s Zone (HCZ) Promising Responses & PracticesA non-profit organization that funds and operates a neighborhood-based system of education and social services for children of low-income families in a 100-block area in Harlem, New York1.Education ComponentsEarly childhood programs with parent classesPublic charter schoolsAcademic advisors and afterschool programs for students attending regular public schoolsSupport system for former HCZ students enrolled in college1Harlem Children’s Zone, FY 2014 Report
93$5,000 vs $50,000+ Fitness program Asthma management program CONCENTRATED POVERTY The Harlem Children’s Zone (continued) Promising Responses & PracticesHealth ComponentsFitness programAsthma management programNutrition programNeighborhood services, programsOrganizing tenant associationsOne-on-one counseling to familiesFoster care preventionCommunity CentersEmployment and technology center (for teaching job-related skills to teens and adults$5,000 vs $50,000+HCZ spends $5,000 per child annually, while New York City spends more than $50,000 each year to incarcerate an inmate.
94100% “Harlem Gems” pre-kindergarteners were assessed as “school ready” CONCENTRATED POVERTYPromising Responses & Practices Results100% “Harlem Gems” pre-kindergarteners were assessed as “school ready”95% of high school seniors were accepted into college$20 million in scholarships and grants were awarded to our most recent college freshmen4,000+ parents have graduated from The Baby College® parenting workshop series12,316 children served in FY 20131,450 students at Promise Academy Charter Schools12,436 adults served in FY 2013$101 million annual budget in FY 2013 (public and private funds)954 students attending college1.4 million free, healthy lunches and breakfasts served to HCZ children4,000 children getting one hour of exercise daily
95* http://www.promiseneighborhoodsinstitute.org/ CONCENTRATED POVERTYPromising Responses & PracticesPromise Neighborhoods …U.S. Department of Education programs developed to provide funding to support eligible entities including nonprofit organizations; institutions of higher education and Native American tribes to improve educational outcomes for students in distressed urban and rural neighborhoods.Based on the experience of programs such as the Harlem Children’s ZoneIncludes a planning year to develop a comprehensive community program with the specific goal of preparing students for success in college and careers. Planners/applicants must focus on schools in challenged neighborhoods and build services and supports for students from birth through college or career**
96* http://www.promiseneighborhoodsinstitute.org/ CONCENTRATED POVERTYPromising Responses & PracticesPromise NeighborhoodsAs of 2012, Promise Neighborhoods were operating in 20 states and the District of Columbia. Emphases continue to focus on offering children high-quality health, social, community and educational services and support.Other communities are considering the Promise Neighborhoods’ model for replication, without federal support.The Promise Neighborhood Institute at Policy Link* can offer technical assistance to communities (resources, training, tools) in this regard.**
98CONCENTRATED POVERTYPromising Responses & PracticesChoice Neighborhoods programs support locally driven strategies to revitalize neighborhoods by replacing distressed public or HUD-assisted housing* with mixed-income developments.Preceded HOPE VIEmphasizes preserving affordable housing and a more comprehensive approach to neighborhood changeStakeholders and residents come together to create and implement a plan that transforms distressed HUD housing, while simultaneously addressing challenges of vacant housing.Piloted in 2010, is part of the White House Neighborhood Revitalization InitiativeCollaborative, place-based planning for neighborhood revitalization in areas of concentrated poverty.Interim report—An Early Look at Choice Neighborhoods looks at qualitative and quantitative approaches to monitor impacts on five of the original implementation sites*U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development. Choice Neighborhood, April 2014
99CONCENTRATED POVERTYPromising Responses & PracticesThe President’s initiative to designate a number of high-poverty urban, rural and tribal communities as Promise Zones, where the federal government will partner with and invest in communities to create jobs, leverage private investment, increase economic activity, expand educational opportunities, and reduce violent crime.A collaborative effort--between private business and federal, state, and local officials; faith-based and non-profit organizations; and striving kids and parents--to ensure that hard work leads to a decent living for every American in every community.
100Promise Zone Designations CONCENTRATED POVERTYPromising Responses & PracticesPromise Zone DesignationsJanuary 9, 2014, the first urban, rural, and tribal Promise Zones were announced in a ceremony at the White House. They are located in: San Antonio (Eastside Neighborhood), Philadelphia (West Philadelphia), Los Angeles (Neighborhoods of Pico Union, Westlake, Koreatown, Hollywood, and East Hollywood), Southeastern Kentucky (Kentucky Highlands), and the Choctaw Nation in southeast Oklahoma.Fifteen more will be designated by the end of 2016.
101CONCENTRATED POVERTYPromising Responses & PracticesNeighborhood Revitalization Initiative (NRI) an interagency collaborative supporting the Obama administration’s approach to federal engagement in neighborhoods of concentrated poverty. The belief is that this alignment will allow resources to effectively support local community, government, business in creating successful neighborhoods of opportunity.A place-based approach to help distressed communities transform into neighborhoods of opportunities.
