Language Access Guidelines, 2017

HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Monday February 4, 2019 6:00 p.m. Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Evanston IL, Council Chambers

AGENDA

I. CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM

II. APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES OF January 7, 2019

Citizen Comments

III. ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION

IV. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION

(HH1) Limited English Language Access Policy Update The creation of a language access plan is legally mandated to provide limited English proficient (LEP) individuals with meaningful access to programs and activities under various statutory and regulatory requirements due to receiving federal funds. The City Manager’s Office proposes to convene a group of public-facing staff members to collect and compile relevant data that will help draft a language access policy for the City of Evanston

(HH2) Update on Services Provided during Recent Severe Cold Weather

(HH3) Social Service Review Status Report In preparation for the 2019 budget surveys conducted indicated social services as one of the top ten priorities. From the initial staff review it was determined additional data was needed to perform a comprehensive review along with identifying the appropriate tool used for the evaluation. This update shares the methodology used to conduct the review.

(HH4) Map of City by Income, Education, and Language from 1990-present Report

(HH5) Equity and Empowerment Commission Equity and Empowerment Commission’s Work-Plan, summarizes the milestones that have been achieved to date

V. ITEMS FOR COMMUNICATION

VI. EXECUTIVE SESSION Police

VII. ADJOURNMENT

HUMAN SERVICES COMMITTEE Monday January 7, 2019 6:00 p.m. Lorraine H. Morton Civic Center, 2100 Ridge Avenue, Evanston IL, Council Chambers

Members Present: Alderman Fleming, Alderman Revelle, Alderman Rue-Simmons, Alderman Braithwaite

Members not Present: Alderman Fiske

Staff Present: Nicola Whyte, Lawrence Hemingway, Victoria Benson, Indira Perkins, Jennifer Lin, Ericka Storlie, Sarah Flax, Alex Thorpe, Jessica Hyick

Presiding Member: Alderman Fleming

CALL TO ORDER / DECLARATION OF QUORUM Ald. Fleming called the meeting to order at 6:05 p.m.

APPROVAL OF MEETING MINUTES OF December 3, 2018 Alderman Fleming moved approval, Alderman Rue Simmons seconded; approved 4-0

Citizen Comments Betty Sue Ester says the current complaint form is not valid because it doesn’t have an area for a notary. Also some of the recommendations made by the Citizen Police Complaint Advisory Committee Report is incorrect.

ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION Mental Health Board allocations for 2019 programs The Mental Health Board (MHB) and staff recommend approval of the proposed allocation of $763,373 in 2019 to 19 non-profit agencies to provide needed social services to Evanston residents. For Action Alderman Rue-Simmons moved approval Alderman Braithwaite seconded, approved 4-0

ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION

Interfaith Action of Evanston Update on Homelessness Ann Murphy Director of Interfaith Action of Evanston gave a summary of services. Interfaith Action of Evanston Organization has governed the Hospitality Center for the Homeless at Saint Marks Church for the last 30 years. It is open Monday to Friday 7-11. Breakfast is served, employment counseling and a computer room is available. Clients are referred to Connection for the Homeless for further benefits.

• Warming Centers The warming centers are open from November until March and are available to anyone who wants to get out of the cold. • ProduceMobile The City of Evanston and Interfaith Action partnered with the Greater Chicago Food Depository ProduceMobile and distributes fresh produce the second Tuesday of each month at Robert Crown Center • Overnight Emergency Center was started thirteen years ago at St. Paul Lutheran Church. Intake of guests begins at 9pm and doors are locked at 10:00 p.m. Guests leave at 6:45 a.m. and they can go over to the Hospitality Center for breakfast. United Methodist provided a generous donation and so this year the Center will be open every night during the winter. The soup kitchens can be found at www.interfaithactionofevanston.org

Alderman Fleming shared her concerns on the location of the ProdceMobile which is not directly on a bus route and that the produce is distributed during the day which prevents those who have to work to miss the opportunity of receiving goods. Chute school has a program similar to the produce mobile which is available to Chute families only.

She wondered if there was another location which would accommodate the truck within the city. Alderman Rue-Simmons suggested contacting Over the Rainbow who has been accommodating to her in the past.

Parks and Recreation Director Lawrence Hemingway said he will speak to the Food Depository on evening hours; however, the only parks and recreation location in which the truck can turn around is at Robert Crown.

Interfaith Action received CDBG funds in the amount of $15000 and $7,000 from Mental Health Board which is used for the shelter.

General and Emergence Assistance 2018 Report Alderman Fleming is concerned with residents moving out of Evanston because they cannot afford to live here. Another concern is residents who are denied assistance when there are funds available in other accounts.

Being and resident of Evanston with proof of a lease is required to apply for General or Emergency Assistance.

Alderman Braithwaite thanked the General Assistance staff for their help when he has advocated for a resident. He stressed the general assistance staff is accommodating and will meet those who wish to apply at their home, Starbucks and the library for convenience.

Review of Police Complaints Four complaints reviewed by the Citizens Police Advisory Committee

New Police Chief Demetrius Cook introduced himself and says his job is to protect the officers when they are right and to protect the citizens. His tenure thus far has been challenging; however, he is receiving assistance from many avenues.

Office of Professional Standards Sergeant Jodi Hart says the difference of formal complaint and informal complaints pertains to the Officer’s Bill of Rights. A formal complaint can result in suspension of three days to termination; an informal complaint suspension is up to three days.

Alderman Rue-Simmons has gotten complaints from residents regarding the police interaction with them to include sarcasm and disrespect in their tone.

DI#8-09 and DI#8-10 were held and will return at the February’s agenda in executive session.

Human Resources employee discipline/termination policy Chair Fleming asked how is the management staff trained to implement the discipline/termination policy.

Jennifer Lin Human Services Manager states the supervisors are trained quarterly and encourages them to seek out Human Services if there is an issue with their staff. Counseling of staff is encouraged before discipline is imposed and as a last resort.

Alderman Braithwaite said the council and community “recognizes that the budget is a tool to save us money sometimes becomes the instrument in which people are walked out the door.”

He encourages that discipline is equitably across employees.

Accessible Transportation Options in the City Report Jessica Hyink Transportation and Mobility Coordinator clarified a point in the memo submitted for the packet “the cost for Para-Transit is at a minimum the same as a regular fixed route trip but it could exceed that cost depending on the distance of the para-transit trip and other factors as set by the Pace and the Regional Transit Authority.”

Lyft is providing accessible transportation to and from Evanston. Uber is not; they will take passengers to Evanston but will not take passengers from Evanston to other locations.

A gentle reminder to residents along Simpson Street and Dodge Avenue to clear sidewalks for wheelchair accessibility was discussed.

A bus shelter at the intersection of Crain Street and Dodge Avenue has the potential to be costly due to unknown factors of what is behind a hill that would have to be removed prior to installing the bus shelter.

City Fees and Fines The City does have a contract with Live West Collection agency to collect unpaid fees. Ambulances fees cannot be assessed a late fee and it does not go on credit report. Parking fees are the biggest with late fees. City charges and late fees do not affect credit report.

ADA Update – City Facilities and Parks Staff recommends that the in-house review of architectural barriers to mobility in City facilities and parks be updated by City staff. This review will take place in 2019, and is proposed to be available in January 2020. -No questions from the committee

Spanish Language Translation Update Chair Fleming requests an update on the policy status.

ADJOURNMENT

Unanimously approved, meeting adjourned at 7:48p.m.

Respectfully Submitted, Nicola Whyte Administrative Lead

For Human Services Committee on February 4, 2019 Item HH1

For Discussion

Language Access Policy Creation

Memorandum

To: Chair and Members of the Human Services Committee

From: Paulina Martínez, Assistant to the City Manager

C: Patricia Efiom, Chief Equity Officer

Subject: Limited English Language Access Policy Update

Date: January 31, 2019

Summary: The creation of a language access plan for the City of Evanston has been a topic of discussion for the last year and a half, as it is legally mandated for any program and/or entity that benefits from federal funds to provide limited English proficient (LEP) individuals with meaningful access to programs and activities under various statutory and regulatory requirements including but not limited to:

• Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq. o https://www.justice.gov/crt/fcs/TitleVI-Overview • Executive Order 13166, “Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency”; o https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2000-08-16/pdf/00-20938.pdf

Therefore, the City Manager’s Office proposes to convene a group of public-facing staff members to collect and compile relevant data that will help draft a language access policy for the City of Evanston.

