“Race”-ing to Equity: A Toolkit and Tale of Two Cities

“Race”-ing to Equity: A Toolkit and Tale of Two Cities

New Partners for Smart Growth ConferenceCharlotte, NCFebruary 3, 2011

john a. powellExecutive Director, Kirwan Institute for the Study of

Race and EthnicityWilliams Chair in Civil Rights & Civil Liberties,

Moritz College of Law

Overview

• Introductions• Understanding the Geography of Opportunity

– Structural racialization and

• Changing the Geography of Opportunity– Targeted Universalism– Growing Communities of Opportunity– Opportunity mapping

• East Baltimore Revitalization Initiative• Racial Equity Impact Analysis

STRUCTURAL RACIALIZATION AND SYSTEMS THINKING

Our understanding of Opportunity has changed over time….

• Structural Inequality– Example: a Bird in a cage.

Examining one bar cannot explain why a bird cannot fly. But multiple bars, arranged in specific ways, reinforce each other and trap the bird.

• One variable can explain why differential outcomes.

• Understanding the relationships among these multiple dimensions, and how these complex intra-actions change processes• Relationships are

neither static nor discrete

5

Opportunity is….

Racialized…

• In 1960, African-American families in poverty were 3.8 times more likely to be concentrated in high-poverty neighborhoods than poor whites.

• In 2000, they were 7.3times more likely.

Spatialized…

• marginalized people of color and the very poor have been spatially isolated from opportunity via reservations, Jim Crow, Appalachian mountains, ghettos, barrios, and the culture of incarceration.

Globalized…• Economic

globalization

• Climate change

• the Credit and Foreclosure crisis

Some people ride the “Up” escalator to reach opportunity

Others have to run up the “Down” escalator to get there

Our opportunity context matters

The order of the structures The timing of the interaction between them The relationships that exist between/among them

8

Structural Racialization

Contd.

• The way we organize the built environment has been based on racial segregation

• This creates psychological segregation

• Not only inefficient but also morally wrong

Why do some people have access to the “good life” while others do not?

It’s more than a matter of choice…The Cumulative Impacts of Spatial, Racial and

Opportunity Segregation

Neighborhood Segregation

School Segregation

Racial stigma, other psychological impacts

Job segregation

Impacts on community power and individual assets

Impacts on Educational Achievement

Exposure to crime; arrest

Transportation limitations and other inequitable public services

Adapted from figure by Barbara Reskin at: http://faculty.washington.edu/reskin/

Segregation impacts a number of life-opportunities

Impacts on Health

Who’s to blame?

13

Historic Government Role

• A series of federal policies have contributed to the disparities we see today– School Policy

– Suburbanization & Homeownership

– Urban Renewal

– Public Housing

– Transportation

14

Institutions continue to

support, not dismantle, the

status quo. This is why we

continue to see racially

inequitable outcomes even

if there is good intent

behind policies, or an

absence of racist actors. (i.e.

structural racialization)

TODAY,

• Factually correct

But what does this sentence suggest?

Black students inherently not as capable?

• SR opens the analysis to impact of housing on schools, concentrated poverty in schools, under-resourced schools

• Structures “normalize”. So when we are navigating through structures (ex. education system), we do so without actively thinking.

• Example: We have accepted the normalization of testing in the US.

– We look at the gap in testing and ways to alleviate that gap.

– A different approach:• Finland has eliminated examination

systems that had previously tracked students for middle schools and restricted access to high schools, among other key changes

– Outcome of changes: graduating over 90% of HS students; consistently high rankings on international standards

– Takeaway: without structural approach, we misdiagnose the problem

UNDERSTANDING THE GEOGRAPHY OF OPPORTUNITY CAN MAKE OUR REGIONAL INVESTMENTS MORE EFFECTIVE.

But how can we rearrange structures so they provide pathways to opportunity for everyone?

Changing the Geography of Opportunity

Targeted Universalism

o Communication

o Policy

o Portland Example

Growing Communities of Opportunity

o Opportunity Mapping

TARGETED UNIVERSALISMA new way of talking and acting

“Situatedness” is relational• Problem: 3 people are

out to sea and a big storm is coming.

• Goal: To reach the people within 6 hours

• Assumption: If we can reach them within 6 hours, we will save them all

Example contd.• But the 3 are not all in

the stormy water in the same way…

• Which person would be most likely to survive the 6 hours it would take to reach them?

