Children in New York City are healthier since the start of Pre-K for All, study finds

Pre-K for All improves student lives in NYC

Article Link: Children in New York City are healthier since the start of Pre-K for All, study finds

Study Link: Seeing and Hearing: The Impacts of New York City’s Universal Prekindergarten Program on the Health of Low-Income Children

Prior research suggests that high quality universal pre-kindergarten (UPK) programs can generate lifetime benefits, but the mechanisms generating these effects are not well-understood.

In 2014, New York City made all 4-year-old children eligible for high-quality UPK programs that emphasized developmental screening. We examine the effect of this program on the health and healthcare utilization of children enrolled in Medicaid using a difference-in-regression discontinuity design that exploits both the introduction of UPK and the fixed age cut-off for enrollment.

The introduction of UPK increased the probability that a child was diagnosed with asthma or with vision problems, received treatment for hearing or vision problems, or received a screening during the prekindergarten year. UPK accelerated the timing of diagnoses of vision problems.

We do not find any increases in injuries, infectious diseases, or overall utilization. These effects are not offset by lower screening rates in the kindergarten year, suggesting that one mechanism through which UPK might generate benefits is that it accelerates the rate at which children are identified with conditions that could potentially delay learning and cause behavioral problems. We do not find significant effects of having a child who was eligible for UPK on mothers’ health, fertility, or healthcare utilization.

Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination

This is an older Correspondence Testing Experiment from from National Bureau of Economic Research 2003.   But not a bad introduction on Correspondence Testing.

Research Link: Are Emily and Greg More Employable than Lakisha and Jamal? A Field Experiment on Labor Market Discrimination Marianne Bertrand, Sendhil Mullainathan

We perform a field experiment to measure racial discrimination in the labor market. We respond with fictitious resumes to help-wanted ads in Boston and Chicago newspapers. To manipulate perception of race, each resume is assigned either a very African American sounding name or a very White sounding name.

The results show significant discrimination against African-American names: White names receive 50 percent more callbacks for interviews. We also find that race affects the benefits of a better resume. For White names, a higher quality resume elicits 30 percent more callbacks whereas for African Americans, it elicits a far smaller increase. Applicants living in better neighborhoods receive more callbacks but, interestingly, this effect does not differ by race. The amount of discrimination is uniform across occupations and industries.

Federal contractors and employers who list Equal Opportunity Employer’ in their ad discriminate as much as other employers. We find little evidence that our results are driven by employers inferring something other than race, such as social class, from the names. These results suggest that racial discrimination is still a prominent feature of the labor market.