We are proud to announce six new research grants, totaling over $2.9 million, in support of five studies on ways to reduce inequality in youth outcomes and one study on strategies for improving the use of research evidence in ways that benefit young people. Approved at the most recent meeting of the Foundation’s Trustees, these grants will help build theory and empirical evidence in our two focus areas.
In the reducing inequality focus area, studies will investigate how schools reduce racial and economic inequalities in absenteeism and in punitive discipline for absenteeism; whether a culturally adapted evidence-based parent-child intervention might improve outcomes for Black children diagnosed with a disruptive behavior disorder; whether an informational outreach intervention might increase uptake in the use of housing stabilization services by low-income families; if recent changes in Puerto Rico’s tax policies reduced economic inequality among residents of the island; and the impact of school board election timing on racial and ethnic inequality in K-12 student academic achievement outcomes.
The study in the use of research evidence focus area will build on a previous Foundation-funded project to examine whether an intervention for research outreach to county policymakers improves their access to and use of research evidence on matters affecting youth and families.
“These studies will not only examine exciting and innovative strategies for reducing inequality, but their findings will also yield insights that can inform policy and practice decisions in youth-serving systems. They will surely deepen our understanding of ways to improve youth outcomes,” said Senior Program Officer Jenny Irons, who oversees grants on reducing inequality.
“Day and Levine’s previous work has provided tremendous insights on the ways in-person outreach facilitate relationship building with county policymakers. We are excited to see how this study will further contribute to our knowledge on scalability of these strategies to improve evidence use in local policymaking,” said Program Officer Anupreet Sidhu, who oversees grants on improving the use of research evidence.
Grants for Research on Reducing Inequality
Moving the Needle on School Attendance and Truancy: A Study of Maryland’s Bright Spot Middle and High Schools
Joshua Childs, Dept. of Education Leadership & Policy, University of Texas, Austin; Clea McNeely, College of Nursing, University of Tennessee, Knoxville
11/1/2025–10/31/2028, $540,000
How do schools reduce racial and economic inequalities in absenteeism and in punitive discipline for absenteeism?
Black and Latinx students and students from low-income families are disproportionately affected by punitive responses to absenteeism because they are more likely to miss school and their absences are more likely to be labelled as unexcused. While changes in attendance policies and practices have improved attendance rates and reduced punitive discipline for absenteeism on average, they have not reduced these racial and economic inequalities. Using from the Maryland Department of Education and the Maryland Department of Juvenile Services, this study will identify and examine “bright spot” middle and high schools, i.e., those that have sustained relatively high attendance for students from all racial and economic backgrounds (or all student groups, whatever you think is best to say here) for several years while also equitably reducing punitive responses to absenteeism. Childs, McNeely, and colleagues will use a synthetic difference-in-differences model with matched samples at a subsequent point in time to estimate the causal impact of bright spot schools on reducing inequality in unexcused absences, truancy, and suspensions in subsequent school years. The quantitative component will inform the selection of case study schools for an in-depth qualitative examination of strategies that appear to support some student groups but not others. Findings can illuminate promising approaches to reducing racial and economic inequalities in absenteeism and in punitive responses to absenteeism.
Reducing Mental Health Disparities in Black Children: Testing a Cultural Adaptation of Parent-Child Interaction Therapy
Erica Coates, Dept. of Psychiatry, Georgetown University
7/1/2026–6/30/2029, $599,995
Does a culturally adapted evidence-based parent-child intervention improve outcomes for Black children diagnosed with a disruptive behavior disorder to reduce racial inequalities in disciplinary and academic outcomes?
Black children experience disproportionately high rates of disruptive behavior disorders and punitive discipline but few options for well-matched care. Parent-Child Interaction Therapy (PCIT) is a well-established, evidence-based treatment for behavior disorders, but it lacks demonstrated efficacy with Black families. This study will evaluate Cultivating Optimal African American Child Health (COAACH), a culturally adapted version of PCIT that Coates developed with input from Black families and clinicians. COAACH promotes positive parent-child relationships to nurture positive development, reduce disruptive behaviors, and strengthen ethnic-racial socialization to protect against racial bias and discrimination. Coates will use a randomized-controlled trial design with 80 parent-child dyads equally assigned to receive COAACH or PCIT. To compare engagement levels, the team will collect data on attendance, compliance with assigned homework, and attrition via electronic medical records and clinicians. The team will use linear mixed-effects models to analyze data on child disruptive behaviors, parent-child relationship, ethnic-racial socialization, and racial identity from caregivers, children, and teachers at three time-points: pre-intervention, post-intervention, and six months post-intervention. Finally, the team will examine interviews with caregivers from the treatment and control groups to explore how families experience COAACH versus PCIT. Findings can offer insight into a culturally responsive intervention that could be integrated into multiple youth-serving systems to improve outcomes for Black youth.
Reducing Inequalities in Eviction Outcomes: A Mixed-Methods Study on Connecting Renters to Housing Stability Resources
Elizabeth Linos, Harvard Kennedy School, Harvard University
11/1/2025–10/31/2028, $537,224
Can a timely and targeted informational outreach intervention increase uptake in the use of housing stabilization services by low-income families and reduce evictions?