• If water is a “structure,”(housing, education, etc.) some groups are able to navigate the structure more successfully than other groups…

Targeted universalism as

• Moves beyond the disparities frame

• Focuses on the universal goals shared by all the communities while being sensitive to the targeted strategies that are responsive to the situation of marginalized communities

Targeted Universalism as Strategy

*Promote Universal Policies in Targeted Ways*

• There is no “one size fits all”

• “One vision, many paths”

• Process:• What is the goal?• How do we tailor

strategies to different groups, who are differently situated, to lift them to that goal?

We’ve seen a Targeted Universalism approach at work before…

Neighborhood Stabilization Program

Context• “the old inequality made the new inequality possible by creating

geographic concentrations of underserved..consumers” ripe for exploitation– Black and Hispanic communities were hardest hit by twin crises of

unemployment and foreclosures. Research shows that residential segregation is a major contributing factor to the incidence of foreclosure in communities of color, esp. in Black communities—the greater the segregation, the higher the number and rate of foreclosure. (Massey)

• And the destabilizing effects were not contained within these neighborhoods (i.e. spillover)

• Solution? Targeted form of public investment: “We believe fundamentally that with the broader recovery we should be focusing resources on the places that are hardest hit.” (Sec. Donovan)

Example contd.

Implementation

• What does this suggest about investment of NSP?– Solutions for rebuilding neighborhoods need to address

the housing issues, the social infrastructure, and access to credit in these neighborhoods.

– And should also provide access to higher opportunity areas

• Questions to consider:– Are NSP funds contributing to increased concentrations of

rental units in high poverty neighborhoods, or predominantly minority neighborhoods?

– Are NSP funds expended in conformance with Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing requirements?

• i.e. used to purchase affordable housing in high opportunity neighborhoods?

In Tampa, NSP properties clustered in neighborhoods of low income, and

neighborhoods that are predominantly minority, which are the hardest hit areas….

These are also neighborhoods of

lowest opportunity …

But a good number of properties are also in neighborhoods of higher opportunity

COMMUNITIES OF OPPORTUNITYGrowing together to expand opportunity for all

The Opportunity Framework– Deliberate, coordinated, and

regional investments in people, places, and linkages

– Two-pronged approach:

• Targeted in-place, urban revitalization strategies

• Mobility-based investments for marginalized residents to access high opportunity communities’

These are Not opposing strategies! A sustainable, transformative development strategy requires both

A Multi-faceted Approach:Strategies for Connecting to Opportunity

So Why Mapping?

Regional, racial and social inequity often manifest as spatial inequity

Mapping shows the cumulative effects of opportunity segregation

www.KirwanInstitute.org

KirwanInstituteon:

www.race-talk.org

East Baltimore Revitalization Initiative

New Partners for Smart Growth Conference

Scot T. Spencer, Associate Director for Advocacy and Influence

The Annie E Casey Foundation

www.aecf.org

The Revitalization Project

• A study was commissioned by the City, funded by a foundation to answer the question ‘what would it take to catalyze the redevelopment of the neighborhoods north of Johns Hopkins?’

• The study underscored the need to be bold, to undertake a development at some scale and to capitalize on the intellectual capital of Johns Hopkins

• There was very little mention of the consequences of the proposed action on the people who lived in the community…

Before Revitalization

Neighborhood Demographics (2000)

• 2nd poorest neighborhood in Baltimore City• Median household income $14,900; city’s median ~

$32,000; regional median ~ $58,000• 98% African-American• Fewer than ½ of the adults were in the labor force• Median sales price for a home was $28,000; city median

was $69,000• 27% of residents over age 25 with HS diploma• Community was part of the Federal Empowerment Zone• Immediately north of Johns Hopkins hospital and

professional campus

The Planning Process

• Project was announced by the City in 2001; most residents found out in the newspaper

• A 3-day community charrette was held in the summer of 2001 and largely focused on an 88 acre area now referred to as “the piano”

• Plans called for the concentration of the development in a 30 acre core resulting in significant relocation (750 families) and demolition (over 800 buildings, 550 in the first 30 acres)

A Community Lost?

