Reduced federal funding has already begun to squeeze local governments. Despite federal retrenchment, however, cities and counties can remain engines of progress by funding ideas proven to strengthen economic opportunity. Evidence-based policymaking evaluates the real-world impact of policies and programs, directing resources toward proven ideas and away from ineffective ones.
Local leaders have long been at the forefront of answering challenging questions on how to address poverty: Should treatment be a prerequisite for people experiencing homelessness? Are guaranteed-income programs effective? We know that intuition and ideology often get it wrong. Evidence cuts through rhetoric and partisan ideology, revealing what actually helps people. And much of that progress has come from the local level across the political spectrum.
In Santa Clara County, Calif., for example, providing emergency financial assistance to families at imminent risk of losing housing reduced homelessness by 81 percent, according to a randomized study by researchers at Notre Dame. The county saw $2.47 in benefits for every dollar invested, made the program a permanent part of its budget and has since served more than 15,000 people through this proven prevention strategy.
In Tarrant County, Texas, a randomized study tested a comprehensive case management program that paired low-income adults with mentors to develop plans for long-term economic self-sufficiency. After two years, participants in this program, run by Catholic Charities, were 25 percent more likely to have full-time employment.
Evidence can also reveal when certain ideas fall short. In Denver, a randomized study found that giving people experiencing homelessness $12,000 a year did not reduce homelessness compared to those receiving only $600 a year. Faced with an extremely tight budget, the Denver City Council opted not to renew the Denver Basic Income Project, which freed up scarce resources toward potentially more effective strategies.
Such decisions are rarely easy; redirecting resources toward effective programs requires courage and creativity to overcome inertia and rigid budgeting processes. But these examples underscore a larger truth: Amid a tumultuous political landscape, most Americans ultimately care about results they can see in their own local communities. They want their local government to deliver safer neighborhoods, healthier families, better schools and stronger job opportunities.
By producing visible results through evidence-based programs, local leaders are demonstrating that government can still be a force for good. For communities struggling with low wages, local leaders should fund sector-based job training programs that target high-growth industries, provide a credential, and teach both soft and technical skills. These programs, such as Per Scholas’ IT training program, have been proven to increase cumulative earnings for non-college-educated workers over 10 years.
For cities looking to help low-income young people gain skills for the working world while also reducing youth justice involvement, we know from rigorous evidence in New York, Chicago, Philadelphia and Boston that summer youth employment programs work. This evidence led Boston Mayor Michelle Wu to guarantee a summer job for every Boston public school student.
Local government leaders don’t have to act alone in the fight against poverty. Universities, philanthropic organizations and technical assistance providers are eager to help local leaders identify and scale what works — often pro bono. For example, Results for America’s County Evidence-Based Budgeting Guide describes how to embed evidence into the budgeting process.
To address poverty, local leaders also need not reinvent the wheel. For an expanding playbook of evidence-based programs, local government leaders should consult Results for America’s Economic Mobility Catalog, J-PAL’s Policy Insights and the Bloomberg Cities Idea Exchange.
Federal priorities may shift, but the fight against poverty has always drawn its strength from the ground up. When local leaders invest in what works to strengthen economic opportunity, they show their constituents that government can deliver — one community at a time.
Vincent Quan is the co-executive director of J-PAL North America, the Abdul Latif Jameel Poverty Action Lab at Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT). J-PAL North America conducts rigorous scientific research to identify what works to reduce poverty.
Governing's opinion columns reflect the views of their authors and not necessarily those of Governing's editors or management.
Related Articles
