Although immigration policies that regulate lawful entry and exit are the preserve of the federal government, the context in which immigrant reception and integration take place is best understood at the subnational level, shaped by policies and practices specific to state and local jurisdictions. In the absence of federal immigration reform, and with the movement of immigrants and their children to a wider array of receiving communities throughout the U.S., states and localities have increasingly developed measures related to enforcement and undocumented immigrants, eligibility rules for immigrants accessing public services, as well as integration efforts to promote immigrant incorporation. This diverse landscape of contexts in which immigrants and their children live and participate in American society is critical for understanding a wide range of public policy issues, from immigrant integration to family economic success and the inter-generational transmission of poverty in immigrant families, as well as impacts on native-born individuals who employ, live next to, and work with immigrants. A growing number of scholars and researchers are grappling with how to measure and understand this varied context of immigrant-related policy and practice across the U.S. Much of the previous research on local immigration context has been conducted through in-depth case study research of specific localities. The next frontier in this line of research is developing comprehensive approaches to measuring and comparing context across cases, and negotiating a number of measurement and conceptual challenges. This panel will present several examples of such cutting-edge research, which explore the wide range of subnational contexts across communities and over time. One paper will provide a methodological and theoretical grounding in assessing and reviewing the tradeoffs and issues in developing such comprehensive contextual measures, while each of the three other papers engages directly in the task of measurement, comparison, and hypothesis testing to explain policy outcomes. The papers reflect varied conceptual approaches and use different tools. First, the empirical papers approach context at different levels of analysis, with one at the metropolitan level, another at the state level, and the third at the local level. They also rely on different sources of data, with one combining administrative and demographic data with compilations of state policies, another combining case study research with quantitative data sources, and another collecting original survey data to complement initial case study work. The conceptualization of policies and practices varies across the four papers, with one taking a narrower focus and limiting the universe to formal laws and ordinances, and others incorporating local-level practices across different sectors. All papers are exploring the range of policy domains to be included in immigrant reception, with all four taking into account not merely immigration enforcement measures but encompassing a wider range of policies and practices that affect the subnational context for immigrant incorporation. Outcomes of interest also vary, with some considering measures of wellbeing while others focus on political outcomes. This exchange between immigration specialists across government, academia, and the think tank world will advance the conversation on this promising line of research.