There is no conflict of interest.
Citation
Cruz, M. D. (2020). Do Investments in Places Benefit People in Poverty? A Case Study of San Antonio's Eastside Promise Zone. Doctoral dissertation, University of Texas at San Antonio.
Highlights
- The study's objective was to examine the impact of San Antonio's Eastside Promise Zone (EPZ) initiative on employment.
- The study used a difference-in-differences design to compare the employment outcomes of residents in the EPZ to residents in a comparable area in the city (non-EPZ). The author used American Community Survey data and statistical models to compare the difference in outcomes from 2013 to 2018 between the groups.
- The study found a significant relationship between the EPZ and decreased employment.
- This study receives a low evidence rating. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to San Antonio's Eastside Promise Zone; other factors are likely to have contributed.
This page has been updated to comply with Executive Order 14168.
Intervention Examined
Eastside Promise Zone
Features of the Intervention
In 2014, President Obama launched the federal Promise Zone program where the federal government partners with local leaders to encourage economic growth in struggling urban and rural areas. San Antonio, Texas was selected as one of five U.S. communities to receive this designation and focused on a 22 square mile area in the city's east side. The Eastside Promise Zone (EPZ) aimed to reduce poverty and improve education, create jobs and training opportunities, increase affordable housing, reduce crime, and expand economic opportunities through partnerships among government agencies, local organizations, and residents. The EPZ worked to reduce poverty and unemployment by providing adult education resources, improving K-12 education, partnering with local colleges, and expanding childcare resources. The initiative was designed to help adults and children living in poverty.
Features of the Study
The study used a difference-in-differences design to compare the outcomes of residents in the EPZ census tract (treatment group) with residents from nearby and similar non-EPZ census tracts (comparison group). There were 19 census tracts designated as the EPZ, while 44 were classified as non-EPZ. In 2010, 35% of individuals residing in the EPZ lived in poverty, compared to approximately 33% of those in the non-EPZ. The author used data from the American Community Survey for the years 2013 and 2018 to compare the changes in outcomes between the treatment group and the comparison group.
Findings
Employment
- The study found a significant negative relationship between the EPZ and employment, with lower employment rates in EPZ tracts compared to non-EPZ tracts.
Considerations for Interpreting the Findings
The author included controls in the statistical model for sex, race/ethnicity, education level, and household income; however, the model did not control for age as required by the protocol. Therefore, the study is not eligible for a moderate causal evidence rating, the highest rating available for nonexperimental designs.
Causal Evidence Rating
The quality of causal evidence presented in this report is low because the author did not include sufficient controls in the analysis. This means we are not confident that the estimated effects are attributable to San Antonio's Eastside Promise Zone; other factors are likely to have contributed.