State DOT Best Practices for Title VI Compliance (2009)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Research Results Digest 340 December 2009 SECTION 1 INTRODUCTION Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs and ac- tivities receiving federal financial assistance. Specifically, Title VI provides that “no per- son in the United States shall, on the ground of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any program or activity receiving federal financial assistance” (42 U.S.C. Section 2000d). In accordance with Title VI, federal enabling legislation for transit funding in- cludes the requirement that recipients of fed- eral funds do not engage in discriminatory practices. This includes the requirement that states distribute their federally supported transit services and related benefits in an eq- uitable manner. State DOT Role in Ensuring Non-Discrimination—Title VI and State Transit Programs Title VI requires that direct grant re- cipients and subrecipients provide all ser- vices and benefits without regard to race, color, or national origin, including those services provided under Federal Transit Administration (FTA) transit programs. FTA issued Circular 4702.1A in May 2007 to provide the guidance and instructions to states and their grantees needed to comply with the Title VI regulations and to inte- grate into their transit programs and activ- ities considerations in the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (U.S. DOT’s) Order on Environmental Justice (Order 5610.2 based on Executive Order 12898) and Pol- icy Guidance Concerning Recipients Re- sponsibilities to Limited English Proficient (LEP) Persons (70 FR 74087 based on Ex- ecutive Order 13166). Title VI requires that state departments of transportation (DOTs) pass-through FTA funds without regard to race, color, or national origin and that minority and low- income populations are not being denied the benefits of or excluded from participa- tion in these programs. The role of the state in ensuring non-discrimination is particu- larly important because states not only have an obligation to consider civil rights in how they administer their transit programs at the state level, but also are responsible for STATE DOT BEST PRACTICES FOR TITLE VI COMPLIANCE This digest contains an overview of Federal Transit Administration Title VI requirements for state departments of transportation (DOTs); provides information on best practices for state DOT compliance; and introduces a companion publication, NCHRP Web-Only Document 147, which includes a collection of material related to best practices for Title VI compliance for reference by state DOTs. The digest and accompanying collection of reference material were developed by KFH Group, Inc., Bethesda, MD, under subcontract with Cambridge Systematics, Inc., Cambridge, MA, for NCHRP Project 20-65(18). Subject Areas: VI Public Transit Responsible Senior Program Officers: Gwen Chisholm Smith NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM C O N T E N T S Section 1 Introduction, 1 Section 2 FTA Title VI Require- ments for State DOTS and Subrecipients, 6 Section 3 Compliance Practices— General Requirements, 8 Section 4 Compliance Practices— Specific State DOT Requirements, 16 Section 5 Compliance Practices— Large Urban Areas with Populations Over 200,000, 20 Section 6 Compliance Practices— Reporting Requirements, 22 References, 23

ensuring that recipients who receive federal funds through the state meet civil rights requirements. As the entities responsible for monitoring the use of federal transit funds by local and regional bodies, states must understand the responsibilities of their subrecipients under Title VI. It is important to note that FTA Circular 4702.1A increased the civil rights responsibilities of state DOTs. Although Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 has been a law for over 40 years, FTA increased state requirements by mandating the submission of a compliant Title VI Civil Rights Program document by state agencies that receive federal transit funds from FTA, as distinct from the previously required Department of Transportation Title VI Civil Rights Program. In addition, each state must document how it meets federal Title VI requirements and monitors subrecipient compliance with these requirements in their State Management Plan. A state must ensure that it and its subrecipients comply with Title VI requirements to: • Ensure that the level and quality of trans- portation service is provided without regard to race, color, or national origin. • Identify and address, as appropriate, dispro- portionately high and adverse human health and environmental effects, including social and economic effects of programs and activi- ties on minority populations and low-income populations. • Promote the full and fair participation of all affected populations in transportation decision- making. • Prevent the denial, reduction, or delay in ben- efits related to programs and activities that benefit minority populations or low-income populations. • Ensure meaningful access to programs and activities by persons with LEP. There are considerable variations in the role the state DOTs play in the provision of public transit around the country—variations that affect their re- quirements under Title VI. All states have some role in administering FTA public transit funds including passing-through funds under the Section 5311, Sec- tion 5310, Section 5316, and Section 5317 programs. Many also administer Section 5307 and Section 5309 funds and a handful of states provide transit services directly. Some states administer funds to Metropoli- tan Planning Organizations (MPOs). However, if an MPO does not receive funds through the state DOT, the state is not responsible for its compliance. There are key differences in Title VI responsi- bilities for those states that either provide services directly or administer funds in large urban areas (with populations over 200,000). It is important to recognize that Title VI requirements are tied to the population size and not to the funding source, which means that transit grantees in large urban areas have more detailed requirements regardless of the type of grants they receive. This also means that if a state has subrecipients operating transit services in large urban areas, the state will need to monitor the sys- tem’s compliance with the large urban requirements. Research Objectives The goal of this research project was to provide guidance to assist the transit administration divi- sions of state DOTs as they comply with Title VI re- quirements. An underlying tenant of this research is that state DOTs should integrate the concept of non- discrimination into the culture of the organization, incorporate civil rights into daily practices and rou- tines, and help their subrecipients to do the same. As noted above, when FTA updated its Title VI Civil Rights Program guidance in 2007, the agency increased the civil rights requirements for state DOTs administering FTA-funded transit programs, including the requirement to develop and submit a compliant Title VI Civil Rights Program document that addresses transit programs. The objectives of this research were to identify and document best practices for the following components of a Title VI Civil Rights Program document: • Notices issued by state DOTs to beneficiaries of their rights under Title VI. • Steps taken with public outreach and involve- ment activities to ensure that minority persons have meaningful access to state DOT activities. • Procedures for filing Title VI civil rights com- plaints with state DOTs. • Plans for providing access to meaningful ac- tivities and programs for persons with LEP. • Procedures used to certify that the statewide transportation planning process complies with Title VI. • Procedures the state DOT uses to pass- through FTA financial assistance in a non- discriminatory manner. 2

• Procedures the state DOT uses to provide as- sistance to potential subrecipients applying for funding in a non-discriminatory manner. • Procedures the state DOT uses to monitor its subrecipients for compliance with Title VI. Research Activities The research team began by exploring the new state requirements under Title VI and identifying ex- isting Title VI practices through an Internet search of the FTA and state DOT websites (searching for best practices information available both to the pub- lic and subrecipients). Based on a review of Title VI material from websites, the research team then can- vassed the “state of the industry” by surveying state DOT personnel in all 50 states on whether they had Title VI procedures or pieces of a Title VI Program they considered as best practices. The survey was an attempt to identify states that had best practices they were willing to share with other states. Multiple attempts were made to solicit responses and 13 states completed the survey. Of these, only seven had components of their Title VI Program that they felt were best practices. Others felt that they had practices or procedures in specific areas that were worth sharing, but only four indi- cated they’d be willing to talk with us further. The survey effort was supplemented by a canvassing of state DOT websites. States that responded to the sur- vey and/or had materials on their websites that looked promising were contacted to obtain further informa- tion on individual best practices. Finally, the study team met with staff in the FTA’s Office of Civil Rights to obtain input on where states needed the most guidance and attempt to identify par- ticular states with exemplary programs or individual best practices that would be included in the digest. The result of this research effort is a collection of materials and information that represent, in the view of the re- search team, best practices for state DOT Title VI compliance. Key Research Findings The review of current state DOT Title VI activ- ities and discussions with FTA’s Office of Civil Rights concluded that some states have components of a full Title VI Program, but at that time none were completely compliant with the state DOT Title VI requirements. Nonetheless, individual components of a compliance program were identified and in- cluded in this digest. As states develop a transit-oriented Title VI Pro- gram to meet FTA requirements, it is recognized that the most effective way to ensure non-discrimination is to make it part of the culture of the agency. Fol- lowing the guidelines of Title VI should not be seen merely as a legal obligation, but as a sustainable and inclusive way of doing business. It also should be noted that since Title VI provides the basis for all civil rights requirements, the term Title VI is often used broadly to describe all civil rights requirements. As the direct recipients of federal funds, states must fulfill Title VI, Disadvantaged Business Enterprise (DBE) and Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) requirements, and monitor subre- cipient compliance with these requirements to ensure non-discrimination. This digest addresses only Title VI requirements, including LEP and environmental justice (EJ) considerations, but not DBE or EEO. In This Digest The digest is organized in six sections: Section 1—Introduction Section 2—FTA Title VI Requirements for State DOTs and Subrecipients Section 3—Compliance Practices—General Requirements Section 4—Compliance Practices—Specific State DOT Requirements Section 5—Compliance Practices—Large Urban Areas with Populations over 200,000 Section 6—Compliance Practices—Reporting Requirements Readers of this digest are encouraged to begin with Section 2 since it presents a summary of the Title VI requirements applicable to all recipients and subrecipients. For a review of common or best prac- tices, readers can then refer to the section or sections that pertain to them. For example, small urban area or rural providers may only use Section 3. Each section dealing with compliance practices includes boxes with self-assessment questions that may be of use to states. Exhibit 1 presents an overall self-assessment checklist for states, including both state activities and subrecipient monitoring efforts. Reference Materials for State DOT Title VI Compliance Appendices A through M of this digest, a collec- tion of reference materials related to state DOT Title 3

