diff --git a/02-data/intermediate/SAMPLE.bib b/02-data/intermediate/SAMPLE.bib
index f81f98c..b608025 100644
--- a/02-data/intermediate/SAMPLE.bib
+++ b/02-data/intermediate/SAMPLE.bib
@@ -1714,7 +1714,7 @@ might be relevant due to focus on minimum wage policy interventions},
   doi = {10.1080/01944363.2014.935267},
   urldate = {2023-11-20},
   langid = {english},
-  keywords = {inequality::income,inequality::spatial,relevant,TODO::full-text,type::experimental},
+  keywords = {country::US,done::extracted,inequality::income,inequality::spatial,region::NA,relevant,type::experimental},
   file = {/home/marty/Zotero/storage/IE2BQE3Q/Blumenberg_Pierce_2014_A Driving Factor in Mobility.pdf}
 }
 
diff --git a/02-data/processed/relevant/Blumenberg2014.yml b/02-data/processed/relevant/Blumenberg2014.yml
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4ad6e2c
--- /dev/null
+++ b/02-data/processed/relevant/Blumenberg2014.yml
@@ -0,0 +1,54 @@
+author: Blumenberg, E., & Pierce, G.
+year: 2014
+title: A Driving Factor in Mobility? Transportation’s Role in Connecting Subsidized Housing and Employment Outcomes in the Moving to Opportunity (MTO) Program
+publisher: Journal of the American Planning Association
+uri: https://doi.org/10.1080/01944363.2014.935267
+discipline: development
+
+country: United States
+period: 1994-2001
+maxlength: 84
+targeting: implicit
+group: poor women
+data: baseline and follow-up survey; 
+
+design: experimental
+method: RCT; multinomial regression model
+sample: 3199
+unit: household
+representativeness: national
+causal: 1 # 0 correlation / 1 causal
+
+theory:
+limitations: low levels of explanatory power for individual model outcomes, esp for disadvantaged population groups; possible endogeneity bias through unobserved factors (e.g. human capital)
+observation:
+  - intervention: subsidy (housing mobility)
+    institutional: 0
+    structural: 1
+    agency: 0
+    inequality: spatial; gender
+    type: 1 # 0 vertical / 1 horizontal
+    indicator: 1 # 0 absolute / 1 relative
+    measures: employment
+    findings: no relationship between subsidy and employment outcomes; increased employment probability for car ownership; increased employment probability for high transit areas, not increased job gain for moving to high transit area
+    channels: high transit area employment paradox may be due to inherent difficulty of connecting household to opportunity in dispersed labor market just via access to transit
+    direction: 0 # 0 = no relationship no direction
+    significance: 0 # 0 nsg / 1 msg / 2 sg
+
+notes: 98% of sample is female
+annotation: |
+  A study looking at the effects of a housing mobility intervention in the United States on employment for disadvantaged households,
+  and comparing its impacts to the ownership of a car for the same sample.
+  It follows the 'Moving to Opportunity' programme which provided vouchers to randomized households for movement to a geographically unrestricted area or to specifically to a low-poverty area (treatment group),
+  some of which are in areas with well-connected public transport opportunities.
+  The sample for the study is made up predominantly of women (98%).
+  No relationship between programme participation and increased employment probability could be established.
+  However, a positive relationship exists between owning an automobile and improved employment outcomes for low-income households,
+  as well as including those households that are located in 'transit-rich' areas.
+  Access to better transit itself is related to employment probability but not gains in employment -
+  the authors suggest this reflects individuals' strategic relocation to use public transit for their job.
+  However, moving to a better transit area itself does not increase employment probability, 
+  perhaps pointing to a certain threshold required in transit extensiveness before it facilitates employment.
+  Ultimately, the findings suggest the need to further individual acess to automobiles in disadvantaged households or for extensive transit network upgrade which have to cross an efficiency threshold.
+  Some limitations of the study are its models low explanatory power for individual outcomes, more so among disadvantaged population groups,
+  as well as some remaining possibility of endogeneity bias through unobserved factors such as individual motivation or ability.
diff --git a/02-data/supplementary/lib.bib b/02-data/supplementary/lib.bib
index 2c130b3..481ce3f 100644
--- a/02-data/supplementary/lib.bib
+++ b/02-data/supplementary/lib.bib
@@ -1748,7 +1748,7 @@ might be relevant due to focus on minimum wage policy interventions},
   doi = {10.1080/01944363.2014.935267},
   urldate = {2023-11-20},
   langid = {english},
-  keywords = {inequality::income,inequality::spatial,relevant,TODO::full-text,type::experimental},
+  keywords = {country::US,done::extracted,inequality::income,inequality::spatial,region::NA,relevant,type::experimental},
   file = {/home/marty/Zotero/storage/IE2BQE3Q/Blumenberg_Pierce_2014_A Driving Factor in Mobility.pdf}
 }