Background: In 2017, six staff members gathered to discuss the need for a language access policy. From this meeting, general guidelines were drafted to begin the creation of a policy, as attached.

Based on American Community Survey Results from 2011-2016, 8% of the Evanston population is considered individuals with limited English proficiency. The top two populations are the Spanish-speaking population and the Chinese-speaking population, which account for 5% of those with limited English proficiency.

Discussion: The language access policy will be created and reviewed under the guidance of the Equity and Empowerment Commission and the Human Services Committee.

After reviewing other cities’ language access plans and guidelines, the following the process will be followed in order to draft a language access policy:

1. Convene a group of public-facing staff working group from each department and/or divisions 2. Perform Four Factor Analysis a. Factor 1: Determining the number and proportion of LEP persons served or encountered in the service area. b. Factor 2: Determine the frequency with which LEP individuals come into contact with City programs, activities, and services. c. Factor 3: Determine the importance to LEP persons of your program activities and services. d. Factor 4: Determine the resource available to the recipient and costs. 3. Collect data and continue researching best practices from comparable communities 4. Seek input from key organizations and community members 5. Draft plan and quantify monetary value of services and staff manpower to implement 6. Solicit community input 7. Release plan

Timeline: Based on the reviewed policies, staff proposes that a 12-month period is allocated to create and implement a language access plan for the City of Evanston. Staff will report quarterly to the Human Services Committee and the Equity and Empowerment Commission of the policy’s progress. In the meantime, we will continue using the attached guidelines.

Attachments: Language Access Guidelines, 2017

Language Access Guidelines

Policy:

The purpose of this Language Access Policy is to ensure that reasonable steps are taken to ensure that residents with Limited English Proficiency (LEP)* have meaningful access and equal opportunity to fully participate in programs and services offered by the City of Evanston.

The policy also provides for communication of information contained in vital documents that have financial implications for residents; this can include parking tickets, water bills, registration and for programs and services that require fees and securing legal documents such as passports.

Currently the City does not employ professionally trained translators however we do have bi-lingual staff who have volunteered to assist. A list of those staff volunteers can be found on the City’s intranet. In addition, staff and residents can access the Language Line by calling 311. If your department is in need of written translation services, please contact Martha Logan the Community Engagement Office.

While all staff are being provided with this policy, staff that may have direct contact with LEP individuals will be provided training.

The Office of Equity & Empowerment will convene a Language Access Committee to establish guidelines for translation of vital documents into additional languages as needed. As the Committee continues its work, the Office of Equity & Empowerment will monitor and update this policy.

Procedures:

Step 1: Identifying LEP residents and their language

Staff members will identify the language and communication needs of the LEP person and contact the appropriate staff person. In addition, when records are kept of past interactions with residents, the language used to communicate with the LEP person will be included as part of that record.

Step 2: Getting assistance

Once the language the resident speaks has been identified, there are several things you can do to get the assistance you need. 1. Contact the appropriate bilingual staff member or 2. Contact 311 to access the language line.

Step 3: Written language translations We currently do not provide written translation for individuals; however departments can request such services by contacting Martha Logan in the Community Engagement Dept. If there are costs associated with the translation, the requesting department will be responsible for those costs.

Step 5 Monitoring Language needs and implementation

On an ongoing basis, the Office of Equity & Empowerment will assess changes in demographics and types of services needed. In addition, the Office will regularly assess the efficacy of these procedures, including but not limited to access to interpreter and translation services. In addition complaints filed by LEP persons, feedback from residents, staff and community partners, will be monitored and benchmarks for translation of vital documents into additional languages will be set.

9 For Human Services Meeting of February 4, 2019 Item HH3 For Discussion Social Service Review Status Report

Memorandum

To: Human Services Committee Chair, Robin Rue Simmons Members of the Human Services Committee

From: Kimberly Richardson, Deputy City Manager

Subject: Social Service Review Status Report

Date: February 4, 2019

Background: In preparation for the 2019 Budget, the City implemented a Priority-Based Budget process to better align spending with community priorities. Based on the community survey, of the 46 programs and services presented social service programs ranked in the top 10 as high priorities.

The City Manager requested staff to do a comprehensive review of all city provided social programs and return to the City Council with a report in September. From the initial staff review, it was determined additional data is needed to do a comprehensive review along with identifying the appropriate tool use for the evaluation.

This memo is to provide an update on the evaluation and share the methodology used to conduct the review.

Discussion:

A. Evaluation Deliverables 1. Identify performance measurements 2. Review program service delivery 3. Review resources and funding allocations

B. Programs Under Review • General Assistance Program (HHS Department) • Emergency Assistance Program (HHS Dept.) • Youth and Young Adults Programs (PRCS Department) • Senior Services Programs /Ombudsman (PRCS Dept.) • Victim Advocates (HHS Dept.) • Workforce Development (CMO/PRCS Dept.) • Mental Health Board Fund Allocation Program (CD Department)

10 C. Evaluation Tool: Result-Based Accountability with a Racial Equity Lens During the budget discussion, many members of the Council as well as the public discussed inequalities that are being experienced by certain communities within Evanston.

Results-Based Accountability (RBA) begins with impact and backs into solutions to ensure that they are selected with an eye to look at root causes of the inequality. It requires the answer to three critical questions as part of a rigorous seven-step process to making sure that people and communities of color equality benefit from our work.

• How much are doing? • How well did we do it? • Is anyone better off?

Results- Based Accountability (RBA) is: • Data –informed, transparent decision making driven • Starts at the end to determine what we seek to achieve and work backwards using data to map out the means • Identifies the appropriate level accountability • Asks effective questions to quickly get from • Creates community impact

To evaluate the each program and services will answer the following seven- performance accountability questions:

1. Who do you serve? 2. How can you measure if they are better off? 3. How can you measure the quality of your work? 4. How are you doing on these measures quantitatively (data trend) and qualitatively (root cause/story) 5. Who are the partners with a role to play? 6. What works (practices, processes and/or policies)? 7. What do you propose to do, in what timeline and what budget?

Racial Equity Lens Shown across the country, building the capacity to focus on impact with a racial equity lens produces more sustained efforts that change culture and marginalized populations within communities. Using the racial-equity RBA process will assist in shifting the institutional and structural patterns that produce racial equity.

Seven Questions of Population Accountability with a Racial Equity Lens

1. What condition of well-being do we want for our community (results)? 2. What would these conditions look like if we achieved them? 3. What measures we can use to quantify these conditions (indicators)? 4. How are we doing on the indicators quantitatively (data trend) and qualitatively (root cause/story)?

11 5. Who are the partners with a role to play? 6. What works? 7. What do we propose to do?

D. Core Evaluation Team A core team will be made of staff members from each division program to implement the review made up of analyst, front line and managerial staff. The team will work together to develop a set of recommended actions to present to City Council.

Responsibilities will include identifying the following: • community indicators • program indicators • community partners • data collection resources • external populations/partners • internal populations/partners

Identifying the next steps, by answering specific questions: • Who will do what, by when? • What resources are needed to get it done? • Is this a long-term action that needs time or can it do in shorter timeframe? • What is the active role of the City Manager and City Council in making these decisions?

E. Timeline: • February 2019 Assemble core team Begin collection of data

• April 2019 Status Report to Human Services Committee Status Report to Equity and Empowerment Commission

• July 2019 Final report submitted to Human Services Committee

Attached: Racial Equity: Getting to Results

12 RESOURCE GUIDE

Racial Equity: Getting to Results

by Erika Bernabei

RACIALEQUITYALLIANCE.ORG 13 This resource guide is published by the Government Alliance on Race and Equity, a national network of government working to achieve racial equity and advance opportunities for all.

Author Erika Bernabei

Introduction and supplemental text Government Alliance for Race & Equity

with the support of Julie Nelson, Simran Noor, Dwayne Marsh, and Ryan Curren, Government Alliance on Race and Equity / Center for Social Inclusion Kelly Larson, City of Dubuque, Iowa Karen Shaban, Fairfax County, Virginia Karalyn Kratowicz, City of Madison, Wisconsin Brenda Anibarro, City of Seattle, Washington

Acknowledgments The authors would like to thank the following individuals who contributed to this guide by participating in interviews for case studies: Kelly Larson, City of Dubuque, Iowa Karen Shaban, Fairfax County, Virginia

editorial support, layout, and design Ebonye Gussine Wilkins

GARE is a joint project of

Published May 2017. Updated July 2017.

