The number of K–12 students experiencing homelessness is increasing across the country. Schools may serve as sources of support and stability for homeless children, but little is known about the types of schools that homeless students attend or about the communities in which they live. We investigate the context of student homelessness in Los Angeles by analyzing student-level administrative data from the Los Angeles Unified School District and publicly available data on neighborhoods and schools from school years 2008–2009 to 2016–2017. Our findings suggest that homeless students tend to be clustered within lower-achieving schools with higher concentrations of disadvantaged student groups and live in neighborhoods with higher concentrated disadvantage. Despite policy provisions to ensure stability, homeless students have high rates of school and residential mobility in the years they are homeless, and mobile students tend to move to less-disadvantaged schools. We conclude with policy implications to strengthen the implementation of the federal McKinney-Vento Act.
AcockAlan C.2013. Discovering structural equation modeling using Stata. College Station, TX: Stata Press. doi:10.1080/10538712.2011.607753.
2.
Burdick-WillJuliaLudwigJensRaudenbushStephen W.SampsonRobert J.SanbonmatsuLisaSharkeyPatrick. 2011. Converging evidence for neighborhood effects on children’s test scores: An experimental, quasi-experimental, and observational comparison. In Whither opportunity? Rising inequality, schools, and children’s life chances, eds. DuncanGreg J.MurnaneRichard J. New York, NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
3.
California Department of Education (CDE) and Los Angeles County Office of Educaiton (LACOE). 2018. Access to higher education: Students experiencing homelessness. Los Angeles, CA: CDE and LACOE. doi:10.4324/9781351024662.
4.
ChettyRajHendrenNathanielKatzLawrence F. 2016. The effects of exposure to better neighborhoods on children: New evidence from the Moving to Opportunity experiment. American Economic Review106 (4): 855–902.
5.
ColemanJames S.1988. Social capital in the creation of human capital. American Journal of Sociology94:95–120.
6.
ColemanJames S.CampbellErnest Q.HobsonCarol J.McPartlandJamesMoodAlexander M.WeinfeldFrederic D.YorkRobert L. 1966. Equality of educational opportunity. Washington, DC: National Center for Educational Statistics. Available from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED012275.pdf.
7.
CordesSarah A.SchwartzAmy EllenStiefelLeanna. 2019. The effect of residential mobility on student performance: Evidence from New York City. American Educational Research Journal56 (4): 1380–1411.
8.
CordesSarah A.SchwartzAmy EllenStiefelLeannaZabelJeffrey. 2016. Is neighbourhood destiny? Exploring the link between neighbourhood mobility and student outcomes. Urban Studies53 (2): 400–417.
9.
CowenJoshua M.2017. Who are the homeless? Student mobility and achievement in Michigan 2010–2013. Educational Researcher46 (1). doi:10.3102/0013189X17694165.
10.
CulhaneDennis P.LeeChang-MooWachterSusan M. 1996. Where the homeless come from: A study of the prior address distribution of families admitted to public shelters in New York City and Philadelphia. Housing Policy Debate7 (2): 327–65.
11.
De GregorioSoledadDhaliwalTasminda K.OwensAnnPainterGary. 2020. Growing up homeless: Student homelessness and educational outcomes in Los Angeles. EdWorkingPaper 20-334, Annenberg Institute at Brown University, Providence, RI. Available from https://doi.org/10.26300/zrf9-2v95.
12.
EdwardsEarl J.2020. Young, Black, successful, and homeless: Examining the unique academic challenges of Black students who experienced homelessness. Journal of Children and Poverty, June: 1–25. doi:10.1080/10796126.2020.1776688.
13.
FantuzzoJohn W.LeBoeufWhitney A.ChenChin-ChihRouseHeather L.CulhaneDennis P. 2012. The unique and combined effects of homelessness and school mobility on the educational outcomes of young children. Educational Researcher41 (9): 393–402.
14.
FargoJamison D.MunleyEllen A.ByrneThomas H.MontgomeryAnn ElizabethCulhaneDennis P. 2013. Community-level characteristics associated with variation in rates of homelessness among families and single adults. American Journal of Public Health103 (52). doi:10.2105/AJPH.2013.301619.
