Motivation for Research:
Having been a staffer on Capitol Hill and watching passage of the Affordable Care Act were milestones in my career. However, I soon learned that passing policy was one thing, implementing it successfully was another. For almost a year, I worked on implementation of the Affordable Car Act for a healthcare Assocation. That experience, along with studying the cornucopia of systems in the rest of the world (it actually isn't a monolith of single-payer systems) made me curious about the comparative advantages, disadvantages and counterfactuals of adopting certain types of programs.  

Abstract:
Nations that guarantee universal access to healthcare for its citizens use one of three systems categories: single-payer, two-tiered (e.g., public options), or a private insurance mandate. While the advantages and disadvantages within each system have been debated in abstract and theoretical terms, empirical comparative research between these systems in lacking. In 2006, The Netherlands restructured its healthcare delivery by moving from a public option to a private insurance mandate. The goal of the reform was to improve efficiency in healthcare management. Numerous studies indicate the program achieved this goal as cost-controls and competition led to a decrease in spending rate increases. Currently, The Netherlands is ranked among the highest in the OECD bloc for both cost-effectiveness and patient satisfaction. However, the impact the reforms had on health outcomes has never been formally evaluated-- leaving open the question of whether health quality was sacrificed for cost savings.

This paper uses the synthetic control method to estimate the effects the law had on both short-term (potential years of life lost) and long-term (life expectancy at birth) health indicators. The results of the synthetic control were then validated using a fixed effects difference-in-differences estimator. Both models showed a statistically significant reduction in years of life lost. While life expectancy at birth improved, it was considered just above the threshold for statistical significance—likely the result of the small number of post-enactment observations. The results suggest that by switching to an insurance mandate, The Netherlands improved both patient outcomes and system efficiency. The implication is that regulated market forces can help lead to health outcome improvements in countries that provide universal healthcare. 

Motivation for Research:
When I lived in St Croix, I saw constant private and public investment flowing into the island yet poverty cycles still persisted. I was reminded of this when I took development economics in grad school and reading countless studies of repeated donor capital flows into the third world with no apparent long-term benefits for the indigenous people living there. I undertook this study to help shed light on why this was occurring.

Abstract:
Microfinance has become a popular tool over the last several decades to fight poverty in the developing world. However, broad systematic evaluation of the direct effects of these programs is lacking. Furthermore, individual studies show conflicting results both within countries and between regions. This paper helps fill this void by estimating the impacts of microfinance on poverty by using a meta-analysis combining data from randomized field experiments, quasi-experiments, and market reports from 38 Microfinance Institutions in Africa, Asia, North, and South America. This paper also tests the difference between two types of common financial products: micro-savings & micro-loans. The results indicate that while microfinance is potentially viable in the long term, it has not statistically significant effects of poverty rates in the short term (1-4 years). Entities that engage in development microfinance must be prepared to operate at a loss during this time. Furthermore, setting statistical significance aside, the results suggest that micro-savings programs are more effective than micro-loans at poverty reduction with the likely reason being that micro-loan participants do not usually possess complete information on both acceptable risk and effective financial management practices. The implications for stakeholders are that microfinance programs should be redesigned with the assumption that their effects will, on average, take 8-10 years to materialize and will need to be coupled with other interventions. This assumption is based on inferences from comparative extrapolation using similar data from the U.S. Federal Reserve. 

Abstract:

Incident response time is one of the most highly researched aspects of policing. Previous research focused on characteristics such as neighborhood disorganization and crime rates as major determinants of response times. Recently, the focus has shifted to the relationship between greenspace (i.e., parks) and crime rates. However, greenspace is also linked to other known factors influencing both crime rates and response times, including changing neighborhood demographics and economics (i.e., redevelopment, disinvestment, gentrification). Using data on calls for service, parks, neighborhood socioeconomics, and demographics, this study helps bridge the gap between these disparate foci.

In a first-stage analysis, we categorize data on incident characteristics (including type, severity, time of day and police response time), greenspace features (including distance to the incident, presence of fencing, playground equipment and open fields) and socioeconomics of the census tract the incident occurred in. Using GIS software, we test the hypotheses that the geo-spatial distribution of incidents will differ by the categories in each typology. In the second stage, using regression analysis at the census tract-level, we examine proposed associations among the number of calls for service per year, amount of greenspace in the tract, unemployment rates, resident demographics, median income, and average home value. We also analyze the relationship between police response time, distance between the incident and the nearest greenspace, type of incident, census tract socioeconomics, as well as temporal factors including time, day and month of the incident.

The findings highlight the nuanced intersectionality of crime, geography and socio-economics, especially gentrification as a mediator of the relationship between police response time and greenspace.

Abstract:

The Coronavirus (COVID-19) was declared as a worldwide pandemic on March 11th, 2020. In the following weeks, many state governments in the United States would issue stay-at-home orders and other extraordinary measures to combat the spread of the COVID-19 pandemic. However, implementation of these measures throughout 2020 and 2021 was haphazard and uneven. There emerged many challenges and outcome disparities on top of traditional American fault lines of race, geography, culture and economics. The primary focus of this study is to understand why COVID-19 had disproportionate impacts, including increased infections, hospitalizations and death rates on marginalized populations in rural and minority communities.

In this context, the study examines how variations in structural factors such as wealth, workforce roles, health care infrastructure, risky personal behavior and underlying community morbidity interacted with race and rurality. After analyzing data collected from the United States Census Bureau, Virginia Department of Health, Robert Woods Johnson Foundation and Environmental Systems Research Institute, our results suggest that differences in workforce roles associated with rural and minority areas were the primary driver in increased COVID-19 infections while underlying health issues such as diabetes were the biggest factors in increased COVID-19 hospitalizations and deaths for those under 75 in these areas. Furthermore, these two dimensions are endogenous to each other, suggesting they need to be addressed in tandem. The implications of this study are that devoting additional resources to underlying community-level structural factors will lessen the severity of future pandemics.

Abstract:

During the novel coronavirus pandemic (COVID-19), nonprofits needed to quickly rethink their

strategies concerning the sustainability of their organizations along with communication

regarding the crisis. The pandemic presented unique opportunities for understanding how

service-oriented nonprofits, who must share timely and accurate information across stakeholders

and work closely with partner organizations, can deliver services during crisis periods. Utilizing

a case study approach, the focus of this study is the impact of COVID-19 on the Federation of

Virginia Food Banks (FVFB), which is a 501(c)(3) nonprofit state association of food banks

affiliated with Feeding America, by examining the use of crisis communication strategies

utilized or not-utilized during the crisis response and recovery activities. The findings present

practical implications for nonprofit organizations and their crisis response and recovery networks

and a better understanding of the needs for nonprofit organizations to engage in crisis

communication planning for diverse crises and planning resources.