RACIALEQUITYALLIANCE.ORG 14 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction by GARE...... 4 Tool Begins with the Data...... 6 What Is Racial Equity-Centered Results-Based Accountability™?...... 7 Population Accountability: Start at the end...... 8

1) What are the desired results ? ...... 8

2) What would the result look like? ...... 9

3) What are the community indicators that would measure the desired result?...... 9

4) What do the data tell us?...... 10

5) Who are your partners?...... 11

6) What works to change the data trend towards racial equity? ...... 12

7) What actions should you start with?...... 13 Performance Accountability for Actions: The road to getting results...... 13

1) Who do you serve?...... 13

2) What is an action’s intended impact? ...... 14

3) What is the quality of the action?...... 15

4) What is the story behind the data? ...... 15

5) Who are the partners with a role to play?...... 15

6) What works to have greater impact?...... 16

7) What are the next steps? ...... 17 Case Study: Dubuque, Iowa...... 19 Case Study: Fairfax County, Virginia...... 20

15 INTRODUCTION 4

Currently across the country, regardless of region, racial inequities exist across every indicator for success—including health, criminal justice, education, jobs, housing, and beyond. We know these inequities are incongruent with our aspi- rations. The Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE), a joint project of the Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society at the University of California, Berkeley and Center for Social Inclusion, recognizes that we can and must do better. We know that government has a key role in advancing racial equity, and therefore are modeling at the local level how it is truly possible for government to advance racial equity Six-Part Strategic and to develop into an inclusive and effective democracy. Approach to Institutional We know change is possible with intentionality and focus. We must Change recognize that from the inception of our country, government at the Normalize local, regional, state, and federal level has played a role in creating • Use a racial equity and maintaining racial inequities. Though we’ve made many strides framework toward racial equity, policies and practices have created and still • Operate with urgency and accountability create disparate results—even if the intention to discriminate is not present. Despite progress in addressing explicit discrimination, ra- Organize cial inequities continue to be deep, pervasive, and persistent across • Build organizational the country. We are at a critical juncture with an exciting new role for capacity government—to proactively work for racial equity. • Partner with other organizations and communities Our goal goes beyond closing the gaps; we must improve overall outcomes by focusing efforts on those who are faring the worst. Deep- Operationalize • Implement racial ly racialized systems are costly for us collectively and depress out- equity tools comes and life chances for communities of color. To advance racial • Be data-driven equity, government must focus not only on individual programs, but also on policy and institutional strategies that create and maintain inequities. GARE uses a six-part strategic approach geared to address all levels of institutional change.

Normalize 1. Use a racial equity framework: Jurisdictions must use a racial equity framework that clearly articulates our vision for racial equity and the differences between individual, institutional, and structural racism—as well as implicit and explicit bias. It is important RESOURCE GUIDE that staff—across the breadth and depth of a jurisdiction—develop a Racial Equity: shared understanding of these concepts. Getting to Results 2. Operate with urgency and accountability: While it is often be- Government lieved that change is hard and takes time, we have seen repeatedly Alliance on Race and that when we prioritize change and act with urgency, change is em- Equity 16 braced and can occur quickly. The most effective path to account- 5 ability comes from creating clear action plans with built-in institutional accountability mechanisms. Collectively, we must create greater urgency and public will in order to achieve racial equity.

Organize 1. Build organizational capacity: Jurisdictions need to be committed to the breadth and depth of institutional transformation so that impacts are sustainable. While elected leaders and other top officials are a critical part, change takes place on the ground. We must build infrastructure that creates racial equity experts and teams throughout local and regional government.

2. Partner with other institutions and communities: The work of government on racial equity is necessary but not sufficient. To achieve racial equity, government must work in partnership with communities and other institutions to achieve meaningful results.

Operationalize 1. Implement racial equity tools: Racial inequities are neither nat- ural nor random—they have been created and sustained over time. Inequities will not disappear on their own; tools must be used to change the policies, programs, and practices that perpetuate inequities. Using this “Focusing on Racial Equity Results,” along with other tools, such as our Racial Equity Tool, will help us to achieve better results within our communities.

2. Be data-driven: Measurement must take place at two levels— first, to measure the success of specific programmatic and policy changes, and second, to develop baselines, set goals, and measure progress towards goals. It is critical that jurisdictions use data in this manner for accountability.

Racial equity means that we no longer see disparities based on race and we improve results for all groups. We believe that in order to disrupt our nation’s deep and pervasive inequality of opportunity and results, generate new possi- bilities for community ownership of government, and establish a new narra- tive for a truly inclusive democracy, it is essential to transform government. Indeed, in order to advance racial equity and success as a nation, we must RESOURCE GUIDE transform government. Racial Equity: Getting to Results Prior to using this resource guide, you might want to familiarize yourself with Government some of GARE’s other tools. Alliance on Race and Equity 17 • Advancing Racial Equity and Transforming Government: A Resource Guide to Put Ideas into Action 6 • Racial Equity Toolkit: An Opportunity to Operationalize Equity • Racial Equity Action Plans: A How-to Manual

If you are not familiar with GARE’s work and theory of change, you may want to start with the Advancing Racial Equity resource guide.

This work builds on the work of numerous other organizations, including the People’s Institute for Survival and Beyond, Race Forward, Western States Cen- ter, the Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society, and many others. This issue paper also aligns with and builds upon Results-Based Accountability™ (RBA), developed by Mark Friedman.

We have intentionally lifted up the importance of centering racial equity within an RBA framework. We have seen too many cases where not doing so reinforces structural racism. Many planning or evaluation tools were designed within environments of institutional or structural racism. When we fail to name and center race, though we may be well-intentioned, we will reinforce racial inequities. Getting clear about racial equity first, then using a powerful tool like RBA flips the status quo on its head–it shifts the power to drive toward racial equity. Only through the use of a structured process will we achieve transformative results, shifting the very foundation of the institution we seek to change. By developing a clear racial equity lens first, we provide a foundation for a racial equity-centered RBA process that facilitates improved results.

BEGIN WITH THE DATA Often, the work of identifying, collecting, and using qualitative and quantita- tive data to inform community change processes is left to staff or partners doing work behind the scenes. But, as noted in the Racial Equity Action Plans manual, the role of identifying, collecting, and using data must be shared and owned by community leaders and the early adopters (or Core Team) of staff responsible for developing a plan of action.

The design and usefulness of the data will hinge on whether transparent, pro- active data analysis and use become a part of the culture of your group. This is different from the compliance structures often required in funding reports or the deficit orientation affixed to communities of color because of poor outcomes. The use and analysis of data are about empowering you to make good decisions–and to advance racial equity. RESOURCE GUIDE Racial Equity: Using a racial equity-centered RBA process requires you to use the same Getting to amount of rigor in your work with and in communities of color as you would Results put into any other endeavor. Racial equity implementation must be just as dis- Government Alliance on ciplined, albeit with different results. This requires, as noted in the Racial Equi- Race and Equity 18 ty Action Plans manual, that every activity you pursue is specific, measurable, 7 attainable, relevant, and timely.

There is a difference between experimentation and deliberate testing of ideas designed to disrupt and shift those practices that create racially inequitable results. When community is authentically engaged in the work, it becomes clear when something is a good idea and when a particular action lacks alignment with community values and goals. Furthermore, when the data trend goes in the wrong direction, authentic, trusting relationships with the group will en- courage and empower people to seek solutions rather than assign blame. An anti-racist, racial equity-focused Results-Based Accountability™ framework is one of many tools that can help you to move your plans forward in a disciplined way that is structured for equitable results. The next section will give you more information about RBA.

WHAT IS RACIAL EQUITY-CENTERED RESULTS-BASED ACCOUNTABILITY™? Results-Based Accountability™ (RBA) is a tool that starts with the desired results and works backwards towards the means, to ensure that your plans work toward community results with stakeholder-driven implementation. This dis- rupts historic patterns of “doing what we’ve always done, because we’ve always done it that way.” That way of work, done with the best intentions, does not produce the racial equity we demand in our communities. RBA also helps distinguish between population level (whole groups) indicators, that are the responsibility of multiple systems and take a long time to shift, and performance measures (activity-specific) that organizations can use to determine whether what they do is having an impact.

