Skip to Main Content
Table 5

Gap-closing estimands with 95% bootstrapped confidence intervals

BlackLatinoWhiteB–WL–W
Observed Graduation Rate 79.0% 78.6% 90.3%   
Observed gap (percentage points)    11.3 11.7 
(1) Intervention: Very Low Exposure to Policing      
 Counterfactual graduation rate 84.0% 82.2% 91.0%   
  (83.2, 85.2) (81.5, 83.0) (90.4, 91.3)   
Counterfactual gap (percentage points)    7.0 8.8 
     (5.6, 7.7) (7.7, 9.5) 
Percentage of gap closed    38.6% 25.4% 
    (32.4, 50.9) (19.5, 34.3) 
(2) Intervention: White Exposure to Policing      
 Counterfactual graduation rate 82.1% 80.7% 90.3%   
  (81.6, 82.9) (80.2, 81.1) (90.0, 90.6)   
Counterfactual gap (percentage points)    8.2 9.7 
     (7.4, 8.7) (9.1, 10.2) 
 Percentage of gap closed    27.8% 17.5% 
    (23.2, 34.5) (13.4, 22.0) 
(3) Intervention: Policing as Function of Crime      
 Counterfactual graduation rate 79.0% 78.9% 90.3%   
  (78.7, 79.5) (78.5, 79.2) (89.9, 90.6)   
Counterfactual gap (percentage points)    11.2 11.7 
     (10.7, 11.7) (10.9, 11.9) 
 Percentage of gap closed    1.1% 3.4% 
    (−2.3, 5.1) (−0.4, 6.1) 
(4) Intervention: Policing as Function of Crime Based on 2009–2010 Cohort      
 Counterfactual graduation rate 80.4% 79.6% 90.5%   
  (80.0, 80.9) (79.3, 79.9) (90.1, 90.8)   
Counterfactual gap (percentage points)    10.2 10.9 
     (9.5, 10.6) (10.4, 11.3) 
 Percentage of gap closed    10.3% 6.9% 
    (7.6, 15.4) (4.0, 10.5) 
BlackLatinoWhiteB–WL–W
Observed Graduation Rate 79.0% 78.6% 90.3%   
Observed gap (percentage points)    11.3 11.7 
(1) Intervention: Very Low Exposure to Policing      
 Counterfactual graduation rate 84.0% 82.2% 91.0%   
  (83.2, 85.2) (81.5, 83.0) (90.4, 91.3)   
Counterfactual gap (percentage points)    7.0 8.8 
     (5.6, 7.7) (7.7, 9.5) 
Percentage of gap closed    38.6% 25.4% 
    (32.4, 50.9) (19.5, 34.3) 
(2) Intervention: White Exposure to Policing      
 Counterfactual graduation rate 82.1% 80.7% 90.3%   
  (81.6, 82.9) (80.2, 81.1) (90.0, 90.6)   
Counterfactual gap (percentage points)    8.2 9.7 
     (7.4, 8.7) (9.1, 10.2) 
 Percentage of gap closed    27.8% 17.5% 
    (23.2, 34.5) (13.4, 22.0) 
(3) Intervention: Policing as Function of Crime      
 Counterfactual graduation rate 79.0% 78.9% 90.3%   
  (78.7, 79.5) (78.5, 79.2) (89.9, 90.6)   
Counterfactual gap (percentage points)    11.2 11.7 
     (10.7, 11.7) (10.9, 11.9) 
 Percentage of gap closed    1.1% 3.4% 
    (−2.3, 5.1) (−0.4, 6.1) 
(4) Intervention: Policing as Function of Crime Based on 2009–2010 Cohort      
 Counterfactual graduation rate 80.4% 79.6% 90.5%   
  (80.0, 80.9) (79.3, 79.9) (90.1, 90.8)   
Counterfactual gap (percentage points)    10.2 10.9 
     (9.5, 10.6) (10.4, 11.3) 
 Percentage of gap closed    10.3% 6.9% 
    (7.6, 15.4) (4.0, 10.5) 

Note: “Percentage of gap closed” is defined as (observed–counterfactual) / observed. Table A5 in the online appendix presents the average assignment probabilities by race/ethnicity under each of the four interventions.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal