Analyzing investment flows in comprehensive community revitalization: The case of Bayview Hunters Point, San Francisco

References

• Castells, N. (2010). HOPE VI neighborhood spillover effects in Baltimore. Cityscape, 12, 65–98.
   Google Scholar
• Center for Transit-Oriented Development. (2008). Capturing the value of transit. Oakland, CA: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Center for Transit-Oriented Development. (2013). Value-capture strategies for public transit. Oakland, CA: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Chapple, K. (2009, August). Mapping susceptibility to gentrification: The early warning toolkit. Berkeley, CA: University of California at Berkeley Center for Community Innovation.
   Google Scholar
• Chinchilla, M. (2011). Rethinking the redevelopment of public housing: HOPE SF, economic change and resident self-sufficiency. Berkeley, CA: University of California, Berkeley.
   Google Scholar
• Deluca, S. (2012). What is the role of housing policy? Considering choice and social science evidence. Journal of Urban Affairs, 41, 21–28. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9906.2011.00598.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• De Souza Briggs, X. (2007). Stocks, flows, and dreas: Shaping and measuring neighborhood change in community development. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
   Google Scholar
• Fauria, A., & Mathur, S. (2012). Impact of targeted redevelopment of central business district on housing prices in the surrounding neighborhoods: Evidence from Oakland, California. Journal of Urban Planning and Development, 138, 244–253. doi:10.1061/(ASCE)UP.1943-5444.0000112
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Freeman, L., & Botein, H. (2002). Subsidized housing and neighborhood impacts: A theoretical discussion and review of the evidence. Journal of Planning Literature, 16, 359–378. doi:10.1177/08854120222093419
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The Foundation Center. (n.d.). Foundation Center grant database. Retrieved from http://www.foundationcenter.org.
   Google Scholar
• Galster, G. (2005). The impact of community development corporations on urban neighborhoods. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Galster, G., Tatian, P., & Accordino, J. (2006). Targeting investments for neighborhood revitalization. Journal of the American Planning Association, 72, 457–474. doi:10.1080/01944360608976766
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Greenberg, D., Williams, W., Karlstrom, M., Quiroz-Becerra, V., & Fensten, M. (2014). The promise of comprehensive community development: Ten years of Chicago’s new communities program. New York, NY: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.
   Google Scholar
• Gebel, M. (2017, March 23). Hunters View revamp helps bring hope to S.F. public housing. San Francisco Business Times. Retrieved from http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/news/2017/03/23/real-deals-residential-hunters-view-phase-2.html
   Google Scholar
• Guidestar. (n.d.). Guidestar nonprofit database. Retrieved from http://www.guidestar.org.
   Google Scholar
• Hanlon, J. (2010). Success by design: HOPE VI, new urbanism, and the neoliberal transformation of public housing in the United States. Environment and Planning A, 42, 80–98. doi:10.1068/a41278
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• HOPE SF. (2013). About HOPE SF: Guiding principles. Retrieved from http://hope-sf.org/guiding-principles.php
   Google Scholar
• Khare, A. T. (2015). Putting people back into place-based public policies. Journal of Urban Affairs, 37, 47–52. doi:10.1111/juaf.12161
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kleit, R. G., Kang, S., & Scally, C. P. (2016). Why do housing mobility programs fail in moving households to better neighborhoods? Housing Policy Debate, 26, 188–209. doi:10.1080/10511482.2015.1033440
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Knight, H. (2007). Hunters View—not Sunnydale—Ranks as S.F.’s worst complex. Retrieved from http://www.sfgate.com/health/article/Hunters-View-not-Sunnydale-ranks-as-S-F-s-2506977.php#src=fb
   Google Scholar
• Kubisch, A. C. (1996). Comprehensive community initiatives: Lessons in neighborhood transformation. Shelterforce Online, 18, 8–11.
   Google Scholar
• Law Office of Julian Gross. (2008). Core community benefits agreement: Hunters Point Shipyard/Candlestick Point integrated development project. San Francisco, CA: Author. Retrieved from http://juliangross.net/docs/CBA/Hunters_Point_Agreement.pdf
   Google Scholar
• LFA Group: Learning for Action. (2012a). HOPE SF baseline report: Prepared for the San Francisco Foundation, Enterprise Community Partners, and the City of San Francisco. San Francisco, CA: Author.
   Google Scholar
• LFA Group: Learning for Action. (2012b). HOPE SF evaluation plan. Prepared for Enterprise Community Partners, Inc. San Francisco, CA: Author.
   Google Scholar
• Lin, E. S., Zaff, J. F., & Gerstein, A. R. (2015). Comprehensive community initiatives: The road ahead for research and practice. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 40, 57–62.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mallach, A. (2008). Managing neighborhood change: A framework for sustainable and equitable revitalization. Montclair, NJ: National Housing Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Newman, K., & Ashton, P. (2004). Neoliberal urban policy and new paths of neighborhood change in the American inner city. Environment and Planning A, 36, 1151–1172. doi:10.1068/a36229
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Pendall, R., & Hendey, L. (2013). A brief look at the early implementation of Choice Neighborhoods: Prepared for the Annie E. Casey foundation. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Rongerude, J. M. (2009). The sorted city: San Francisco, HOPE SF, and the redevelopment of public housing. Berkeley, CA: University of California.
   Google Scholar
• Sampson, R. J., Morenoff, J. D., & Gannon-Rowley, T. (2002). Assessing “neighborhood effects”: Social processes and new directions in research. Annual Review of Sociology, 28, 443–478. doi:10.1146/annurev.soc.28.110601.141114
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• San Francisco Foundation. (2017). The partnership for HOPE SF: Reflections on accomplishments, impact, and lessons learned since 2010. San Francisco, CA: Author.
   Google Scholar
• San Francisco Planning Department. (n.d.). San Francisco permit database. Retrieved from http://sf-planning.org.
   Google Scholar
• Sideroff, D., & Walker, C. (2011). From leadership to outcomes: An evaluation of San Francisco’s neighborhood marketplace initiative. San Francisco, CA: Bay Area LISC.
   Google Scholar
• Smith, R., Kingsley, G. T., Cunningham, M., Popkin, S., Dumlao, K., Ellen, I. G., …, McKoy, D. (2010). Monitoring success in choice neighborhoods: A proposed approach to performance measurement. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Tatian, P., Kingsley, G. T., Parilla, J., & Pendall, R. (2012). Building successful neighborhoods ( Unpublished manuscript). Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
   Google Scholar
• Theodos, B., Kingsley, G. T., & Zhang, S. (2013). Neighborhood investment flows: Prepared for the What Works Collaborative. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute.
   Google Scholar
• The Urban Institute. (2013). Developing choice neighborhoods: An early look at implementation in five sites: Interim report. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://hope-sf.org/background.php
   Google Scholar
• The Urban Institute and Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation. (2015). Choice Neighborhoods: Baseline conditions and early progress. Report prepared for U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
   Google Scholar
• United States Census Bureau. (2011). 2010 census summary file 1, California. Machine-readable data files. Washington, DC: Author.
   Google Scholar
• United States Census Bureau/American FactFinder. (2016). 2011–2015 American community survey. Washington, DC: United States Census Bureau.
   Google Scholar
• Walls, D. (2013). National Establishment Time-Series (NETS) database, 2013 database description. Oakland, CA: Walls & Associates.
   Google Scholar
• Zielenbach, S. (2003). Assessing economic change in HOPE VI neighborhoods. Housing Policy Debate, 14, 621–655. doi:10.1080/10511482.2003.9521489
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar