{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.029069767441860465, 'fraction_numerical': 0.01744186046511628, 'mean_word_length': 6.057377049180328, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Did Immigrant Incorporation Overcome Structural Discrimination in Federal Place-based Antipoverty Implementation?

ABSTRACT Most antipoverty programs target people. In the 1990s, the Federal government launched place-based initiatives to direct resources to places with high poverty to address decades of structural discrimination and segregation. Immigrant incorporation theory suggests that local receptivity varies depending on if places are homogenous, bifurcated (i.e., two racialized or ethnic populations), or multiethnic. Multivariate analysis of annual reports (n = 127) from 1996– 2008 and Census population data find that Hispanic enclaves, bifurcated Hispanic places (as opposed to multiracial), and those with increasing immigrant populations are more likely to have immigrant-friendly projects. Implications for policy and practice are discussed.