Tools are not the work, but they are a part of the work. The following guide will help you begin the process of using a powerful tool, Results-Based Account- ability™ that incorporates a racial equity lens.

The overarching RBA framework shows a relationship between Results, Indi- cators, and Activities. The orange bar in the diagram separates the population level results and indicators that are the responsibility of many systems over time; below the orange bar are the activities for which jurisdictions can develop performance measures and hold themselves accountable. The activities below the line should contribute to the change toward which the jurisdiction aims. The illustration on the next page visualizes what that looks like.

To start, Results-Based Accountability™ uses seven primary steps, also called questions of population accountability. RESOURCE GUIDE Racial Equity: Getting to Results Government Alliance on Race and Equity 19 8 RESULTS (A condition of well-being for people)

Indicators (Measures of Results)

Programs Policies Functions Agencies

Performance Performance Performance Performance Measures Measures Measures Measures

POPULATION ACCOUNTABILITY: START AT THE END

1) What are the desired results ? First, you need to be clear about what desired racial equity conditions you and your group want to see in your whole community. This requires the recognition that the whole community cannot experience well-being when communities of color experience it at disproportionately lower rates. Results focus on a city, county, or state and are articulated as positive conditions of well-being—such as people are healthy in [city], or Latino children are ready for school in [state]. This requires you to think about the larger context—toward the transformation of systems to get equitable results for communities of color. Because changing results is a bigger responsibility than any one agency can shoulder, you need institutional, agency, and community partners to accomplish your goals.

For example, Portland, Oregon’s statement “Develop planning and sustainability solutions that eliminate racial disparities thereby creating prosperous, re- silient, healthy, and affordable communities for all Portlanders” includes four results toward which the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability’s planning and sustainability solutions aspire: prosperity, resilience, health, and afford- ability. In order to get to those results, the Bureau will have to partner with other groups. The first step, then, is for your group to determine results.

Fill in the following statement: “We want families/communities that are…”

These statements should be positive (i.e. “healthy” versus “not sick”). They RESOURCE GUIDE should also be about the condition itself, not a choice or possibility of a con- Racial Equity: dition, (i.e. “educated” versus “the opportunity or to be educated”)—allowing Getting to the choice to be built in to the condition. Saying “the opportunity” reinforces Results notions that community members experience disparate outcomes because of Government choices they make rather than as a result of institutional and/or structural Alliance on Race and racism. Equity 20 2) What would the result look like? 9 The next step is to answer the following question: What would this result/condition of well-being look like if you experienced it in the community? What would it physically look like? What would it feel like?

This question should be answered in a culturally relevant, contextualized manner that is connected to the vision you have for racial equity. The question is not about any community, but about this community. You should ask yourself, whose vision does this picture reflect? Does it reinforce a deficit orientation about behaviors or does it authentically reflect what a result means to that city/county/state/community?

3) What are the community indicators that would measure the desired result? The next step is to identify community indicators, of the population-level result(s). Indicators may not be quick to move because they should be community-level measures that reflect generations of policy and systems failures that have produced racial inequity. Nevertheless, they are powerful measures that focus and hold your efforts accountable to population-level systems change over time.

These measures might look similar to others across the country, but once you disaggregate the data by race and ethnicity and review it, they tell a unique story about a particular community.

The group should keep ambitions practical and identify a small number of indicators on which to concentrate; it is easy to get distracted or avoid work when taking on too much at once. You can use some of the guiding questions outlined in the Racial Equity Action Plan manual to help identify the most relevant indicators.

• What needs or opportunities were identified during the information-gathering phase of this process? • What does our organization define as the most important racially equitable indicators? • What are some known racial inequities in our organization’s field?

Indicators are large-scale measures like unemployment rates, chronic disease rates, or academic achievement rates. Because of the scope and scale of the collection, population level data often comes from federal, state, city, or county RESOURCE GUIDE government or agencies, university partners, or Census data. Racial Equity: Getting to Once the group has identified the indicators that they would like to measure, Results partners should be identified to decide: (a) how to get this data, (b) how it can be Government disaggregated by race and ethnicity, and (c) with what regularity the data can Alliance on Race and be produced. Equity 21 10 THINKING THINGS THROUGH: A SAMPLE DIALOGUE Upon reviewing data that show a gap between the diabetes rates of white and African American residents of a city, a facilitator asks, “Why is the rate of diabetes so much higher for X residents?” A person might say “because X eat poor quality, sugary foods.” If the process ended there, it would not get at the root causes of the issue, and would also reinforce the assumptions some people make about the “choices” people make. Instead, the facilitator would ask the group, “But why?” and someone might say, “because it is cheap,” to which the facilitator might ask “so why would X people in city buy cheap food?” This might prompt the group to talk about the economic inequality wage and employment difference, or food deserts/the lack of access to healthy foods by neighborhood. A final “why?” might bring the group to identify histori- cal, structural racism in the context of that community.

4) What do the data tell us? Your group then needs to look at the data trend for each indicator, disaggregated by race/ethnicity and whatever relevant demographic breakdowns matter to your work, while asking “what would happen if we did nothing different?” Longitudinal indicator trends can help you see the racially disproportionate results for communities of color over time, and therefore past data is critical at this point in the process.

Then, facilitators will help the group to uncover the root causes behind the data trend, asking the group, “why does the trend look like this?” and for each answer, they should ask “why” three to five more times to move past superficial understandings of racial inequity and get to the underlying causes.

During this part of the process, you need to maintain discipline to dig into the root causes represented by indicator data trends. The review of data trends and analysis of root causes of racial disparity are critical to setting the stage for the rest of your work with your group. The process must be facilitated by someone skilled at pushing back on views that reinforce individual responsibility and shifting the focus to institutional and structural racism, and able to actively surface the historic and present-day root causes underlying the assumptions. This is most effective when there are two facilitators in a multiracial team who can use their understanding of racial equity; individual, institutional, and structural racism; and power and politics to lead the conversation. RESOURCE GUIDE Racial Equity: For example, when seeking root causes, some participants will likely state as- Getting to Results sumptions about people’s behavior that presume that all people, when they Government make choices, start on an even playing field. This often comes up when re- Alliance on viewing health data and child-related data on parenting—(i.e., assuming that Race and Equity 22 people make bad eating, purchasing, or parenting choices that cause poor outcomes). It is critical to understand structural and institutional racism and how 11 it plays out in people’s lives, and to use a root-cause analysis to understand underlying causes of disparities and to disrupt deficit thinking.

When done well, root-cause analysis produces the foundation upon which all actions and next steps are built. When done poorly, it causes confusion and tension in the group. When insufficient time is spent on root-cause analysis or it is skipped over, groups revert back to the same actions that they have used in the past rather than working with new processes or partners that would change results.

5) Who are your partners? After you’ve completed your root-cause analysis, your group should consider which partners you should work with in order to reach your goals. As noted in the Racial Equity Action Plan manual, in order to do systems change work, government must partner not only with community leadership, but also with a range of types of institutions. The group should consider:

• other government agencies; • local government leadership; • nonprofits; • philanthropy; • community-based advocacy and community organizing groups; • the private sector; and • any other partners that would be required.

For each of the identified partners, the group should also determine their role (“Why are they important? What are they needed for?”), and when it would be effective to bring that partner into the effort so as to phase the work strate- gically. Identify partners from other institutions whose participation will ensure that you have impact in your priority communities. Representatives from community-based organizations and grassroots community groups bring a more holistic understanding of inequities, as well as innovative solutions.

The group should also challenge itself to identify “unlikely suspects” or partners that have been avoided in the past—these might well be the exact partners you need in order to produce the results you seek. In addition, consider current partners and how they might expand or change what they are doing, allowing all options to be on the table. To reach impact, it is critical to set a cul- RESOURCE GUIDE ture of transparency about past performance by current partners. Racial Equity: Getting to Even if the group cannot yet determine how to engage a needed partner, the Results process of identifying strategic partners allows us to determine what we need, Government Alliance on and prevents us from falling back on business as usual. Making the connec- Race and tion with the partner is a separate step that can come at a later time. Equity 23 6) What works to change the data trend towards racial equity? 12 When determining what might work to transform results in your community, begin by having brainstorming sessions. No one program or policy will change an entire result, but any can be a good starting point.