Resident Organizing/Resident Engagement

• A resident group - Save Middle East Action Committee - was formed in response to the project

• With a long history of distrust of Johns Hopkins, the project was viewed as another land grab

• Residents began to organize “A House for a House” campaign and sought a seat at the leadership table

• Residents fought for (and won): Economic Inclusion, Right to Return, Safe Demolition Protocol

A Different Role for Philanthropy

• Invest in both sides of the discussion –resident engagement and project management

• Serve as a tool to amplify the resident voice –anger, anxiety, resentment, ideas and ideals and mourning

• Look for new ways to use resources to achieve mutual benefit

• Leadership by example

Elements of a More Inclusive Process –Some Lessons Learned

• Reframing the project from Economic Development to Community Development to Community Building

• Significant investment of resources – time and capital

• Actively listening to and including the voices of community

• Being nimble to respond to immediate issues without losing sight of the long term goals

• Document the process to inform the field

The Story is not finished…

Scot T. Spencersspencer@aecf.org

Today’s Face, Tomorrow’s Future

Friends of Talladega College MeetingNew York, NY

October 11, 2005

http://www.aecf.org/KnowledgeCenter/PublicationsSeries/RaceMatters.aspx

Racial Equity Impact Analysis Value of the Tool

• Encourages broad participation in discussion

• Turns generally good ideas into ones that can close racial gaps (From necessary to sufficient policies and practices)

46

1. Are all racial/ethnic groups who are affected by the policy/practice/decision at the table?

2. How will the proposed policy/practice/decision affect each group?

3. How will the proposed policy/practice/decision be perceived by each group?

4. Does the policy/practice/decision worsen or ignore existing disparities?

5. Based on the above responses, what revisions are needed in the policy/practice/decision under discussion?

47

Racial Equity Impact Analysis

The Tool

Today’s Face, Tomorrow’s Future

Friends of Talladega College MeetingNew York, NY

October 11, 2005

For additional information, contact Delia Carmenwww.carmen@voices.org

MORE ON EQUITY IMPACT STATEMENTS

Example: LEED certification• LEED for Neighborhood Development recognizes

development projects that successfully protect and enhance the overall health, natural environment and quality of life in our communities.

• The rating system encourages smart growth and New Urbanist best practices by promoting the location and design of neighborhoods that reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and creating developments where jobs and services are accessible by foot or public transit.

• It also promotes an array of green building and green infrastructure practices, particularly more efficient energy and water use—especially important in urban areas where infrastructure is often overtaxed.

Source: US Green Building Council http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=6423

But where’s the “teeth”?The following credit categories are included in the rating system:

Smart Location and Linkage encourages communities to consider location, transportation alternatives, and preservation of sensitive lands while also discouraging sprawl.

Neighborhood Pattern and Design emphasizes vibrant, equitable communities that are healthy, walkable, and mixed-use.

Green Infrastructure and Buildings promotes the design and construction of buildings and infrastructure that reduce energy and water use, while promoting more sustainable use of materials, reuse of existing and historic structures, and other sustainable best practices.

Innovation and Design Process recognizes exemplary and innovative performance reaching beyond the existing credits in the rating system, as well as the value of including an accredited professional on the design team.

Regional Priority encourages projects to focus on earning credits of significance to the project’s local environment.

Source: The Opportunity Agenda http://opportunityagenda.org/files/field_file/The%20Opportunity%20Impact%20Statement.pdf

Example: Opportunity Impact Statements

• The Opportunity Impact Statement (OIS) is a comprehensive evaluation tool that public bodies, affected communities, and the private sector can use to ensure that programs and projects offer equal and expanded opportunity for everyone in a community or region, as required by law.

• The Opportunity Impact Statement creates a uniform enforcement protocol with consistent metrics to facilitate compliance with anti-discrimination protections and proactively to promote greater opportunity.

Source: US Green Building Council http://www.usgbc.org/ShowFile.aspx?DocumentID=6423

Opportunity Impact StatementsDraft Opportunity Impact Statements would be prepared in accordance with

the scope of the project decided upon during the Opportunity Assessment, which will determine what opportunity factors and considerations will be examined. In addition, they must fulfill to the fullest extent possible the requirements established for final Statements. Those requirements should include:

1. The opportunity impact, measured by delivery of and/or access to services, job creation, business openings, and community opportunity to participate in the benefits of the project, with a discussion of community need;

2. Any adverse effects on the population’s opportunity which cannot be avoided should the proposal be implemented;

3. Alternatives to the proposed action or ameliorative effects, including a cost-benefit analysis; and

4. The degree to which the project will impact services or industries in a manner that will meet projected long-term community employment and infrastructure needs. The ultimate format for Opportunity Impact Statements should encourage both solid analysis and clear presentation of the alternatives, allowing the agency, the applicant, and members of the affected communities to understand the opportunity implications of the proposed project

Source: The Opportunity Agenda http://opportunityagenda.org/files/field_file/The%20Opportunity%20Impact%20Statement.pdf