4Exhibit 1 Checklist of state DOT transit program Title VI compliance State-Level Activities Subrecipient Monitoring State Management Plan Does the state document how it meets federal Title VI requirements and monitors subrecipient compliance with these requirements in its State Management Plan? Certification and Assurance Has the state signed its annual Title VI Certification and Assurance? Does the state have an analytical basis for making this certification? What is that basis? Assignment of Responsibility Has the state DOT assigned responsibility for the coordination of Title VI/environmental justice assessments related to transit within the agency? What is the relationship of this individual to the statewide or department-wide civil rights function? Public Notification How does the state notify the public of their rights under Title VI? How is the information disseminated? Do these methods go beyond posting on the agency’s website? Does the notice include the statement that the state operates the program without regard to race, color, or national origin; a description of how the public can request additional information; and procedures the public should follow to file a discrimination complaint? Public Outreach and Involvement What measures or practices does the state use to seek out and consider the viewpoints of minority, low- income, and LEP populations in the course of conducting public outreach and involvement activities? Do the measures provide meaningful, early, and continuous opportunities for public involvement? Limited English Proficiency and Low Literacy What steps has the state taken to ensure meaningful access to the benefits, services, information, and other important portions of its programs and activities for individuals who are LEP? Do these include steps to accommodate persons with low literacy? N/A* Does the state have on file from each subrecipient a signed nondiscrimination Certification and Assur- ance? What is the mechanism used to obtain the cer- tification annually? How does the state monitor the basis for local certification? Who is responsible for monitoring subrecipients to en- sure that they do not discriminate in the provision of service? What is the relationship of this individual to the statewide civil rights function? How does the state ensure that subrecipients are notify- ing the public of their rights under Title VI? Do subrecipient notices include required elements? How does the state ensure that subrecipients seek out and consider the viewpoints of minority, low-income, and LEP populations in the course of conducting public outreach? Has the state ensured that subrecipients take responsi- ble steps to ensure meaningful access to the benefits, services, information, and other important portions of its programs and activities for individuals who are LEP or low literacy?

5Exhibit 1 (Continued ) State-Level Activities Subrecipient Monitoring N/A N/A N/A Do subrecipients have written procedures for investi- gating and tracking Title VI complaints? Is this infor- mation made available to the public upon request? Do subrecipients maintain a record of Title VI investi- gations, complaints, and lawsuits filed with the agency? Does the state have procedures for investigating and tracking Title VI complaints filed against subrecipi- ents and is this information made available to the public upon request? How does the state monitor that subrecipients distribute service levels, service quality and facilities on an equitable basis? How does the state ensure that changes in services and fare increases do not have a disproportionately high negative impact on low- income and minority populations? N/A N/A Has the state determined what steps are necessary to provide meaningful access based on a “four factor” analysis? Does the state have an LEP implementation plan (written or otherwise) that identifies LEP individuals who need assistance, develops language assistance mea- sures, trains staff, provides notice to LEP and low- literacy persons, and provides for monitoring and updating the plan? Are vital written documents translated for each eligible LEP language group that constitutes 5% or 1,000 (whichever is less) of the population served or likely affected? Complaints Does the state have written procedures for investigating and tracking Title VI complaints? Is this information made available to the public upon request? Does the state maintain a written record of Title VI investigations, complaints, and lawsuits filed with the agency? For each investigation, complaint, or lawsuit, does the record include date filed, a sum- mary of allegations, status, actions, and follow-up/ resolution with complainant? Does tracking allow discrimination complaints to be distinguished from other, non-discrimination complaints? Has the state developed a mechanism for analyzing whether its services and benefits are distributed in a non-discriminatory manner? What data are collected and analyzed? How are these data used in the plan- ning process? How does the state assist applicants that would serve predominately minority and low-income populations in applying for assistance? Are these efforts docu- mented in the State Management Plan? Does the process used by the state to evaluate and select Section 5307, 5310, 5311, 5316, and 5317 projects ensure the fair and equitable distribution of funds to subrecipients that serve predominately minority and low-income populations, including Native American Tribes? Planning and Service Equity and Equitable Distribution of Funds

VI compliance, are published as NCHRP Web-Only Document 147, which can be accessed by searching on the TRB website (www.trb.org) for “NCHRP Web- Only Document 147.” Appendix A contains the Internet-based survey conducted as part of the proj- ect’s research, and Appendix B includes federal and national resources available to meet Title VI requirements. The remaining appendices include example practices or tools and are discussed in more detail throughout this digest. Appendix titles are the following: Appendix A: Survey Instrument Sent to Transit Personnel in State DOTs Appendix B: Federal Regulations and Resources Appendix C: Designation of Title VI Contact Appendix D: Notification of Rights Appendix E: Training Appendix F: Complaint Procedures Appendix G: LEP Implementation Procedures Appendix H: Overall Title VI Program Updates Appendix I: Construction Project Analysis Appendix J: Interdisciplinary Approaches Appendix K: Planning Tools Appendix L: Subrecipient Monitoring Appendix M: Subrecipient Reporting SECTION 2 FTA TITLE VI REQUIREMENTS FOR STATE DOTS AND SUBRECIPIENTS This section presents an overview of the Title VI requirements for states. The general requirements apply to all states that administer FTA funds. These general requirements are important to state DOTs because they include both requirements for the state as well as actions subrecipient/local transit systems must take, invoking significant monitoring and re- porting by state DOTs on subrecipient activities. State DOTs that administer specific programs, states operating or contracting for transit services in geo- graphic areas with at least 200,000 people, and MPOs must meet additional criteria. 6 Exhibit 1 (Continued ) State-Level Activities Subrecipient Monitoring N/A N/A Has the state trained subrecipients on Title VI requirements? Does the state have a process for collecting subrecipients’ Title VI program reports and submitting them to FTA? Have all subrecipients submitted reports? Are they complete? N/A Does the state submit with its annual Section 5307, 5310, 5311, 5316, and 5317 grant applications a record of approved and rejected funding requests that identifies applicants that are minority organizations or that provide assistance to minority or low-income communities? Has the state incorporated an environmental justice analysis into its National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation of construction projects? Staff Training Has the state trained its staff on the requirements of Title VI? Is this training provided periodically? Title VI Program Compliance Reporting Has the state’s Title VI Program (compliance report) been submitted to the FTA/Compliance Report Office (CRO)? Has it been approved by FTA? If yes, when does the approval expire? If the state operates or contracts for service in an urban area of 200,000 or more population, has it met the provisions required of transit operators in large urbanized areas? *Not Applicable

General Requirements—Applicable to States and All Subrecipients All states and their subrecipients of federal fund- ing must have: • Certifications and Assurances—signed Title VI Certifications and Assurances as part of their respective annual grant submissions or agreements. By signing the annual Certifica- tions and Assurances, states and their subrecip- ients agree to comply with the provisions of Title VI. These assurances imply that grant- ees will have procedures in place to ensure equitable distribution of services and program benefits. • Public Notification—procedures for notifying the public of Title VI rights and procedures that the public may follow to file a complaint. • Public Participation—procedures for con- ducting public outreach and involvement ac- tivities. States and their subrecipients must undertake steps to ensure that minorities had meaningful access to these activities. • Investigation/Complaint/Lawsuit Processes—written procedures for recording, responding to, and resolving Title VI investi- gations, complaints, and lawsuits. • A Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Plan— a written plan for providing access to mean- ingful activities and programs for persons with LEP based on the federal DOT LEP guidance (or copy of the agency’s alternative frame- work for providing access to activities and programs). • Title VI Program—submitted a Title VI Pro- gram to FTA’s regional Civil Rights Officer once every 3 years. The state’s Title VI Pro- gram must include the Title VI Programs for their local grantees (subrecipients). To meet this requirement, states often have their subgrantees prepare and submit certain general information and the collection and reporting of this infor- mation constitutes their Title VI Program. Additional State DOT Requirements In addition to the general requirements, state DOTs must have a process in place to ensure that they are able to evaluate the compliance of subre- cipients receiving federal funds: • Statewide Transportation Planning. State DOTs must establish a basis for certifying their compliance with Title VI as part of their statewide planning activities. • State Program Administration. State DOTs must document that they pass-through FTA funds without regard to race, color, or national origin and that minority populations are not being denied the benefits of or excluded from participation in these programs. • Providing Assistance to Subrecipients. State DOTs also must assist their subrecipi- ents in complying with the general reporting requirements. • Monitoring Subrecipients. State DOTs must monitor their subrecipients for compliance with Title VI. • Prepare and Submit a Title VI Program. FTA requires that state DOTs document their compliance with the program-specific require- ments, and submit to FTA a Title VI Program that also includes documentation of compli- ance with the general reporting requirements. This program is submitted once every 3 years. Additional Requirements for Large Urban Areas States or subrecipients that provide services in urbanized areas with populations of 200,000 or greater must meet additional guidelines to comply with Title VI. To the extent that state DOTs operate or contract for services or administer transit funds for subrecipients in these large urban areas, the states must also ensure that the following items are addressed by the appropriate agencies: • Collect and Analyze Demographic Data. Race and ethnicity data should be collected and analyzed so agencies can ensure that minority groups are not being discriminated against in the delivery of services that are fed- erally funded. • Set System-wide Service Standards. Agen- cies must set standards to ensure that service changes are based on objective indicators and not on preferential treatment or discrimination. • Set System-wide Service Policies. Agencies must adopt system-wide service policies that ensure services being provided do not have a 7

disproportionately disparate affect on minor- ity or low-income populations. • Evaluate Service and Fare Changes. Agen- cies must evaluate any major service or fare changes to ensure that there will not be a dis- criminatory impact. Agencies must have a policy for what constitutes a major change. • Monitor Transit Service. The state must con- duct triennial reviews to ensure that their poli- cies and services meet Title VI requirements. • Prepare and Submit a Program-Specific Title VI Program. Agencies must submit a Title VI Program to FTA that includes the col- lection and analysis of demographic data and how system-wide service standards and policies are set. The report should also include reporting on general requirements. This program is sub- mitted once every 3 years, although if prior to submission of an update, the transit agency has not changed its policy, notice to the public, or had a complaint, they only need to submit a statement to this effect in lieu of copies of the original documents. MPO Requirements MPOs must establish a basis for certifying their compliance with Title VI as part of their metropoli- tan transportation planning activities, just as is called for in large urbanized areas. MPOs that receive fed- eral funding through their state DOT should report to the state. MPOs that receive funding directly from the FTA report directly to the FTA. These MPOs should see Chapter II, Part 4 for reporting procedures. Examples of Compliance Practices The following sections present practices by which states and their subrecipients reach and maintain compliance, with a focus on state DOT responsibil- ities. Examples of existing or best practices are pre- sented when possible. This was a challenge because the regulations are relatively new and in the past many state agencies have relied on other divisions such as the Statewide Office of Civil Rights or an office of civil rights within the DOT to ensure their compli- ance. These offices are often unfamiliar with the re- quirements for transit program dollars. But, while most state DOTS have yet to develop a program that is fully compliant with the new FTA guidance, pieces of the old programs are still applicable and useful. SECTION 3 COMPLIANCE PRACTICES— GENERAL REQUIREMENTS The general requirements covered in this section must be met by all agencies that receive any federal funding including state DOTs and their subrecipi- ents. These requirements are important to state DOTs because they include actions that both the states and their subrecipients/local transit systems must take. Since states pass-through FTA funds, they are re- quired both to assist local systems and to monitor their compliance. States should document how they meet federal Title VI requirements and monitor sub- recipient compliance with these requirements in their State Management Plan that is submitted to FTA. General requirements include: • Certifications and Assurances • Public Notification of Rights • Public Participation and Outreach • Investigation/Complaint/Lawsuit Processes • Limited English Proficiency Plan • Title VI Program—Reporting The sections below provide a detailed expla- nation of each requirement as well as examples of how states and local transit providers have met those requirements. Assign Responsibility for Title VI Compliance While not required by federal regulations, a good practice is for state DOTs to assign responsibility for compliance with Title VI to a staff position or divi- sion within the DOT. In Practice The responsibility for compliance with Title VI could be assigned within the state transit unit or to the DOT’s Office of Civil Rights. Based on the limited survey results, it appears that often the staff or de- partment responsible for state compliance is different from the staff responsible for ensuring the compliance of subrecipients. If the responsibility for compliance rests within the broader DOT context, it is important that staff be familiar with the specific requirements under FTA Circular 4702.1A (May 2007). As part of monitoring subrecipient compliance, states may also require that subrecipients identify a contact person within their organization who is re- sponsible for ensuring local agency compliance with 8

Title VI. For example, the Maryland Transit Admin- istration (MTA) requires that subrecipients identify a contact person for Title VI, EEO, and DBE com- pliance in their annual grant application. Appendix C in NCHRP Web-Only Document 147 presents a copy of the form used in the MTA application. Provide Annual Title VI Certification and Assurance States and their subrecipients must submit signed Title VI assurances as part of their annual Certifica- tion and Assurance package. The state must have on file from each subrecipient a signed nondiscrimina- tion assurance. This nondiscrimination assurance re- placed the DOT Title VI and FTA civil rights assur- ances when FTA instituted the annual Certification and Assurance process in FY95. This assurance must be collected from subrecipients prior to passing- through FTA funds. It is critical to note that, as the applicant, the state is ultimately responsible for compliance with the FTA Certifications and Assurances even though the proj- ect may be carried out in whole or in part by one or more subrecipients. Thus, if subrecipients will be participating in the project, when the applicant sub- mits its FTA Certifications and Assurances, the ap- plicant is also signifying that it will be responsible for compliance, both of itself and of each of its sub- recipients, with the provisions of the FTA Certifica- tions and Assurances it has selected. In Practice Typically, states obtain the certifications annu- ally with their grant applications but they also can be included in the grant agreement. Certifications and Assurances should also be checked when states con- duct on-site compliance reviews with subrecipients. As an important element of the annual Certifica- tions and Assurances, states and their subgrantees must have an analytical basis for certifying their compliance with Title VI. This can be accomplished in a number of ways. For example, a state could de- velop a demographic profile of the state that identi- fies the location of low-income and minority popu- lations, establish a statewide transportation planning process that includes the needs of low-income and minority populations, or develop a process that iden- tifies any imbalances in the benefits and potential negative impacts of transportation investments on low-income or minority populations. As applied to local subrecipients, this provision requires transit operators to ensure that services, fa- cilities, and benefits are distributed equitably in their community. They must also consider the impact that new services, changes in services, and increases in fares may have on low-income and minority popu- lations. This can be accomplished in a number of ways; these are addressed under transportation plan- ning in Section 4. Notify Beneficiaries of Protection under Title VI The public must be informed of their rights under Title VI. Both states and subrecipients that provide transportation must proactively advertise that: • The agency operates programs without regard to race, color, or national origin; • The public can request additional information about the obligations of the recipient or sub- recipient; and • There are procedures that can be taken if a per- son feels they have been discriminated against. Recipients and subrecipients that provide transit service must disseminate this information to the pub- lic through measures that can include, but cannot be limited to a posting on the agency’s website. The state and its subrecipients do not need to reference “Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964” in their notifica- tion to the public, since most of the public is not aware of this provision. In Practice There are a number of ways this requirement can be fulfilled. Ideas for dissemination include comment 9 State Check: Has the state signed its annual Title VI Certifications and Assurances? What is the analytical basis for making this certifica- tion? Do you have on file a signed nondis- crimination assurance from each subrecipi- ent? What is the mechanism used to obtain the certification annually? What basis do sub- recipients have for making this certification (e.g., mechanisms for ensuring that new ser- vices are distributed equitably, that changes in services and fare increases do not have a disproportionately high negative impact on low-income and minority populations)?