Results-Based Accountability™ starts with these categories of ideas:

• Low-cost, no-cost ideas: free or nearly free ideas that members of the group identify. Because these solutions are not resource dependent, they may help the group get started more quickly than other activities that require money. • Community knowledge: ideas and solutions that are culled from the wisdom and experience of residents and community members who have already informally tried out actions and have found them to be effective. • Promising practices: solutions that are not considered “evidence-based” because they haven’t been rigorously studied, but that people in or outside of the community have tried that show promise. • Evidence-based practices: actions that research has shown to be effective. • Out-of-the-box/“Imagine if” ideas: ideas that may seem unorthodox or nontraditional but that just might work. With a diverse partnership come a diversity of ideas, and RBA believes that the more initial ideas the better. Creative, out-of-the-box ideas that relate to the root cause analysis can be particularly impactful.

Ask the group to think about the city/county/state’s current policies and service systems, and how they maintain or reinforce structural racism. During this part of the process, the group considers all actions—from policy changes or implementation to new, client-level programs with the end of decreasing racial disparities. Remember that the root causes they have already identified will inform their brainstorming.

The group should identify a large number of actions in each of the categories above in a judgment-free zone. The brainstorm is not a research project for evidence-based practices, although that can be a part of the brainstorming process. The brainstorm is a way to gather the ideas that have the best chance of impacting indicators at the macro-level.

RESOURCE GUIDE Racial Equity: 7) What actions should you start with? Getting to Results Once you’ve recorded the brainstorm, the group should use the following RBA Government criteria to determine which actions to begin with: Alliance on Race and Equity 24 • Values: Is it strengths-based, people-centered, and culturally relevant/ anti-racist? Does it advance a racial equity agenda? 13 • Leverage: How likely is it to change the trendline? What additional resources for change does it activate? • Reach: Is it feasible? Will it actually benefit communities of color expe- riencing racial inequities? • Specificity: Does it have a timeline with deliverables that answer the questions who, what, when, where, and how?

The Racial Equity Action Plan manual highlights action and accountability; in this large-scale, whole-community work, action commitments are critical to holding the group accountable. You should make action commitments at the end of each meeting to ensure that actions and new partnerships move forward. Action commitments require each member of the group to person- ally commit to one action related to moving indicators, and complete it by an agreed-upon deadline. People should report on progress on these actions at the beginning of every stakeholder meeting.

PERFORMANCE ACCOUNTABILITY FOR ACTIONS: THE ROAD TO GETTING RESULTS The hard work begins after the groundwork has been laid. For each community indicator, the group has already identified a set of actions. Now, as noted in the Racial Equity Action Plans manual, facilitated action planning sessions—within departments, across departments, and sometimes with nonprofit or other partners—help to refine the potentially broad set of actions. The Core Team should bring population-level indicators and results to these sessions and begin to build a performance plan.

Whether your actions are department-level policy changes, or changes to nonprofit programming, each need a set of performance measures to ensure that the action or activity is crafted to decrease racial disparities. RBA’s seven steps of performance accountability will guide your action refinement and your development of performance measures.

1) Who do you serve? For each action, the group working on that measure must first identify the intended beneficiary. Identifying who you serve (whether an institution, people, a group, or a system) helps you gain clarity about the intended impact of your work and not attempt to make people accountable for change outside their RESOURCE GUIDE scope of work. For example, some actions will impact community members Racial Equity: Getting to directly (i.e. parenting program); some will impact other kinds of stakehold- Results ers, such as elected officials (i.e. policy brief development), board members (i.e. Government training), or internal staff (i.e. use of a Racial Equity Toolkit policy). Alliance on Race and Equity 25 2) What is an action’s intended impact? 14 This simple question, articulated as a measure, is the most critical part of performance accountability. This is the difference between doing business as usual, which has produced racially inequitable results for generations, and being accountable for the impact of our work.

Begin by having the group answer these questions:

• How would I know if this action worked? • What is the intended impact? • How would I know if anyone is “better off” as a result of it?

These answers will inform the development of performance measures that will be critical to measuring the impact of your work. The three performance measures are:

• How much did you do? (Quantity, number of clients and/or activities) • How well did you do it? (Quality, percentage of activity that was of high quality, percentage of common measures of appropriate/high quality) • Is anyone better off? (Impact, number or percentage change in skills/ knowledge, attitude/opinion, behavior, or circumstance)

For example, a “better off” skills/knowledge measure might be the percentage of people that participated in an activity that have gained knowledge of their rights. An attitude/opinion measure could be the percentage of people that feel empowered as a result of an action. A behavior measure might be a change in the percentage of school attendance rate. And a circumstance measure could be the percentage working in family-sustaining wages as a result of a new employment policy.

You can sometimes expect to experience skepticism from community members. Remember, there are many reasons why communities of color might not trust government. Restoring trust will require time and government must demonstrate a long-term commitment and a willingness to partner in respon- sive, engaging, and power-sharing new ways. Internal to government, some staff may be skeptical as well; some may have seen similar conversations or initiatives come and go. Similar to working with community, building trust with employees of color will require demonstrated commitment from leadership over the long term.

RESOURCE GUIDE 3) What is the quality of the action? Racial Equity: It is essential to use metrics that measure the quality of the strategy in ways Getting to Results that span the gamut from cultural relevance, language access, and participa- Government tion rates to more technical measures of staff training and staff-to-client ratio. Alliance on Race and Equity 26 THINKING IT THROUGH: QUESTIONS TO ASK 15 Just because something is “evidence-based,” or should work, does not mean that it will work. A perfect, high-quality replication of an evidence-based service in your community does not mean that it is an impactful solution. You must ask yourself: Is it culturally relevant? Does it take into account community values? Was it selected with an eye to the root causes of racial inequity? If so, evidence-based practices can be part of the solution as long as you pay attention to the associated “better off” measure. But merely being evidence-based does not guarantee positive change, and some can have neutral or detri- mental impacts in communities, and others might result in overall improvement, but still result in increases in racial disproportionali- ties. It is important to maintain a focus on closing to racial inequities, as well as lifting up results for all.

The main purpose of this group of metrics is to ensure that action is being done well. If the “better off” measures show no change, quality measures sometimes tell us why we are not having an impact. Alternately, just because the action is being implemented in a high-quality manner, does not mean that the “better off” data will move in the right direction.

You can see how all three types of measures relate in this RBA graphic on page 16 (from Mark Friedman’s Trying Hard is Not Good Enough):

4) What is the story behind the data? Much of what was noted in population level accountability section for step four is the same for each performance-level action identified in your process. We recommend that you review that section again at this point. Even when groups select actions that they believe will address root causes at the population level, it is critical to regularly review data at the performance level and ask “why?” This is where the rubber hits the road on racial equity. This is the difference between perpetuating systemic failures to address racially disproportionate outcomes and disrupting them.

5) Who are the partners with a role to play? Again, this step is similar to the process at the population level, but it is often skipped at the action level. Generally, identifying partners after looking at data RESOURCE GUIDE helps organizations fill in service, policy, and community gaps. Racial Equity: Getting to Internally, organizations often fail to think about the partners that would make Results their work more effective. This can be because of ego, resources, or time. This Government failure causes them to continue business as usual, and prevents them from Alliance on having the thought partners at the table that would allow them to take their Race and Equity 27 HOW THREE MEASURES RELATE: RESULTS-BASED ACCOUNTABILITY 16

How much did we do? How well did we do it?

# Clients/people served % Common measures (e.g. client staff ratio, workload ratio, turnover rate, staff morale, % staff fully trained, % clients seen in their own language, unit cost) # Activities (by type of activity % Activity-specific measures (e.g. % timely, % clients completing activity, % correct and complete)

Is anyone better off?

#/% Skills/knowledge

(e.g. parenting skills)

#/% Attitude/opinion

(e.g. toward drugs)

#/% Behavior

(e.g. school attendance)

#/% Circumstance (e.g. working, in stable housing) work from good to transformative. If you are committed to racial equity, partners are critical to doing work differently, because they can expand and accel- erate impact. Organizations cannot afford to stay siloed any longer—multiple systems impact people and their efforts need to be coordinated and effective.

Again, think about all of the types of partners named in step five in the population part of this tool and consider who is needed, in what role, and when to move the work.

