Do antipoverty nonprofits locate where people need them? Evidence from a spatial analysis of phoenix

Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly

Volumn 37, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 138-151

  Peck, Laura R ^a  

^a ARIZONA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Nonprofit organizations; Poverty; Spatial analysis

Indexed keywords

EID: 38849113987     PISSN: 08997640     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0899764006298963     Document Type: Article

References (7)

1. Allard, S.W. (2004). Access to social services: The changing urban geography of poverty and service provision. Washington, DC: Metropolitan Policy Program, Brookings Institution, Survey Series.
2. Allard, S.W., & Danziger, S. (2003). Proximity and opportunity: How residence and race affect welfare recipients. Housing Policy Debate, 13 (4). 675-700.
3. Allard, S.W., Tolman, R.M., & Rosen, D. (2003). The geography of need: Spatial distribution of barriers to employment in metropolitan Detroit. Policy Studies Journal, 31 (3). 293-306.
4. Bielefeld, W., & Murdoch, J.C. (2004). The locations of nonprofit organizations and their for-profit counterparts: An exploratory analysis. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 33 (2). 221-246.
5. Bielefeld, W., Murdoch, J.C., & Waddell, P. (1997). The influence of demographics and distance on profit location. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 26, 207-225.
6. Joassart-Marcelli, P., & Wolch, J.R. (2003). The intrametropolitan geography of poverty and the nonprofit sector in Southern California. Nonprofit and Voluntary Sector Quarterly, 32 (1). 70-96.
7. Wang, F., & Minor, W.W. (2002). Where the jobs are: Employment access and crime patterns in Cleveland. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 92 (3). 435-450.