Commonwealth’s geography of opportunity - Building Opportunities in Massachusetts

Executive Summary
The following report assesses the “State of Opportunity” in Massachusetts. An “opportunity mapping”
analysis was commissioned and funded by the Massachusetts Legal Services Programs`.
Representatives of the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute and the Legal Aid programs in
Massachusetts worked with The Kirwan Institute for the Study of Race & Ethnicity at The Ohio State
University to conduct the analysis. Opportunity mapping analyzes the distribution of opportunity in
metropolitan areas utilizing state‐of‐the‐art Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and
extensive data sets.
The Kirwan Institute has become a national leader in conducting opportunity
mapping to support social and racial justice initiatives.

The goal of the Massachusetts opportunity mapping initiative was to understand how low‐income
groups and racial and ethnic populations were situated in the Commonwealth’s geography of
opportunity. The initiative provides not only a tool to support advocacy and policy reform but also an
analytical lens to view the challenges and potential remedies for legal aid clients in the State of Massachusetts.
A high quality education, a healthy and safe environment, sustainable employment, political
empowerment and outlets for wealth‐building are the essential opportunities needed to succeed, thrive
and excel in our 21st‐century society. Decades of social science research support the finding that
neighborhood conditions play a substantial role in the life outcomes of inhabitants.

Although individual characteristics play a role in determining who excels in our society, neighborhood conditions are critical
in promoting or impeding people, even the most motivated individuals. The cumulative impact of having
access to these levers of opportunity can be profound. Although personal motivation and individual
determination can help people transcend the impediments in depressed communities, these strivers are
the exception and not the norm. By assuring access to these critical opportunity structures we
dramatically increase the likelihood that people can meet their full development potential, benefiting
both the individual and society as a whole.
Unfortunately, access to these critical building blocks of opportunity is not equal or even possible for
many people. This isolation from opportunity is even more pronounced for people living in low income
communities, especially communities of color. Many low income communities are deprived of the
essential elements needed to promote advancement and success in our society. The stakes are
tremendous and have substantial impact on our society: will a child growing up in public housing in a
distressed inner‐city neighborhood end up in college, or victimized by crime or incarcerated? To remain
economically vibrant, competitive and healthy, the Commonwealth must nurture and develop its most
important asset, namely its people and human capital. The Commonwealth cannot achieve this goal
unless it confronts these barriers to opportunity, which impede the success and development of so
many of its residents.

Opportunity Mapping:


The opportunity mapping analysis demonstrated that:
1. Racialized isolation from neighborhoods of opportunity is very evident in Massachusetts. The
degree of racial isolation in low opportunity areas in the Commonwealth is one of the highest
rates of “opportunity segregation” found in an opportunity mapping analysis conducted by the
Kirwan Institute. Substantial racial segregation can be found in the Commonwealth’s low
opportunity communities for African‐Americans and Latinos.
• More than 90% of African‐American and Latino households in 2000 were isolated in the
lowest opportunity neighborhoods in the Commonwealth. The extent of isolation for
African‐American and Latino households was one of the highest rates of isolation
recorded in any of our previous opportunity mapping analyses.
• Some segregation was found for Asian households as well, with over 55% of Asian
households found in low‐opportunity communities.
See Appendix C for a review of literature supporting the importance of neighborhood factors in predicting and impacting
development and life outcomes.
All population figures cited in this section are derived from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2000 Census of Population and Housing.
For all maps and analyses conducted as part of this initiative, please visit: Page 5
In contrast, only 31% of White, Non‐Latino households were found in the low opportunity communities.
Racial isolation into low‐opportunity neighborhoods is far more pronounced than class based
segregation into these low‐opportunity communities. The finding suggests that while both race
and class play a role in who has access to high‐opportunity communities, race may play a
stronger role than class in heightening isolation into low‐opportunity neighborhoods in
Massachusetts.
• Low‐income Whites were not as concentrated in low‐opportunity communities as other
races. Only 42% of low‐income White households were living in low‐opportunity
communities, while approximately 33% of low‐income White households were living in
high‐opportunity communities. This concentration into low‐opportunity neighborhoods
was significantly more pronounced for low‐income Asian, African‐American and Latino
households. More than 95% of low‐income Latinos, 93% of low‐income African
Americans and 71% of low‐income Asians were found in the State’s low‐opportunity
neighborhoods.
• This opportunity segregation was also found for high‐income African‐American and
Latino households. Approximately 90% of high‐income African‐American and Latino
households were isolated in low‐opportunity neighborhoods, compared to just 20% of
high‐income White households. This shows empirically that higher incomes simply do
not translate into increased neighborhood opportunities for people of color, highlighting
the importance of both desegregating high‐opportunity White areas, and bringing
investment into distressed, racially‐isolated communities.
3. Non‐native born African and Latino residents were found to be disproportionately concentrated
in low‐opportunity neighborhoods in 2000.
• Non‐native residents from Africa and Latin American were far more likely to be
concentrated in the State’s low‐opportunity neighborhoods than immigrants from
Europe or Asia. Only 42% of European‐born and 46% of Asian‐born residents were found
in the State’s low‐opportunity neighborhoods. In contrast, over 70% of non‐native born
African and Latin American households were concentrated in the State’s low‐
opportunity neighborhoods.


Analysis of Federally Subsidized Housing:

Due to the critical importance of affordable housing in providing access to opportunity, the
Massachusetts opportunity mapping initiative also analyzed the current supply of subsidized housing in
the State in relation to the condition of communities in which subsidized housing was found. Housing is
more than just shelter – rather, it is a strategic intervention point into opportunity and advancement for
marginalized populations. The results suggest that:
• Massachusetts’s federally subsidized housing supply is isolated from many high
opportunity neighborhoods. The Commonwealth’s low‐opportunity neighborhoods
(which represent 2/5 of the total census tracts in the State) contained over three‐
fourths of the number of subsidized housing units in the HUD 2000 Picture of Subsidized
Non‐native residents are defined as residents who self identified as “foreign born” in the 2000 Census.

The Geography of Opportunity:

Building Communities of Opportunity In Massachusetts
January 2009 Housing data set. Nearly 70% of the subsidized housing sites or projects in the State
were found in the low‐opportunity communities. While only 15,000 units of subsidized
housing were located in the high opportunity communities, nearly 100,000 units were
located in the low‐opportunity communities.
Recommendations:
Massachusetts should adopt strategies to open up access to the “levers” of opportunity for marginalized
individuals, families and communities. One model of remedying opportunity isolation is the
“Communities of Opportunity” model, a fair‐housing and community development framework that
attempts to remedy these disparities while growing opportunity for all people in the region. The model
emphasizes investments in people, places, and linkages. Massachusetts can build human capital through
improved wealth‐building, educational achievement, and social and political empowerment.
Massachusetts should:
• support neighborhood development and reinvestment initiatives that attract jobs with living wages and advancement opportunities;
• demand high‐quality local services for all neighborhoods, including high‐performing local public schools;
• encourage better links among people and places, fostering mobility through high‐quality public transportation services and region‐wide housing mobility programs;
• and manage sprawling growth, in order to reduce the drain of jobs and resources from existing communities.