cards, posters, and flyers in transit stations. Exam- ples of brochures published by the U.S. Department of Justice that notify the public of their rights can be found at http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/cor/pubs.htm. It is important that the states effectively relay the in- formation because subrecipients may adopt the Title VI notice developed by the recipient. This notification should be considered a vital document, which means it should be translated into whatever languages are found necessary to be con- sistent with the DOT LEP guidance. Appendix D in NCHRP Web-Only Document 147 includes a number of examples of outreach and communications with the public including examples of Title VI Non-Discrimination Statements on state websites and brochures/pamphlets. Examples of brochure/pamphlet dissemination methods include: • In Washington, D.C., the District Department of Transportation’s civil rights department disseminates a brochure at public meetings. • In Montana, the state requires transit agencies to put pamphlets on the buses that not only in- form riders of their rights, but allow riders to fill out a complaint form right on the bus if they feel they have been discriminated against. The goal is to make sure vehicle operators aren’t able to scare system users from filing a report if they feel their rights have been violated. Promote Inclusive Public Participation One of the principles of Title VI, especially EJ, is to ensure the full and fair participation of all po- tentially affected communities in the transportation decision-making process. In addition to notifying the public of their rights under Title VI, states and their subrecipients need to actively engage the pub- lic in planning transportation projects throughout the process. Transit agencies and state DOTs need to reach out and bring minority and low-income popu- lations to the table. DOT Order 5610.2 states that, “Procedures shall be established or expanded, as necessary, to provide meaningful opportunities for public involvement by members of minority populations and low-income populations during the planning and development of programs, policies, and activities (including the identification of potential effects, alternatives, and mitigation measures).” The FTA circular includes guidance on promoting inclusive public participa- tion which states, “Recipients and subrecipients should seek out and consider the viewpoints of minority, low-income, and LEP populations in the course of conducting public outreach and involve- ment activities. An agency’s public participation strategy shall offer early and continuous opportuni- ties for the public to be involved in the identification of social, economic, and environmental impacts of proposed transportation decisions.” In Practice FTA’s website provides useful tools and exam- ples of methods that can be used to promote inclu- sive public participation. It emphasizes a few points that are important for all states to address. First, for public participation to be inclusive, state DOTs must know where disadvantaged people are located. This can be done through mapping and keeping various lists with contact information. Next, there has to be a level of outreach that goes beyond advertising in the local newspaper and regular pub- lic meetings. Outreach can be done through conduct- ing in-person community tours, visiting churches and other community organizations, and making sure there is a channel for feedback from community groups. Finally, states must track and be able to docu- ment those public involvement measures taken and methods used to seek out and consider the viewpoints of minority, low-income, and LEP populations in the course of conducting these public outreach and in- volvement activities. They should also have docu- 10 State Check: Does your state notify residents of their rights under Title VI? How is such notifica- tion provided to the public? Do subrecipients no- tify the public of their rights under Title VI? How do you monitor their performance in this area? State Check: Has your state sought out and con- sidered the viewpoints of minority, low-income, and LEP populations in the course of conducting public outreach and involvement activities? Have your subrecipients? How do you monitor sub- recipient outreach?

mentation that they have monitored their subrecipients for the same inclusive methods. FTA Circular 4702.1A also discusses some ef- fective practices to promote inclusive public involve- ment and lists some specific practices, including: 1. Coordinating with individuals, institutions, or organizations and implementing com- munity-based public involvement strate- gies to reach out to members in the affected minority and/or low-income communities; 2. Providing opportunities for public participa- tion through means other than written com- munication, such as personal interviews or use of audio or video recording devices to capture oral comments; 3. Using locations, facilities, and meeting times that are convenient and accessible to low- income and minority communities; 4. Using different meeting sizes or formats, or varying the type and number of news media used to announce public participation oppor- tunities, so that communications are tailored to the particular community or population; and 5. Implementing DOT’s policy guidance concerning recipients’ responsibilities to LEP persons to overcome barriers to pub- lic participation. Examples of state DOT practices training staff on Title VI and public participation requirements are included in Appendix E (see NCHRP Web-Only Document 147). For example, California’s Division of Transportation Planning works to incorporate community concerns and values into the planning process by using focus groups, public hearings, grant workshops, and Citizen Advisory Committees. They are also providing planning grants to promote Title VI and EJ considerations in communities. The California DOT also has a training video on its website that is for both Caltrans employees and California Indian communities. The video is free, about 30 minutes long, and aims to inform and engage people about EJ as it applies to the transportation needs of California Indians. This video can be viewed at the following URL: http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/bep/ title_vi/training_video_3_choice.htm. The Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) of- fers a compliance monitoring review in the form of a checklist for all local operators that receive federal funding. Procedures for Handling Complaints State DOTs and their subrecipients must develop and maintain procedures for handling, investigating, and tracking Title VI complaints. Procedures for how to file a complaint must be made available to the public upon request. Effective processes for han- dling complaints must include procedures for: • Receiving, • Tracking, • Investigating, • Responding to Complaints, and • Record-Keeping. States and subrecipients do not need to develop separate procedures for investigating and resolving Title VI complaints beyond what procedures have already been established to respond to complaints of discrimination filed on bases not covered under Title VI, or procedures to respond to complaints not re- lated to civil rights. Receiving, Tracking, Investigating, and Responding to Complaints The procedures established by states and their subrecipients must include a mechanism to inform the public how complaints can be lodged, how they will be received and tracked, and how they will be investigated and responded to. States also must make sure that recipients are following-up and tak- ing corrective action on Title VI complaints. States must take action if subrecipients are not responding or have a large number of complaints. It is up to the states to resolve Title VI complaints and to tell the FTA regional office when and how complaints are resolved. Most states have a well-established process and schedule for receiving and acknowledging com- plaints, determining whether it is appropriate to in- vestigate the complaint, conducting investigations, and issuing determinations. This process can be ap- plied to Title VI complaints. However, there should be a system in place to identify which, if any, complaints have been filed because the complainant believes that he or she was denied the benefits of, excluded from participation in, or subject to discrimination on the grounds of race, color, or national origin under any program or activity offered by the recipient. Although the com- plainant may not refer to Title VI in the complaint, 11

