This primer on federal place-based programs explains what these programs are, how they work, and how they support sustained interventions to improve the physical and social conditions of distressed local areas.

Why This Matters

For decades, geographic disparities—differences in resources or outcomes across places—have shaped residents’ economic opportunity, well-being, and mobility. Federal place-based programs are central tools for addressing these inequities, and strengthening the design, targeting, and evaluation of these programs can increase their effectiveness.

What We Found

Evidence suggests that federal place-based programs can produce modest, positive results. Federal funding for these programs has grown in recent years, but it remains insufficient relative to need and is often unevenly distributed and difficult to deploy, with high transaction costs and limited community input. To be successful, place-based programs can aim to achieve the following:

• Target programs effectively. Policy practitioners can work with local governments to scale programs and improve targeting to prioritize reinvestment in underserved neighborhoods.
• Aim to benefit multiple domains or outcomes. Funding should focus on efforts that address multiple community needs.
• Provide robust resources and leverage capital responsibly. Public and private investments should be coordinated to achieve meaningful neighborhood transformation.
• Plan for the long term and adapt to shifting priorities. Programs should use financing structures that support long-term horizons and remain flexible to adjust as local conditions change.
• Incorporate community input. Programs should elevate community voices and use tools like land trusts and cooperatives to limit displacement.

How We Did It

We conducted a thorough literature review and reviewed available program performance data to understand how federal place-based programs are constructed, implemented, and financed.