6) What works to have greater impact? After you’ve reviewed data on any action, it is time to use it. If you do not use the data, you perpetuate the same practices that have contributed to racial inequities all along. When things are not going well, or as planned, or the data does not show impact, remember that you have already identified root cases and know that it takes time to see change. You should begin by thinking about RESOURCE GUIDE how you might change the action. Start by reflecting on the lessons learned Racial Equity: within the agency’s experience, but also think about what works in other parts Getting to of the community and in other communities—as well as formal best practices/ Results evidence-based practices that you can use or adapt. This may require you to Government Alliance on consider the requirements of funding streams, contracts, and evidence-based Race and Equity 28 17 THINKING IT THROUGH: EQUITY REQUIRES COMMUNITY INSIGHT To ensure maximum fidelity between the data and the intended impact of an action, ensure that community leadership is in the room for data reviews and root-cause analysis. Sometimes data looks like it is having an intended impact, but you need community residents or people on the receiving end of the implementing a solution to identify the “why?”—or the unintended consequences of “success.” For example, new residents in a community may increase the number of business opportunities/jobs, hence increasing employment in the neighborhood. It is critical to notice/track the beginning stages of that increase in new residents to see whether it is moving into gen- trification, displacing existing residents or businesses, or if businesses are selling goods that are affordable to the existing community. Community leadership is best positioned to flag these root causes of otherwise neutral-seeming actions or other things “under the radar.” Community insight is also necessary when designing and refining solutions—so make sure to have them at the table.

models—balancing what is required of you with what you believe will work to change systems. While it can be hard to change or stop existing practices, change can produce improved results.

7) What are the next steps? To figure out the next steps, you will need to ask and get answers to specific questions:

• Who will do what, by when? • What resources are needed to get it done? • Is this a long-term action that needs time or can it be done tomorrow? • What is the active role of community leadership in making these decisions? A commitment to action, just like in the population level process, is critical. The more precise the better, and they must be written.

RESOURCE GUIDE Racial Equity: Getting to Results Government Alliance on Race and Equity 29 A COMMITMENT TO RACIAL EQUITY AND BETTER 18 RESULTS

A Racial Equity-focused Results-Based Accountability™ (RBA) in and of itself is not the work; authentic and principled engagement with community is the work. If a tool could accomplish the hard work of transformative public systems change that would produce better results for communities of color, jurisdictions would have solved racial inequities. On the other hand, without tools and a disciplined and focused way of doing work, communities can unintentionally perpetuate inequity by re- lying on goodwill and intellect alone. In places like Fairfax County and Dubuque, and many places around the country, hard work is underway— laying the foundation for systems change by investing in both a common understanding of racism and tools for transformative change.

RESOURCE GUIDE Racial Equity: Getting to Results Government Alliance on Race and Equity 30 19

CASE STUDY: DUBUQUE, IOWA

Dubuque, Iowa, a majority white community with disproportionately poor results based on race and ethnicity, is building the public will and institutional ability to look at racially-disaggregated data to inform decisions. They have been embedding the RBA framework into their already-evolved racial equity-focused work on advancing housing equity, and building a local model from which other groups can learn. In addition, Dubuque is investing in empowering and developing the ability of local direct-service staff and managers to use disaggregated data to improve results for people of color in real time. They believe that when lawyers, social workers, and managers themselves do this work with data, it helps them internalize the related values and skills over time, and they can apply those learnings more directly to their work. Dubuque is modeling how smaller, disproportionately white communities across the country can deliberately build a foundation using a racial equity lens—and embed a disciplined approach to use data to change systems.

RESOURCE GUIDE Racial Equity: Getting to Results Government Alliance on Race and Equity 31 20

CASE STUDY: FAIRFAX COUNTY, VIRGINIA

In July, 2016, the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors and School Board adopted the One Fairfax Resolution envisioning an opportunity-rich community in which everyone can participate and prosper. This resolution provides the vehicle to understand how issues of equity impact all Fair- fax County residents and directs the development of a racial and social equity policy—at its core—to be applied in the planning and delivery of all public services and investments. The policy, once adopted, will facilitate the use of equity tools to ensure that equity becomes an intentional point of consideration in decision-making and resource-allocation processes. A cross-systems (County and Schools) Executive Leadership Team, along with an inter-disciplinary, multi-agency policy development workgroup was convened and charged to develop the policy and recommendations regarding the infrastructure necessary for implementation and sustainability. Meaningful metrics, supported by an accountability structure that bridges the County Government and the Public School System will ensure common terminology, disaggregated data standards, and “better off” measures to evaluate progress towards achieving racial and social equity. Finally, and importantly, to redefine public engagement in ways RESOURCE GUIDE that affirm effective democracy through implementing inclusive actions, Racial Equity: processes, and structures that build community capacity and reflect the Getting to diversity of all residents. Fairfax County is working hard to make their Results vision for racial and social equity a reality with and for the community. Government Alliance on Race and Equity 32 Across the country, governmental jurisdictions are:

Making a Focusing on Working in commitment the power partnership to achieving and influence with others racial equity of their own institutions

When this occurs, significant leverage and expansion opportunities emerge, setting the stage for the achievement of racial equity in our communities.

33 Census Tracts

900 600

400 100 200 800 500 700 300

3500 3000 2800 2100 1600 1300 1100 3800 3700 3300 3200 2700 2500 1900 2900 2000 3400 2400 2300 1700 1000 3600 1500 2200 1400 3100 1200 2600

1800

ROSLYN PL SHERIDAN PL ´ 2900 2800 GREEN BAY RD LAKESIDE GLENVIEW RD ISABELLA ST ISABELLA ST ISABELLA ST SHERIDAN RD CT 2800 PRAIRIE AVE EUCLID BERNARD PL OTTO THAYER ST JENKS ST PARK PL

CRAWFORDCLIFFORD ST MARCY AVE

MEADOW- LN LARK LN THAYER ST LAWNDALE AVE LAWNDALE HIGHLAND AVE HIGHLAND INGLESIDE PL THAYER CT THAYER

THAYER WOODBINE AVE 2700 STEWART AVE HAMPTON PKY THAYER ST PARK PL LIVINGSTON ST INGLESIDE GARRISON AVE GARRISON PARK PL AVE HURD MONTICELLO PL 2700 ST PARK PL POPLAR AVE PK LIVINGSTON ASBURY AVE HILLSIDE 8089 BROADWAY AVE HARTZELL ST WALNUT AVE CHANCELLOR ST CHANCELLOR CLINTON PL LN HARTZELL ST GIRARD AVE LIVINGSTON

PRINCETON AVE HILLSIDE RD RIDGE AVE

BENNETT AVE

REESE AVE REESE EWING AVE EWING

LINCOLNWOOD DR LINCOLNWOOD 2600 CENTRAL ST CENTRAL ST CENTRAL ST BRYANT AVE COWPER AVE CENTRAL ST MARCY AVE 2600 CENTRAL PARK AVE RIDGEWAY AVE LAWNDALE AVE HASTINGS AVE 8088

CULVER GREEN BAY RD HARRISON ST HARRISON ROSALIE ST RIDGE TER MILBURN PK GROSS POINT RD MILBURN ST 2500

GREELEY

PRINCETON

JACKSON

2500 WELLINGTON LINCOLN ST EASTWOOD AVE ASHLAND AVE ELM AVE ELM CT LINCOLN ST LINCOLN ST HARRISON ST PRAIRIE AVE COLFAX COLFAX TER

PL AVE McDANIEL COLFAX ST 2400 2400 COLFAX ST WESLEY COLFAX ST

DARTMOUTH GRANT 2300 PROSPECT PROSPECT AVE GRANT ST NOYES DARTMOUTH 2300 PL GRANT ST 8091 CT PL 8090 NOYES ST NOYES CALVIN NOYES ST TECH CIR NORMANDY GREY AVE LEONARD PL HAVEN ST DR 2200 PL PAYNE ST 8093 GAFFIELD PL 2200 HAYES RD PIONEER

EWING AVE EWING FORESTVIEW RD FORESTVIEW

ARBOR DR LINCOLNWOOD PAYNE ST PAYNE ST LN GARRETT PL PAYNE TRINITY BRIDGE SIMPSON ST AVE SHERMAN ORRINGTON AVE ORRINGTON CRAWFORD AVE CRAWFORD ST NORTHWESTERN 2100 CT KNOX BENNETT AVE BENNETT SIMPSON ST CIR HAMLIN ST PL 2100 HAWTHORNE LEON PL LIBRARY PL SIMPSON ST WOODLAND LN

MAPLE MAPLE AVE

PRATT CT RD FOSTER ASHLAND AVE ST FOSTER ST 2000 ELGIN RD 2000 McCORMICKNORTH SHORE CHANNEL BLVD GARNETT McDANIEL AVE MARTHA LN 8087.02 PL

RIDGE AVE

DEWEY DEWEY AVE

GREY GREY AVE 8092 JACKSON AVE FOSTER ST

BROWN AVE EMERSON ST 1900 CAMPUS DR CAMPUS EAST RAILROAD AVE 1900 ELGIN RD EMERSON ST UNIVERSITY PL ARTS

WADE OAK CT CIRCLE DR

DARROW AVE LYONS ST HARTREY AVE CLARK ST LEMAR AVELEMAR A 1800 1800 LAUREL AVE LYONS ST CLARK ST LYONS ST K

GREY AVE GREY E

BROWN BROWN AVE

HOVLAND CT

WESLEY AVE WESLEY ASBURY ASBURY AVE 1700

LELAND AVE CHURCH ST 1700 SHERIDAN RD M CHURCH ST

I DAVIS ST AVEBENSON 1600 R DAVIS ST C I

ASHLAND AVE

1600 ELINOR G H

CT ST. MARK'SST.