In Practice Many states include complaint forms on their websites and invite members of the public to lodge complaints if they feel they have been discriminated against. Most also have procedures to investigate and follow-up with complainants. Tennessee has a system in place that could be useful for other states that need guidance on what steps to take beyond publishing a complaint form. After a person has filed a complaint form in Ten- nessee, the procedure is as follows: • A form letter is first sent out to let the person know the complaint has been received. • A follow-up letter asks them to get in touch so they can discuss the complaint further, usually by phone. • An assigned investigator uses a standard worksheet that lists the date, the type of com- plaint (such as race or national origin), when the last compliance review was conducted, and when the next review is scheduled. • Another letter notifies the complainant that the program will be investigated and that they will be notified of the results. • The next letter either lets the complainant know that there were violations in the Title VI Program and that efforts are underway to cor- rect them or that the file will be closed because the investigation did not uncover any viola- tions in Title VI. State complaint procedures and forms can be found in Appendix F (see NCHRP Web-Only Doc- ument 147). Record-Keeping on Title VI Investigations, Complaints, and Lawsuits Both states and their subrecipients must keep a list of active investigations, complaints, and lawsuits that allege discrimination by the recipient or sub- recipient on the basis of race, color, or national ori- gin. The list must include the following information: 1. The filing date of the investigation, lawsuit, or complaint; 2. A summary of the allegations; 3. The status of the investigation, lawsuit, or complaint; and 4. The response taken by the recipient or sub- recipient. States should require local subrecipients to keep: • A list of active lawsuits or complaints, includ- ing the date the lawsuit or complaint was filed. • A summary of the allegations, the status of the lawsuit or complaint, and whether the parties to a lawsuit entered into a consent decree. • A summary of all civil rights compliance re- view activities conducted in the past 3 years. Subrecipients should keep files for at least 3 years or longer if required by the state. In Practice In Maryland, this process requires immediate notification of the MTA when any investigation, complaint, or lawsuit is initiated. The MTA process also requires subrecipients to report on complaints as part of the annual grant application. 12 FTA Requirements: The first step in develop- ing and maintaining a procedure for tracking complaints is to have a standard method of re- porting a complaint. If there is no contact point for civil rights matters, states should assign a staff member to be the contact for all Title VI complaints and to answer questions from sub- recipients. State Check: Does your state have procedures for investigating and tracking Title VI com- plaints and is this information made available to the public? How is the public informed? Do your subrecipients have such procedures? Do you monitor their procedures and complaints including follow-up? there should be a process to be able to identify and classify this type of complaint as a Title VI com- plaint. The state should also have procedures for monitoring its subrecipients for this requirement. In addition, FTA Circular 4702.1A includes the process that FTA uses to respond to complaints of discrimination under Title VI and provides an exam- ple of a good complaint process that may be useful to state DOTs (see Chapter IX—Complaints).

Provide Meaningful Access to Limited English Proficient Persons All states and their subrecipients must take re- sponsible steps to ensure meaningful access to the benefits, services, information, and other important portions of their programs and activities for individ- uals who are Limited English Proficient (LEP). States and their subrecipients must have an LEP plan that starts with an assessment to identify whether there is a significant LEP population. Certain recipients or subrecipients, such as those serving very few LEP persons or those with very limited resources may choose not to develop a writ- ten LEP plan. However, the absence of a written LEP plan does not obviate the underlying obligation to ensure meaningful access by LEP persons to a re- cipient’s program or activities. Recipients or subre- cipients electing not to prepare a written language implementation plan should consider other ways to reasonably provide meaningful access. LEP Assessment The DOT LEP guidance advises grantees to de- termine what steps are necessary to provide “mean- ingful access” on the basis of four factors: (1) the number and proportion of LEP persons served or en- countered in the eligible service population; (2) the frequency with which LEP individuals come into contact with the program, activity, or service; (3) the nature and importance of the program, activity, or service provided by the program; and (4) the re- sources available to the recipient and costs. States must document how their agency and sub- recipients have analyzed the four factors presented in the DOT LEP guidance and whether they have developed an implementation plan on language assistance. LEP Plan Implementation Based on the assessment of need for LEP assis- tance, states and their subrecipients should develop an implementation plan to address the identified needs of the LEP populations they serve including specific language assistance measures to be taken. The plan should consist of: 1. Identifying the LEP individuals who need language assistance; 2. Providing notice to LEP persons of services available; 3. Providing language assistance measures such as using telephonic and video-conferencing interpretation services; 4. Training staff or hiring bilingual staff to act as interpreters and translators; 5. Formalizing use of qualified community volunteers; 6. Using centralized interpreter and translator services; 7. Using symbolic signs (pictographs); 8. Translating into languages other than En- glish vital written materials, such as appli- cations or instructions on how to partici- pate in a recipient’s program, signs in bus and train stations, notices of public hearings and other community outreach, and notices advising LEP persons of free language as- sistance; and 9. Monitoring and updating the LEP plan. At a basic level, state DOTs should make vital documents about Title VI, such as what it is, what people’s rights are, and how to file complaints available in any languages the LEP assessment showed has a significant population in the study area. While it is up to individual states to determine what information is considered vital, and how to make it available, states and their subrecipients should be able to handle special requests for materials. 13 State Check: Does your state have procedures for tracking which complaints may be related to discriminatory practices? Are these reported separately? State Check: Has your state taken responsible steps to ensure meaningful access to the bene- fits, services, information, and other important portions of their programs and activities for in- dividuals who are LEP? What are these steps? Do they include measures to accommodate per- sons with low literacy? Have your subrecipients also taken steps to ensure access for persons with LEP? How do you monitor this?

In Practice The FTA website has some materials on good LEP plans and expects to post additional examples as they become available. States also can work with large urban systems that have successful LEP plans to develop one that works at the state level. New York’s Metropolitan Transportation Authority is currently developing an LEP plan that can be used as a best practice, and FTA will post the plan on its website upon completion. Appendix G in NCHRP Web-Only Document 147 includes examples of LEP materials. For exam- ple, the Indiana DOT’s DBE and Title VI website offers information in both English and Spanish. All states could have a link to translation services of some sort, or require subrecipients to do so for local transit systems. The Washington State DOT translates materials for advertising a project, hearings, meetings, radio and/or TV advertisements in areas where at least 5% of the individuals in an impact area speak a language other than English, and can make translators available. The DOT also assesses what “reasonable accommo- dations” means in terms of how much material should be published on a case-by-case basis (1). In Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2004, California es- tablished an LEP protocol pamphlet for DOT em- ployees who encounter the traveling public (2). Al- though this Highway Emergency Language Protocol (HELP) pamphlet was aimed at highway personnel, the idea could be very useful for transit agencies. This pamphlet helped staff communicate with the public in six different languages. The California DOT offers free videos on its website (3). The videos are required by department staff to help the state meet federal requirements, but they are also available for the general public or other agencies. The second video posted on the web page is called “Language Assistance for Limited-English Proficient Persons Your Responsibilities under the Dymally-Alatorre Bilingual Services Act” (4). TriMet in Portland, Oregon, is another large urban system with a thoroughly developed LEP program that states could look to for guidance in developing a more comprehensive state plan. In 2006, TriMet developed a Language Implementation Plan that was phased in over 4 years. The list of goals is broken into six categories: • Capital Projects and Facilities, • Legal/Human Resources, • Marketing and Customer Service, • Operations, • Diversity and Transit Equity, and • Additional Services. States can take a look at the items covered in TriMet’s Language Implementation Plan for their own LEP plans on the FTA website as well as in Ap- pendix G (5). Again, these items can be phased in, but regardless of how a plan is implemented, the process should be documented. The U.S. Department of Commerce, with the U.S. Census, published a Language Identification Flashcard that a driver can show a non-English speaking person in order to figure out what transla- tion services are needed. (Referred to as “I speak” cards, these can be found at http://www.usdoj.gov/ crt/cor/Pubs/ISpeakCards.pdf.) Although LEP reg- ulations do not require agencies to provide all ma- terials in all languages, it can aid in the identification of LEP individuals who need language assistance. It is important for an agency to know who to reach out to, even if the number of people with a specific lan- guage affiliation is not high enough to require pro- duction of materials. States or subrecipients looking for ideas for drafting an LEP plan or improving an existing plan can check the website at http://www.lep.gov. Title VI Program Reporting There are a number of requirements for docu- menting and reporting how states comply with Title VI requirements and how they monitor their subrecip- ients. To document compliance, states must prepare and submit their Title VI Program (a.k.a. reporting) every 3 years. Exemptions from this report include re- cipients who only receive FTA funding through the 14 FTA Requirements: The FTA considers a signif- icant LEP population as one in which the pro- portion of persons in the grantee’s service area who reported to the 2000 Census that they speak English less than “very well” exceeds the statewide proportions, and/or the grantee’s out- reach to the community organizations serving LEP persons in their service area determines that there exists a sizable LEP population residing in the service area.