102Engages key federal agencies: CONCENTRATED POVERTYPromising Responses & PracticesEngages key federal agencies:U.S. Dept. of Housing & Urban Development (HUD)Dept. of JusticeDept. of Health & Human ServicesNRI strategy seeks to integrate the Choice and Promise Neighborhood programs to ensure federal funds are aligned and local efforts are comprehensive.
103The five programs at the center of the NRI: Choice Neighborhoods CONCENTRATED POVERTYPromising Responses & PracticesThe five programs at the center of the NRI:Choice NeighborhoodsByrne Criminal Justice Innovation (a community-based strategy designed to control and prevent violent crime, drug abuse, gang activity in high-crime neighborhoods across the country)Community Health Centers have provided comprehensive high-quality prevention and primary health care to medically underserved urban and rural communities for four decades.Behavioral Health Community Initiative focuses resources in selected disadvantaged communities seeking to improve outcomes for substance use, mental health prevention, treatment and recovery.
104Strategy 4: Provide Residents with Means to Leave Neighborhoods of Concentrated Poverty
105Traditional section 8 housing To move to a low-poverty neighborhood CONCENTRATED POVERTYPromising Responses & PracticesIn 1992, Congress authorized Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to implement in five cities (Baltimore, Boston, Chicago, Los Angeles, New York) a randomized experiment involving families in public housing, to receive vouchers to use for housing. Three groups were identified and divided, assigned to use vouchers for:Traditional section 8 housingTo move to a low-poverty neighborhoodAs part of a control group(Summary Overview of MTO, a Random Housing Assignment Mobility Study,
106Findings of a follow-up study of MTO: CONCENTRATED POVERTYPromising Responses & PracticesFindings of a follow-up study of MTO:Improved neighborhood outcomes...assignment to the MTO mobility groups led participating adults to feel safer and more satisfied with their housing and neighborhoodHad no effect on the labor market outcomes or social program participation of adults, but improved adults' mental health and some aspects of physical healthImproved outcomes for female youth, but on balance, had deleterious effects on male youths’ risky behaviorHad no detectable effects on the math and reading achievement of children (A Summary Overview of Moving To Opportunity)
107ReferencesAtkinson, R., & Kintrea, K. (2004). Opportunities and despair, it’s all in there: Practitioner experiences and explanations of area effects and life chances. Sociology 38 (3), ppBryk, A., Sebring, B.P., Allensworth, E., Luppescu, S., Easton, Q. J., (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Lessons from Chicago. Chicago: University of ChicagoDitomaso, N. (2013). The American non-dilemma. Russell SageCasselman, B. (2014). The poorest corner of town.Cortright, J. & Mahmoudi, D. (2014). Lost in Place: Why the persistence and spread of concentrated poverty--not gentrification--is our biggest urban challenge.Harding, D.J. (2003). Counterfactual Models of Neighborhood effects: The effect of neighborhood poverty on dropping out and teenage pregnancy. American Journal of Sociology 109;Hogrebe, M., Tate, W. (2010). School Composition and Context factors that moderate and predict 10th grade science proficiency, Teachers College Record, 112, 4.Jargosky, P.A. (2013). Concentration of poverty in the new millennium: Changes in the prevalence, composition, and location of high-poverty neighborhoods. New York: The Century Foundation. Retrieved from the-new-millenniumKennedy, M.M., et al. (1986). Poverty, Achievement and the distribution of compensatory education services: an interim report from the national assessment of Chapter 1, Office of Educational Research and Improvement, Washington D. C.
108References (cont.)Kneebone, E. & Berube, A. (2013). Confronting suburban poverty in America: Brooking Press.Kneebone, E. (2014). The growth and spread of concentrated poverty, 2000 to BrookingsPRRAC, Annotated bibliography: The impact of school based poverty concentrated on academic achievement and student outcomesRoger, J. & Mirra, N. (2014). It’s About Time: Learning Time and Educational Opportunity in California High Schools Royster, D. (2003). Race and the invisible hand. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press. Massey, D., & Denton, A.N. (1998) American Apartheid: segregation and the making of the underclass. Harvard University Press.Meade, E. (2014). Overview of community characteristics in areas with concentrated poverty. ASPE Research Brief. Department of Health and Human Services.Nauer, K., et al. (2014). A better picture of poverty: What chronic absenteeism and risk load reveal about NYC’s lowest-income elementary schools.Lichter, D.T., & Parisi, D. (2008). Concentrated Rural poverty and the geography of exclusion. Report, Carsey InstituteSharkey, P. (2013). Stuck in place: Urban neighborhoods and the end of progress toward racial equality. University of Chicago Press.Wilkerson, I. (2011) The warmth of other suns: the epic story of America’s great migration. Random House.Wilson, W.J. (1987). The truly disadvantaged; the inner city, the underclass, and public policy: University of ChicagoYoung, A.A. (2003). Social isolation, and concentration effects: William Julius Wilson revisited and re-applied, Ethnic and Racial Studies 26 (6)