E PL SHERMAN AVE GROVE ST GROVE ST JUDSON AVE I

G DODGE AVE 8095 8094HINMAN AVE FOREST PITNER AVE PL 1500 FOWLER AVE A

OAK OAK AVE 1500 McDANIELAVE LAKE ST LAKE ST N

8096 A

GREY

BROWN GREENWOOD ST 1400 1400 GREENWOOD ST SHERMAN PL

DARROW AVE DARROW THELIN AVE ASBURY Main Road CT DRYDEN WESLEY AVE PL DEMPSTER ST 1300

DEMPSTER ST CHICAGO AVE 1300 RIDGE AVE OAK AVE WILDER ST CROFT BURNHAM PL Local Street LN

MAPLE MAPLE AVE

FOREST AVE

JUDSON AVE CRAIN ST HINMAN AVE HAMILTON ST 1200 1200 Railroad CRAIN

HARTREY AVE

DODGE AVE

ELMWOOD AVE SHERMAN AVE SHERMAN GREENLEAF ST 1100

PITNER AVE 1100 Water FOWLER AVE GREENLEAF8097 ST 8098 8099 NATHANIEL PL LAKE LAKE SHORE BLVD

DEWEY DEWEYAVE

LEE ST RD SHERIDAN FLORENCE AVEFLORENCE

DARROW DARROW AVE LEE ST MICHIGANAVE 1000

EDGEMERE 1000 LEE ST CT

McCORMICK McCORMICK BLVD

McDANIEL AVE BRADLEY PL

RIDGE CT RIDGE NORTH SHORE CHANNEL

ASHLAND AVE ASHLAND

ASBURY ASBURY AVE MAIN ST AVE WESLEY MAIN ST 900 900 WASHINGTON ST WASHINGTON ST GREY GREY AVE KEDZIE ST 800 WASHINGTON ST CHICAGO AVE HINMAN AVE JUDSON AVE MICHIGAN AVE MADISON ST SHERIDAN RD FOREST AVE 800 PITNER ALY MADISON PL

MONROE ST AVE SHERMAN ELMWOOD AVEELMWOOD 700

DODGE AVE 700 CLEVELAND ST BROWN AVE CLEVELAND ST REBA PL 8101 LINDEN PL KEENEY ST PITNERAVE SEWARD ST SHERIDAN DEWEY DEWEY AVE SEWARD ST SQ 8103.02 RIDGE AVE SEWARD ST 600 600 KEENEY ST KEENEY ST SOUTH BLVD WARREN ST SOUTH BLVD SOUTH BLVD

WESLEY AVE 8100 500

HARTREY AVE HARTREY GREY AVE OAKTON ST

CUSTER AVE 500 CALLAN AVE ARNOLD SHERIDAN RD OAKTON ST AUSTIN ST PL

RIDGE AVE KIRK ST 400 400 BARTON AVE HULL TER

DODGE AVE

WESLEY WESLEY AVE FLORENCE AVE FLORENCE DARROW AVE DARROW 300 DEWEY DEWEY AVE MULFORD ST 300 8103.01 AVE ASHLAND HARVARD TER MULFORD ST 8102CASE ST CASE PL AUTOBARN PL BRUMMEL ST BRUMMEL ST 200 BROWN AVE

CALLAN 200 CLYDE AVE 1 inch = 0.5 mile

RICHMOND AVE DOBSON ST DOBSON ST

ASBURY ASBURY AVE 1:31,680

HARTREY HARTREY AVE 100 100 GREY AVE HOWARD ST HOWARD ST 0 0.5 1 Mile

2000

2500 2300 2200 1800 1600 1000 2600 2400 2100 1700 1400 1500 1200 1100 1900 1300

800 700 400 300 200 600 900 100 CensusTractsLetter.mxd 500 10/21/2016

This map is provided "as is" without warranties of any kind. See www.cityofevanston.org/mapdisclaimers.html for more information.

34 Educational Attainment - Population 25 years and over High school graduate or higher by census tract for the years 2000, 2010 & 2017 ´ 8089 2000: 98% 8088 2010: 99.6% 2000: 99.1% 2017: 98.9% 2010: 100% 2017: 100%

8090 2000: 96.7% 8091 2010: 97.6% 2000: 96.6% 2017: 97% 2010: 98.3% 8093 2017: 99.1% 2000: 90.6% 2010: 97.2% 2017: 92.2% 8087.02 2000: 98.5% 8092 2010: 96.9% 2000: 70.9% 2017: 98% 2010: 79% 2017: 83.6% % HS graduate or higher 8095 8094 50 8096 2000: 96.6% 2000: 85.8% 2000: 94.8% 2010: 94.5% 2010: 96.8% PerHSGradPer2000 2010: 82.6% 2017: 98.8% 2017: 88.6% 2017: 95.7% PerHSGradPer2010 PerHSGradPer2017 8097 8099 Tract boundary 2000: 83.2% 8098 2000: 98.7% 2010: 85.2% 2000: 85.9% 2010: 99.6% 2017: 84.6% 2010: 93.2% 2017: 98.3% 2017: 93.9%

8101 2000: 94.7% Data sources: US Census Bureau 8103.02 2010: 96.4% Census 2000 Summary File 3 2000: 91.1% 2017: 94% 8100 2010 American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates 2010: 92.8% 2000: 97.1% 2017 American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates 2017: 92.4% 2010: 97.6% 8103.01 2017: 97.2% 2000: 85.6% 8102 2010: 89.3% 2000: 86.3% 2017: 88.5% 2010: 89.1% 2017: 85.5%

0 0.25 0.5 1 Mile

This map is provided "as is" without warranties of any kind. EducationalAttainmentHSGradMap.mxd See www.cityofevanston.org/mapdisclaimers.html35 for more information. 1/30/2019 Language spoken at home - Population 5 years and over Language other than English by census tract for the years 2000, 2010 & 2017 ´ 8089 8088 2000: 11.2% 2000: 10% 2010: 6.7% 2010: 13.8% 2017: 12.1% 2017: 19.5%

8090 8091 2000: 10.8% 2000: 9.4% 2010: 7.5% 2010: 8.7% 8093 2017: 12.3% 2017: 8% 2000: 21.3% 2010: 24.7% 2017: 22.2% 8087.02 2000: 25.5% 8092 2010: 26.7% 2000: 15% 2017: 32.2% 2010: 19.1% 2017: 35.1% % lang. other than English 8095 8094 18 8096 2000: 25.1% 2000: 20.3% 2000: 12.8% 2010: 14.3% 2010: 20.8% LangOtherThanEnglish2000 2010: 30.6% 2017: 34.4% 2017: 24.9% 2017: 27.4% LangOtherThanEnglish2010 LangOtherThanEnglish2017 8097 8099 Tract boundary 2000: 24.9% 8098 2000: 10.9% 2010: 29.7% 2000: 13.6% 2010: 11.4% 2017: 29.4% 2010: 17% 2017: 20.6% 2017: 16.2%

8101 2000: 18.4% Data sources: US Census Bureau 8103.02 2010: 25.6% Census 2000 Summary File 3 2000: 16.4% 2017: 16.5% 8100 2010 American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates 2010: 19.8% 2000: 16% 2017 American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates 2017: 16.5% 2010: 19.6% 8103.01 2017: 21.6% 2000: 28.3% 8102 2010: 30.4% 2000: 23.3% 2017: 35.3% 2010: 27.8% 2017: 32%