FTA’s University Transportation Centers Program, National Research and Technology Program, Trans- portation Cooperative Research Program, Over the Road Bus Accessibility program, or Public Transporta- tion on Indian Reservation programs. The document must include: • A summary of public outreach involvement activities; • The LEP plan; • Procedures for tracking and investigating Title VI complaints; • A list of any Title VI investigations, com- plaints, or lawsuits filed; and • The notice to the public that the agency com- plies with Title VI that includes instructions to the public on how to file a discrimination complaint. States must also submit this information on be- half of their subrecipients every 3 years. Generally this is accomplished by states requiring that sub- recipients provide a Title VI Program (report) that contains the above information. If the state or sub- recipient policies and procedures remain unchanged since the last submission, in lieu of resubmitting the Title VI Program documents, the state or subrecipi- ent can submit a statement that no major changes have occurred. gram has been accepted or if there are changes they need to make. Conduct an Analysis of Construction Projects An EJ analysis must be submitted in order to meet federal requirements for new construction and major rehabilitation or renovation projects. States and subrecipients should integrate the EJ analysis into the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation of the construction project. Grantees are not required to conduct EJ analyses of projects where NEPA documentation is not required. Projects Eligible for a Categorical Exclusion (CE): Recipients documenting a CE will be compli- ant by submitting the FTA’s standard CE checklist. Projects Requiring an Environmental Assessment (EA) or Environmental Impact Statement (EIS): Re- cipients preparing an EA or an EIS must include the following: • A description of the low-income and minority population within the study area affected by the project, and an explanation of the identifi- cation of the population. • A discussion of how minority or low-income populations could be adversely impacted by the project during and after construction. • A discussion of positive effects the project would have on minority or low-income populations. • A description of what would be done to mit- igate or enhance the resources the project would affect. • A discussion of the effects that will remain after the project has been completed and why the project did not go further to mitigate them. • A comparison of mitigation and environmen- tal enhancement actions that affect minority and low-income populations to mitigation and environmental enhancement actions that affect the non-minority and non-low-income population. 15 FHWA Requirements: FHWA requires recipients of highway funds to prepare annual update re- ports that cover a number of compliance topics. Therefore, the state DOTs are required to submit Title VI updates annually. This is separate from the Title VI Program required by FTA recipients. State Check: Has your state submitted its Title VI Program report to FTA within the past 3 years? Did it include the required elements? Did it include reports from subrecipients? Were they complete? In Practice The researchers found three good examples of overall Title VI Program updates from state DOTS; these examples were from Oregon, Tennessee, and California. While it is not clear that these plans have been reviewed and approved by FTA in their en- tirety, they are the most complete state Title VI Pro- grams identified. The sections of these documents that pertain to transit are included in Appendix H (see NCHRP Web-Only Document 147). In addition, states may find useful the form letter that Tennessee uses to inform subrecipients if their Title VI Pro-

In Practice The Oregon Transportation Commission has a chart for eligibility criteria and prioritization for highway projects, but the format could be useful for transit projects as well (see Appendix I in NCHRP Web-Only Document 147). SECTION 4 COMPLIANCE PRACTICES— SPECIFIC STATE DOT REQUIREMENTS This section will take a more detailed look at the specific state DOT requirements for Title VI com- pliance and examples of current state practices for: • Transportation Planning • State Program Administration, including – Distributing FTA funds in an equitable manner – Providing assistance to potential sub- recipients • Monitoring Subrecipients In addition, states that operate or contract for service in an urbanized service area of 200,000 or more population are also required to comply with the provisions for large urban areas and should refer to Section 5 for more details. Transportation Planning States must have procedures in place to ensure that a statewide transportation planning process complies with Title VI. As part of this, states must conduct an EJ analysis when determining the site or location of facilities to ensure avoiding both non- discrimination in locating passenger amenities and a disproportionately high negative effect on minority and low-income populations. Some of the data from these statewide planning activities is also required for states to meet the gen- eral requirements identified in the previous section. The statewide planning requirements are intended to both provide the basis for certifying that the state does not discriminate in administering the federal transit program, and inform the decision-making process as federal transit funds are being distributed. In Practice There are three examples in FTA Circular 4702.1A of what a statewide analysis to establish non-discrimination can include. They are: • A demographic profile of the state that geo- graphically identifies socioeconomic groups, in- cluding low-income and minority populations. • Research that identifies the needs of low- income and minority populations within the state. • An analytical process that identifies the ben- efits and burdens of the state’s transporta- tion investments for different socioeconomic groups, indicates imbalances, and responds to the analyses (6). The results of this analysis provide state DOTs with the basis for making the decisions necessary to comply with LEP, public notification, and public participation. This planning step lays the foundation for good planning and assuring non-discrimination. FTA recommends that states continually update models and have on-going analyses of demograph- ics and needs. Keeping this information current allows states to decide where to focus funding. By making the process a continuing effort, the data and on-going analyses can become an integrated part of decision-making. Some states are now addressing Title VI im- plementation using an interdisciplinary team ap- proach. Two examples of states with this approach are included in Appendix J (see NCHRP Web- Only Document 147). In Practice—Interdisciplinary Team Approach 1. In Tennessee, a Title VI interdisciplinary team is responsible for ensuring that Title VI requirements are being met before any major decisions are made. This team helps with all aspects of Title VI compliance and is com- posed of program and Title VI specialists, and should be able to provide training, an- swer specific questions, and keep agencies up-to-date on any changes in requirements. 2. Washington State DOT also uses an inter- disciplinary team approach. In Practice—Planning Tools There are a number of examples of planning tools used by states and local subrecipients to ensure that federal transit funding is distributed equitably and that transit planning decision-making is not having a disproportionally negative effect on low- income and minority communities. Appendix K in 16