15.
GonzalezRene. 2016. Educational rights and guidelines for youth in foster care, experiencing homelessness and/or involved in the juvenile justice system. Los Angeles, CA: Los Angeles Unified School District.
16.
HanushekEric A.KainJohn F.RivkinSteven G. 2004. Disruption versus Tiebout improvement: The costs and benefits of switching schools. Journal of Public Economics88 (9–10): 1721–46.
17.
JacobBrian A.2004. Public housing, housing vouchers, and student achievement: Evidence from public housing demolitions in Chicago. American Economic Review94 (1): 233–58.
18.
JencksChristopherMayerSusan E. 1990. The social consequences of growing up in a poor neighborhood. In Inner-city poverty in the United States, 111–86. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
19.
KerbowDavid. 1996. Patterns of urban student mobility and local school reform. Washington, DC. doi:10.1207/s15327671espr0102_5.
20.
LeeBarrett A.Price-SpratlenTownsand. 2004. The geography of homelessness in American communities: Concentration or dispersion?City and Community3 (1): 3–27.
21.
MasseyDouglas S.DentonNancy A. 1988. The dimensions of residential segregation. Social Forces67 (2): 281–315.
22.
MastenAnn S.SesmaArturoSi-AsarRekhetLawrenceCatherineMiliotisDonnaDionneJacqueline A. 1997. Educational risks for children experiencing homelessness. Journal of School Psychology35 (1): 27–46.
23.
McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, Title IX, Part A of the Every Student Succeeds Act, 42 (2015).
24.
National Association for the Education of Homeless Children and Youth. 2010. A critical moment: Child & youth homelessness in our aation’s schools. Minneapolis, MN: National Association for the Education of Homeless Children and Youth.
25.
National Center for Homeless Education. 2019. Federal data summary school years 2014-2015 to 2016-17: Education for homeless children and youth. Greensboro, NC: National Association for the Education of Homeless Children and Youth.
26.
OwensAnn. 2010. Neighborhoods and schools as competing and reinforcing contexts for educational attainment. Sociology of Education83 (4): 287–311.
27.
OwensAnnCandipanJennifer. 2020. Social and spatial inequalities of educational opportunity: A portrait of schools serving high- and low-income neighbourhoods in US metropolitan areas. Urban Studies56 (15): 3178–97.
28.
QuigleyJohn M.RaphaelStevenSmolenskyEugene. 1999. Homeless in America, homeless in California. Journal of Urban History25 (2): 258–70.
29.
ParolinZachary. 2021. Income support policies and the rise of student and family homelessness. The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science (this volume).
30.
RaffertyYvonneShinnMarybeth. 1991. The impact of homelessness on children. American Psychologist51 (6): 721–36.
31.
RumbergerRussell W.LarsonKatharine A.ReamRobert K.PalardyGregory J. 1999. The educational consequences of mobility for California students and schools. PACE Policy Brief, Policy Analysis for California Education, Berkeley, CA.
32.
SastryNarayan. 2012. Neighborhood effects on children’s achievement: A review of recent research. In The Oxford handbook of poverty and child development, 1–53. London: Oxford University Press.
33.
SchwartzAmy EllenStiefelLeannaCordesSarah A. 2017. Moving matters: The causal effect of moving schools on student performance. Education Finance and Policy, November: 87. doi:10.1162/EDFP.
34.
SharkeyPatrickFaberJacob W. 2014. Where, when, why, and for whom do residential contexts matter ? Moving away from the dichotomous understanding of neighborhood effects. Annual Review of Sociology40. doi:10.1146/annurev-soc-071913-043350.
35.
SwansonChristopher B.SchneiderBarbara. 1999. Students on the move: Residential and educational mobility in America’s schools. Sociology of Education72 (1): 54–67.
WelshRichard O.2017. School hopscotch: A comprehensive review of K–12 student mobility in the United States. Review of Educational Research87 (3): 475–511.
38.
XuZeyaHannawayJaneD’SouzaStephanie. 2009. Student transience in North Carolina: The effect of school mobility on student outcomes using longitudinal data. Washington, DC: National Center for Analysis of Longitudinal Data in Eduation Research.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