0 0.25 0.5 1 Mile

This map is provided "as is" without warranties of any kind. LanguageSpokenAtHomeOtherMap.mxd See www.cityofevanston.org/mapdisclaimers.html36 for more information. 1/30/2019 Median family income, high school graduate or higher, and language other than English spoken at home by census tract for the year 1990 ´ 8089 8088 8087.01 Income: $77,037 Income: $71,147 Income: $119,613 HS Grad: 97.5% HS Grad: 99.6% HS Grad: 100% Other lang.: 7% Other lang.: 15.2% Other lang.: 14.4%

8090 8091 Income: $82,766 Income: $67,713 8093 8087.02 HS Grad: 97.5% HS Grad: 97.2% Income: $50,851 Income: $79,801 Other lang.: 6.2% Other lang.: 5.5% HS Grad: 79.4% HS Grad: 98% Other lang.: 11.1% Other lang.: 17.6%

8092 Income: $33,727 HS Grad: 60.6% Other lang.: 12.4%

8095 8094 8096 Income: $52,813 Income: $58,993 Income: $40,104 HS Grad: 95.2% HS Grad: 89.6% 1990 Census Tract HS Grad: 72.9% Other lang.: 9.6% Other lang.: 13.4% Other lang.: 11.6%

8099 8097 8098 Income: $79,540 Income: $43,438 Income: $62,784 HS Grad: 98.4% HS Grad: 81.5% HS Grad: 88.9% Other lang.: 17.5% Other lang.: 17.6% Other lang.: 8.2%

8101 Income: $40,921 Income = Median family income (1989 reported) 8103.02 HS Grad: 89.5% 8100 HS Grad = Percent high school graduate or higher Income: $49,390 Other lang.: 13.1% Income: $57,259 for the population 25 years and older HS Grad: 90.5% Other lang. = Percent language spoken at home HS Grad: 98.7% Other lang.: 15.1% is other than English Other lang.: 5.4% 8103.01 8102 Income: $49,730 Income: $37,107 Data source: US Census Bureau HS Grad: 88.4% HS Grad: 87.3% Census 1990 Summary File 3 Other lang.: 17.3% Other lang.: 16.7%

0 0.25 0.5 1 Mile

This map is provided "as is" without warranties of any kind. MedFamInc_HSGrad_Language1990Map.mxd See www.cityofevanston.org/mapdisclaimers.html37 for more information. 1/31/2019 Median family income by census tract for the years 2000, 2010 & 2017 ´ 8089 2000: $111,523 8088 2010: $130,457 2000: $136,660 2017: $168,750 2010: $165,000 2017: $181,250

8090 2000: $137,347 8091 2010: $170,500 2000: $123,746 8093 2017: $183,527 2010: $155,682 2000: $90,000 2017: $167,969 2010: $121,895 2017: $160,450 8087.02 8092 2000: $76,780 2000: $42,206 2010: $125,000 2010: $70,625 2017: $143,750 2017: $53,019

Median family income 8095 2000: $77,312 8094 93,000 8096 2010: $104,219 2000: $50,865 2000: $101,862 2017: $115,150 2010: $116,250 MedFamInc2000 2010: $71,806 2017: $96,293 2017: $127,714 MedFamInc2010 MedFamInc2017 8097 8099 Tract boundary 2000: $56,680 8098 2000: $110,354 2010: $90,733 2000: $87,450 2010: $155,543 2017: $82,100 2010: $119,286 2017: $186,250 2017: $183,889

8101 2000: $69,844 Data sources: US Census Bureau 8103.02 2010: $82,841 Census 2000 Summary File 3 2000: $76,340 2017: $85,714 8100 2010 American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates 2010: $90,260 2000: $90,743 2017 American Community Survey 5 Year Estimates 2017: $103,225 2010: $98,750 8103.01 2017: $155,478 2000: $61,250 8102 2010: $85,029 2000: $48,451 2017: $92,788 2010: $55,595 2017: $58,895

0 0.25 0.5 1 Mile

This map is provided "as is" without warranties of any kind. MedianFamilyIncomeMap.mxd See www.cityofevanston.org/mapdisclaimers.html38 for more information. 1/30/2019

For Human Services Committee February 4, 2019 Item HH5

For Discussion

Equity and Empowerment Commission Update

Memorandum

To: Chair and Members of the Human Services Committee

From: Paulina Martínez, Assistant to the City Manager

C: Patricia Efiom, Chief Equity Officer

Subject: Equity and Empowerment Commission Update

Date: January 31, 2019

Summary: Attached is the Equity and Empowerment Commission’s work-plan, which summarizes the milestones that have been achieved to date. The document also outlines the strategies of the plan and the proposed timeline to achieve each milestone.

Attachments: - Equity and Empowerment Workplan

39 Evanston Equity and Empowerment Commission WORKPLAN, 2018-2019 Revised January 2019

TASK September October November December January February March April May NO MEETING Equitable Evanston (equity framework) Strategy 1: Staff draft, Commission Present to Human Define Equity Commission discussion approval Services Committee Concepts (Tim, Julie, Pat) [done] Resources, meeting Staff draft Revised draft Memo to HS packet Committee Strategy 2: Committee (Alejandra, Commission Commission approval Develop community Delores) to draft discussion engagement policy and tool Resources, meeting Committee draft Revised draft packet Strategy 3: Gather data, assess data needs (project- based) Resources, meeting Committee draft Revised draft packet Strategy 4: Assign committee Racial Committee to draft Assign Commission Commission Develop equity lens, equity committee discussion approval systems analysis training. (Melissa and Committee: Jane) Alejandra and Pat Resources, meeting Committee draft Revised draft 1

40 packet Strategy 5: Committee to draft Assign Commission Develop evaluation committee discussion tool (project-based) (Monté and Kathy) Resources, meeting Committee draft packet Strategy 6: Assign Recommend equity committee goals (Mario)

Note: City Council discussion January 30 Resources, meeting Committee draft packet Strategy 7: Appoint committee Commission Commission Commission Commission Ongoing work discussion discussion discussion discussion Resources, meeting packet Translation services Staff to report on policy City policy Resources, meeting Staff memo: existing packet City policy, contract, type of services, standard accessibility language; school district services. EPL equity consulting Commission discussion report Resources, meeting EPL report (DeEtta packet Jones, consultant) 2

41 Commission workplan Committee (Alejandra Commission Commission and Jane) to draft; approval [done] revisions commission discussion [done] Resources, meeting Draft workplan Revised draft Revised workplan for packet workplan packet Commission budget Committee (Delores, Commission [City Council [City Council Monte) to draft, approval approval of approval of FY2019 Commission FY2019 budget?] discussion budget?] Resources, meeting FY2018 expenses; packet Committee draft for FY2019 (estimate of training, consulting, speaking expenses, etc.) July 2018: Adopted of Annie E Casey Foundation race equity guide as model for Equitable Evanston framework. July 2018: Adopted of race equity priority, internal/City of Evanston focus on equity framework. September 2018: Adopted Six-Month Workplan, 2018-2019. January 2019: Updated workplan; adopted key equity concepts.

For future Commission consideration:

 Professional development o Community orientation: . Black Business Consortium Tour . Snapshot Evanston (Evanston Community Foundation) o Guest speakers, discussions: . Terry Keleher, Director of Strategic Innovations, Race Forward o Diversity and inclusion training . Terry Keleher, Director of Strategic Innovations, Race Forward

 Tasks o Environmental justice ordinance 3

42 o City summer camp programming, Recreation Board consideration of equity o FY2019, FY2020 budgets o Truth and reconciliation, community restorative justice initiative

 Prospective meeting hosts o School District 65 o Second Baptist Church o Foster Senior Club o Fleetwood-Jourdain Community Center o Gibbs Morrison Community Center o Levy Recreation Center o Y.O.U. o St. Nicholas Catholic Church o McGaw YMCA (background on Emerson Branch YMCA) o Evanston Community Foundation o Northwestern University o St. Francis Hospital o Beth Emet Synagogue

 Meeting hosts o Shorefront Legacy Center (April 2018) o Center for Independent Futures (May 2018) o Students Organized Against Racism, Evanston Township High School (June 2018) o Joining Forces, Connections for the Homeless (July 2018) o Evanston/Northshore YWCA (September 2018)