NCHRP Web-Only Document 147 includes exam- ples of local planning processes and tools that have been used as well as the FTA recommended analy- sis for proposed service and fare changes under Title VI, EJ, and LEP. State Program Administration State procedures for selecting Sections 5307, 5310, 5311, 5316, and 5317 projects must ensure that minority organizations or providers that serve primarily minority populations are eligible. Further, states must assist applicants, including those that are minority organizations or that serve primarily mi- nority communities, in applying for assistance. Title VI requires that each state: • Evaluate and select Sections 5307, 5310, 5311, 5316, and 5317 projects without regard to race, color, or national origin, and • Identify and assist Sections 5307, 5310, 5311, 5316, and 5317 providers, including those that are minority organizations or that serve mi- nority populations, in applying for assistance. The state must document the procedures and this is generally accomplished by including a discussion of selection, eligibility, and technical assistance ef- forts in their State Management Plans. Equitable Distribution of Funds Recipients must have procedures in place to en- sure that funds were received in a non-discriminatory manner. Ensuring the equitable distribution of funds requires that states evaluate and select Sections 5307, 5310, 5311, 5316, and 5317 projects without regard to race, color, or national origin. Selection procedures may vary by program, but should be documented in State Management Plans. In Practice—Evaluation and Selection States typically select their Sections 5310, 5316, and 5317 grantees through a competitive selection process, often on a statewide basis. States generally evaluate the merit of applications using criteria such as the need for the vehicle, coordination efforts, man- agerial and financial capacity, and the need of the population served. Some states give a slight prefer- ence to applicants that serve low-income or minority populations. Several states include representatives of minority organizations, such as the National Associ- ation for the Advancement of Colored People, on their selection committees. Typically, states distribute Section 5311 operat- ing funds to established grantees based on the level of funding these systems have received in previous years. Some states distribute Section 5311 operating funds by formula. They generally distribute capital funds based on the condition, age, and the need for vehicles. In most cases, states bring new operators into the program based on criteria such as the need for services in their area, projected ridership, and managerial and financial capacity. Many states limit eligibility to public entities and few consider race as a factor. States that administer the small urban Sec- tion 5307 program usually adopt FTA’s methodol- ogy for apportioning funds, although this is not re- quired. Any of these methods is acceptable as long as grantees are selected without regard to race, color, or national origin and you have provided adequate opportunity for all applicants. States may classify applicants as providing ser- vice to predominately minority and low-income populations, if the proportion of minority and low- income people in the applicant’s service area ex- ceeds the statewide average. In Practice—Documentation To document the competitive selection process or annual program of projects (POP), the FTA rec- ommends DOTs include in their State Manage- ment Plan a description of the competitive selection process. The annual POP that is submitted to FTA should also show that the methods used to distribute funds are not discriminatory. These procedures must take into account the DOT Order on Environmental Justice. 17 State Check: Has the state developed a mecha- nism for analyzing whether services and benefits are distributed in a non-discriminatory manner? What data are collected and analyzed? How are these data used in the planning process? Has the state incorporated an EJ analysis into its NEPA documentation of construction projects? How does the state monitor how subrecipients distrib- ute services and facilities and assess the impact of service changes on low-income and minority populations?

The selection process should include a descrip- tion of the criteria used to select transit providers or subrecipients. One way states can distribute Section 5311 funds is by using a formula based on the condi- tion, age, and need for vehicles. As noted above, there are a number of possible criteria that can be used to ensure that funding selection is based on objective standards: • The need for a vehicle, determined by an ob- jective measure; • Coordination efforts; • Managerial and financial capacity; • Condition of the vehicle being replaced; • Income of population served; and • General need of the population of the area served. In Practice—Reporting on Grantee Selection Results States must submit annually with their grant ap- plications a record of approved and rejected funding requests that identifies which applicants would use the funding to provide assistance to predominantly minority or low-income populations. The state may submit a list of every accepted and rejected applicant or may submit totals, such as total applications re- ceived, total applications rejected, total applications from minority and low-income providers received, and total applications from minority and low-income providers rejected. The designation of an applicant as serving low-income or minority populations can be done as part of the annual grant application. for Sections 5307, 5310, 5311, 5316, and 5317 funds. It is important that states provide this assis- tance to applicants serving low-income and minor- ity communities and that technical assistance to current and potential applicants is provided in a non-discriminatory way. In Practice Technical assistance can be, and is, provided by states in a variety of ways. At a minimum, state DOTs provide assistance to grant applicants by phone, but most also conduct meetings throughout their states to introduce potential applicants to the programs. Some will provide on-site assistance in completing applications, especially to first-time ap- plicants. As part of this process, states should pro- vide outreach to targeted organizations located in and serving low-income and minority communities. The outreach efforts may consist of sending annual notices to targeted organizations and placing notices regarding the availability of assistance in newspa- pers, including those serving minority communities. Technical assistance can come in the form of phone calls, site visits, or conducting workshops on how to apply for funds. The State Management Plan should include a de- scription of the procedures the agency has in place to assist potential subrecipients in applying for grants. States should document efforts to assist applicants that would serve predominantly minority and low- income populations. The FTA also emphasizes ensur- ing equitable distribution to Native American Tribes. States are allowed to give a slight preference to ap- plicants that serve minority populations. 18 State Check: Does the process used to evaluate and select Sections 5307, 5310, 5311, 5316, and 5317 projects ensure the fair and equitable dis- tribution of funds to subrecipients that serve pre- dominately minority and low-income popula- tions (including Native American Tribes)? Does the state submit with its annual Sections 5307, 5310, 5311, 5316, and 5317 grant applications a record of approved and rejected funding re- quests that identifies applicants that are minor- ity organizations or that provide assistance to minority or low-income communities? State Check: How does the state assist appli- cants that would serve predominately minority and low-income populations in applying for assistance? Are these efforts documented in the State Management Plan? Provision of Technical Assistance As part of the grant application process, states routinely provide technical assistance to applicants Monitoring Subrecipients Part of the state-specific reporting requirements deals with monitoring subrecipients. In order for states to comply with Title VI requirements, subrecipients of Sections 5310, 5311, 5316, and 5317 programs must be in compliance, and it is the responsibility of

the state to monitor whether they are. States are not compliant if their subrecipients are not compliant (7). States should document their monitoring process for ensuring that all subrecipients are complying with the general reporting requirements. In addition, if the state finds it necessary (i.e., there is a complaint of discrimination), the state can request that subre- cipients who provide transportation services verify that their level and quality of service is provided on an equitable basis. In these cases, states can request that subrecipients develop system-wide service stan- dards and verify that service provided to predomi- nantly minority and low-income communities meets these standards. States should describe how they monitor subre- cipients for compliance with Title VI and a summary of the results of this monitoring in their Title VI plan. State Management Plans should include both a dis- cussion of the assignment of monitoring responsi- bility as well as monitoring procedures. In Practice The assignment of responsibility for monitoring subrecipients to ensure that they do not discriminate in the provision of service differs among the states. Typically, the transit units that administer the FTA- funded programs monitor subrecipients, but often the DOT department-wide civil rights office provides them with technical assistance. In practice, states generally require subrecipients to report annually (perhaps in their grant application) or quarterly that they are complying with Title VI. Other methods of monitoring include on-site visits, training, documentation reviews, checklists, annual grant applications, and Certifications and Assurances. The most prevalent method of monitoring subre- cipient compliance with Title VI is through subrecip- ient reporting (on Title VI activities and complaints). This self-reporting generally is done in conjunction with the annual grant application, but is often verified by states during on-site visits to the subrecipients. As an added element, some states have a policy that if a Title VI complaint is received, an on-site visit is trig- gered. Some states take a multi-faceted approach to confirm that subrecipients are in compliance. For ex- ample, the Maryland Transit Administration requires that local transit systems develop a written process, report on complaints, and identify a staff member des- ignated to deal with Title VI as part of their annual grant application. Other examples of subrecipient monitoring pro- cedures and tools are presented in Appendix L. Ex- amples of subrecipient reporting requirements are included in Appendix M. (See NCHRP Web-Only Document 147 for Appendices L and M.) Staff Training While not a specific requirement, states should train their staff and the staff of subrecipients regard- ing Title VI requirements. As with monitoring, assis- tance can be performed by the civil rights department in the DOT as opposed to someone in the department administering the grant. Common methods for pro- viding assistance to subrecipients include: • Outreach programs to ensure that local sys- tems know they have to comply with Title VI regulations, • Phone assistance, • Websites, • Training, and • E-mail alerts if there is a change in the Title VI Program guidelines. In Practice—Staff Training 1. In California, the training videos discussed in the monitoring section of this digest that help incorporate the public into the plan- ning process also double as training for staff, keeping them up-to-date on Title VI considerations. This helps staff do a better job with questions from both the public and subrecipients. 2. The Michigan DOT offers links to Washing- ton and California Title VI procedures on its website. The easy-to-find links are a great way to help answer questions and get ideas on how other areas are fulfilling their Title VI obligations. Some examples of training activities were in- cluded in Appendix E (see NCHRP Web-Only Document 147). 19 State Check: Who at the state is responsible for monitoring subrecipients to ensure that they do not discriminate in the provision of service? What is the relationship of this individual to the state’s or the department’s civil rights function?

