A Conditional Cash Transfer in the Big Apple

  • Michelle Morais de Sá e Silva


Chapter 4 brings a complete account of the design, implementation, and frustrating results of Opportunity NYC , a conditional cash transfer program that was experimented in New York, supposedly following the example of the Mexican conditional cash transfers (CCT) . It tells how Opportunity NYC had a rationale that was distinct from any other CCT in the world, how it was financed only with private money, and how it was terminated after only three years of implementation. Finally, the chapter looks into the policy diffusion processes involving the program, revealing how it was not really the result of emulation from Mexico and how, even before its evaluation was completed, the program was being used as an international example.


  1. Baumgartner, F., & Jones, B. (1993). Agendas and instability in American politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  2. Bosman, J. (2009, September 20). Cash incentive program for poor families is renewed. The New York Times. Retrieved December 19, 2009, from
  3. Bosman, J. (2010, March 30). City will stop paying the poor for good behavior. The New York Times. Retrieved March 31, 2010, from
  4. Center for Economic Opportunity. (2009). Early achievements and lessons learned. New York: Center for Economic Opportunity.Google Scholar
  5. Center for Economic Opportunity, MDRC , Seedco. (2008, November 6). Testing Conditional Cash Transfer (CCT) Programs in New York City. Family rewards demonstration. Presentation at the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management Annual Meetings, Los Angeles.Google Scholar
  6. Dubner, S. (2005, March 20). Toward a unified theory of black America. New York Times Magazine. Retrieved July 15, 2008, from
  7. Education Innovation Laboratory. (2010). About us. Retrieved January 12, 2010, from
  8. Fiszbein, A., & Schady, N. (2009). Conditional cash transfers: Reducing present and future poverty. Washington, DC: The World Bank Group.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gelinas, N. (2006). New York isn’t Mexico. City Journal, 17(4). Retrieved October 25, 2007, from
  10. Kaiser, J. (2008). Money—with strings—to fight poverty. Science, 319(5864), 754–755.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Kahlenberg, R. (2007). In defense of Bloomberg’s bribe. Slate Magazine. Retrieved January 4, 2008, from
  12. Liebling, B. (2007). Sometimes, cash incentives can hurt. Retrieved November 28, 2007, from
  13. MDRC. (2008). Program design and evaluation strategy for opportunity NYC – Family Rewards. A comprehensive conditional cash transfer (CCT) pilot program for New York City. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  14. Miller, C., Riccio, J., & Smith, J. (2009). A preliminary look at early educational results of the Opportunity NYC – Family Rewards program. A research note for funders. Unpublished manuscript.Google Scholar
  15. Office of the Mayor. (2007). Mayor Bloomberg Welcomes First Opportunity NYC Programm Participants and Announces Partnerships with Eight Local Banks and Credit Unions to Offer Them “No Fee” Accounts. Retrieved October 20, 2007, from
  16. Opportunity NYC Family Rewards. (2010). Education rewards. Retrieved January 15, 2010, from
  17. Organization of American States. (2009, October). Inter-American Social Protection Network launched. Summit of the Americas Newsletter. Retrieved January 6, 2010, from
  18. Riccio, J., Dechausay, N., Greenberg, D., Miller, C., Rucks, Z., & Verma, N. (2010). Toward reduced poverty across generations: Early findings from New York City’s Conditional Cash Transfer program. Retrieved March 30, 2010, from
  19. Riccio, J., Dechausay, N., Miller, C., Nuñez, S., Verma, N., & Yang, E. (2013). Conditional Cash Transfers in New York City: The continuing story of the Opportunity NYC – Family Rewards demonstration. New York: MDRC.Google Scholar
  20. Rockefeller Foundation. (2008). Mayor Bloomberg and the Rockefeller Foundation announce the launch of a learning network to share design and implementation of a conditional cash transfer program. Retrieved January 24, 2010, from
  21. Sabatier, P., & Jenkins-Smith, P. (1999). The advocacy coalition framework: An assessment. In P. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  22. Steiner-Khamsi, G. (2004). The politics of educational borrowing and lending. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  23. Stone, C., Henig, J., Jones, B., & Pierannunzi, C. (2001). Building civic capacity: The politics of reforming urban schools. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas.Google Scholar
  24. True, J., Jones, B., & Baumgartner, F. (2007). Punctuated-equilibrium theory: Explaining stability and change in American policymaking. In P. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the policy process. Boulder: Westview Press.Google Scholar
  25. Tyack, D., & Cuban, L. (1995). Tinkering toward utopia: A century of public school reform. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  26. UN Webcast Archives (2007). Eyes on the South as a Knowledge Hub. Retrieved November 25, 2007, from
  27. Wilson, D. M. (2009). Money and motivation. Harvard Education Newsletter, 35(2). Retrieved January 23, 2010, from

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michelle Morais de Sá e Silva
    • 1
  1. 1.Escola Nacional de Administração Pública (ENAP)BrasíliaBrazil

Personalised recommendations