Of the nearly four million people across the country that face eviction each year, Black households and families with children are affected disproportionately. Eviction can have long-lasting adverse impacts on children’s development, including their mental health, physical health, and academic performance. While low-income renters can access a range of governmental housing stabilization services, barriers like learning costs, compliance costs, and psychological costs prevent take-up. In partnership with the Boston Office of Housing Stability, this study will randomly assign and evaluate a light-touch outreach intervention as a strategy to connect low-income renters who are imminently facing eviction to housing stabilization resources. The study will include all Boston renters who receive a “Notice to Quit” (NTQ) or an eviction filing over at least a 12-month period. Renters who receive an NTQ will receive one of two different mail-based outreach messages, with staggered timing to generate a treatment and comparison group. Renters who receive an eviction filing will be assigned to one of three conditions: a control group that does not receive outreach or one of two mail-based outreach conditions with different messages. Understanding whether and for whom this approach works will help inform program design in Boston, as well as broader strategies for reaching low-income families who could benefit from housing stabilization services.
The Impact of Tax Policies on Youth Inequality in Puerto Rico: A Granular Analysis Using Decomposable Metrics
Daniel Santamaría Ots and Joshua Villafañe Delgado, Espacios Abiertos Puerto Rico Inc.
8/1/2025-7/31/2027, $250,000
Have recent changes in Puerto Rico’s tax policies reduced economic inequality among residents of the island?
Income inequality among Puerto Rican youth represents a persistent structural challenge that compromises the island’s capacity for economic development. Young adults ages 19-24 are disproportionately affected by high unemployment, stagnant wages, precarious employment, and geographic disparities in opportunity. This study will examine whether two tax policy interventions—one exempting workers ages 16-26 from income taxation up to $40,000 (Law 135-2014), and the other an expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit to childless young adults—reduce income inequality among young adults in Puerto Rico. The team will use administrative tax data from the Puerto Rico Department of Treasury and a synthetic birth cohort methodology to evaluate both within-group and between-group inequality. Within-group analysis will assess whether the expansion of the Earned Income Tax Credit to childless young adults and whether Law 135-2014, which exempts workers ages 16-26 from income taxation up to $40,000, reduce income inequality among 19-24-year-olds by narrowing disparities across the labor income distribution. Between-group analysis will determine whether these policies disproportionately benefit or neglect this age group relative to adjacent cohorts. Findings will contribute to research on the potential of youth-focused tax policies to reduce economic inequalities and inform legislative discussions in Puerto Rico.
The Impact of School Board Election Timing Policies on Educational Equity
Beth Schueler, Education and Public Policy, University of Virginia; Melissa Arnold Lyon, University at Albany; Joshua Bleiberg, University of Pittsburgh
11/1/2025-10/31/2028, $299,083
What is the impact of school board election timing on racial and ethnic inequality in K-12 student academic achievement outcomes?
School boards in the U.S. make a variety of important decisions about K-12 education policy. Race-based educational inequality is likely due in part to inequality in political voice: If Black and Latinx community members are not well represented in the educational decision-making process, the interests of their children may not be prioritized by elected officials. Many school board elections are held at a different time from national elections, which substantially decreases voter turnout overall and makes the electorate less representative of the student population. This study will examine whether holding school board elections on-cycle increases the representation of Black and Latinx voters, which may result in the election of school board members who better represent the interests of Black and Latinx youth. Data will include districts in 39 states, with election timing data come from original tracking of election dates and contact with election officials. Academic achievement data and covariates will be drawn from the Stanford Education Data Archive, and data on descriptive representation will come from an original collection of winning board candidates. Finally, voter turnout data will come from historical voter data. The team will use event study methods and exploit variation in election timing across time and place to explore policy effects on educational equity, both within and between districts. They will capitalize on concentrations in district-level shifts from off- to on-cycle elections that occurred in five states, along with within-state shifts at the district level to learn more about the impact and mechanisms through which election time does or does not impact racial inequality in achievement. Findings will shed light on whether shifts in local political processes can create conditions that are more likely to produce policies that reduce racial and ethnic educational inequalities.
Grants for Research on Improving the Use of Research Evidence
Strengthening Connections Between Researchers and Policymakers: Testing the Scalability of a Local-level Intervention
Elizabeth Day, College of Education, University of Oregon; Adam Levine, Dept. of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins University
11/1/2025-10/31/2028, $689,452
Does a county-focused intervention for research outreach to county policymakers increase their use of research evidence on matters affecting youth and families?
In the more than 3,000 county governments across the country, county policymakers have substantial authority on matters that directly affect youth and families. With increasing mandates for research use in policy and the recent shifts in the federal government landscape, county policymakers have a greater need to collaborate with researchers to navigate complex research literature and inform policymaking efforts for youth. At the same time, county policymakers’ part-time schedules and labor shortages in county governments limit resources to support research use. This randomized-controlled trial addresses these shortcomings by scaling an intervention to facilitate relationship-building between evidence synthesis researchers and county legislators, thus lessening the distance between research and key decision makers. The team will assess intervention processes, researchers’ knowledge and beliefs about local policymaking, policymakers’ use of research evidence and research reach. It is informed by findings from the team’s previous Foundation-funded study, which found that in-person outreach by researchers is an effective strategy to build relationships with county policymakers.