Preparing and Submitting a Title VI Program In addition to the reporting requirements in the General Requirements section, FTA also requires that state DOTs document their compliance with the program-specific requirements and submit to FTA a Title VI Program that also includes documentation of compliance with the general reporting require- ments. As with the general reporting, this program is submitted once every 3 years. State DOTs must document that they comply with Title VI with regard to: • Conducting statewide transportation planning, • Administering the program, and • Monitoring procedures and results. If a DOT has not altered its procedures, the agency can submit a statement to this effect in lieu of copies of the original documents when the triennial review is due. It must be submitted before the deadline. In Practice The Tennessee DOT has a checklist of transit providers categorized by whether they serve rural or urban areas and the date of their last submittal. meet these requirements. The best examples of how these requirements can be met are found within the FTA Circular 4702.1A and the appendix to 49 CFR 21. Since the large urban area compliance practices are not applicable to most state DOTs, no best prac- tices were identified under this research. It should be noted that while these “large urban” requirements do not apply to Section 5310, Section 5316, or Section 5317 grantees, they would apply to any public transit grantee that operates in a service area with populations of 200,000 or more; the re- quirements are tied to the service area population size, not the funding sources. In the event that states administer FTA funding for subrecipients in such an area, the state is responsible for ensuring that the sub- recipient complies with the following requirements. Collect and Analyze Demographic Data In the same way that state DOTs are responsible for analyzing demographics and knowing where needs lie, large urban areas also must be able to show the extent to which members of minority and low-income groups are beneficiaries of programs re- ceiving federal funding. In Practice There are multiple ways of collecting and ana- lyzing the relative benefits and burdens associated with transit programs that are realized by different socioeconomic groups, as suggested in FTA Circu- lar 4702.1A. FTA notes that agencies can choose one or more of the following options: • Option A: Demographic and service profile maps and charts. This option would allow agencies to show where transit service exists by using maps showing demographics, and specifically where any minority and low- income populations are clustered, and their location in relation to transit services offered. Maps and charts should be redone after de- cennial Census and before proposed service reductions or eliminations. Additional guid- ance can be found in FTA Circular 4702.1A. • Option B: Survey information on customer demographics and travel patterns. Agen- cies can collect demographic information and travel patterns from riders. The FTA recom- mends the following questions: – Information on the rider’s race, color, and national origin 20 State Check: Has the state trained its staff and the staff of subrecipients on the requirements of Title VI? Is this training provided periodically? State Check: Has the state’s Title VI Program (compliance report) been submitted to the FTA/ Compliance Report Office for the region? Has it been approved by FTA? If yes, when does the approval expire? Does the state have a process for collecting subrecipient reports and submit- ting them to FTA? SECTION 5 COMPLIANCE PRACTICES— LARGE URBAN AREAS WITH POPULATIONS OVER 200,000 FTA recipients of transit funds in large urbanized areas (with populations over 200,000) must meet six requirements in addition to the general requirements that all federal funding recipients must meet. If the state directly operates or contracts for services in a service area of 200,000 or more in population it must

– Whether the rider speaks or understands English “not well” or “not at all” – Information on the rider’s income or in- come range – The mode of transit service most frequently used – The frequency of transit usage – The typical number of transfers made – The fare payment type and media most fre- quently used (if applicable) – Rider’s access to an automobile These can be integrated into routine cus- tomer surveys and collected routinely by the agency. Agencies should translate the surveys into other languages when necessary to com- ply with DOT LEP guidelines. • Option C: Locally developed alternative. Agencies can modify and develop their own procedures to analyze demographic data as long as it meets Title VI requirements. Set System-Wide Service Standards Locally planned changes in services, facilities, and policy must not result in discrimination against any segment of the community. Service and facili- ties planning must take into consideration the po- tential impact on minority and low-income popula- tions. For example, service cuts should not result in a relatively higher loss of service for minority or low-income communities, while service expansions should serve low-income and minority communities as well as other communities. In order to verify and track non-discrimination, operators of transit services must have service stan- dards to ensure that discriminatory service design or operations decisions are avoided. In Practice While operators are free to adopt additional or other service standards, the FTA suggests setting quantitative standards on indicators such as vehicle load; headway; on-time performance; distribution of transit amenities (newer, nicer, etc.); and service avail- ability or distribution. These standards allow agencies to document and ensure that minority or low-income groups are not being discriminated against. Set System-Wide Service Policies Like setting system-wide standards, the object of this effort is to set service policies in a manner that does not lead to disparate impacts on minority or low-income populations. This requirement differs from setting system-wide service standards in that policies are not necessarily quantifiable. In Practice FTA Circular 4702.1A gives examples of policies regarding vehicle assignment and transit security: • Vehicle Assignment—Agencies could assign vehicles based on: – Age of vehicle—so that the age of vehicles at each depot doesn’t exceed the system- wide average – Type of vehicle—so that popular routes and peak periods could be served by higher capacity vehicles – Level of emissions—in a way that could re- duce emissions per bus at each depot • Transit Security—When deciding how to disperse transit security measures throughout a system, policies should be based on criteria such as where data show there is a higher level of criminal activity or other objective infor- mation. Policies regarding the search and ob- servation of suspicious activity should ensure that surveillance is conducted without regard to race, color, or national origin. Evaluate Service and Fare Changes To the extent that states operate or contract for services or directly fund transit services in large urban areas, states must evaluate any major service or fare changes to ensure that there will not be a disproportionate disparate impact on minority or low-income populations. The state or local sub- recipients must have a policy for what constitutes a major change. In Practice When contemplating a change, the state or its subrecipients should assess the effects of the pro- posed fare or service change on minority and low- income populations, and the alternatives available for people affected by the proposed change. The state or its subrecipients should be able to describe how adverse effects will be mitigated, minimized, or off- set, and determine whether proposals would have a disproportionately high and adverse effect on mi- nority or low-income populations. 21

If a state chooses to develop its own method for assessing proposals for fare or service changes, a de- scription of the methodology must incorporate the items mentioned above. Monitor Transit Service Again, to the extent that states operate or con- tract for services or directly fund transit operators in large urbanized areas, the state must monitor that services provided meet Title VI requirements. While monitoring is required every 3 years, it is highly rec- ommended that states periodically monitor service more frequently. In Practice Four possible methods that states can use to monitor services are included in Chapter V of FTA Circular 4702.1A: • Option A: Level of service methodology— reviewing the level of service (miles, hours) provided to various demographic groups throughout the service area compared to es- tablished service policies. This can be based on a sample of bus routes and fixed-guideway routes. • Option B: Quality of service methodology— reviewing the quality of service (frequency, major destinations served, travel time, cost per trip) provided to various demographic groups throughout the service area. This can be based on a sample of Census tract or Traffic Analy- sis Zone (TAZ) data, but should include zones where minority and low-income residents reside. • Option C: Title VI analysis of customer surveys—comparing customer satisfaction survey responses from individuals who iden- tify themselves as members of minority groups and/or in low-income brackets with other re- spondents. • Option D: Locally developed alternative— modifying the above or developing their own procedures to monitor transit services to en- sure compliance with Title VI. Prepare and Submit a Title VI Program Recipients of Section 5307 funds must submit a report to the FTA that includes information much like state DOT requirements. They are: • A copy of the demographic analysis for the service area. Maps, charts, customer surveys, and information on travel patterns should be included. • A copy of system-wide service standards and polices. • A copy of the evaluation of fare or service changes that were found to be major. • A copy of the results of monitoring done by the state. If the items in the above list have not been changed since the last triennial review Title VI Pro- gram report, an agency can submit a statement saying that the items have not changed, in lieu of sending a full report to eliminate redundancy. SECTION 6 COMPLIANCE PRACTICES— REPORTING REQUIREMENTS This section summarizes the items in the previous chapters that must be reported to the FTA. These re- porting requirements have been reformatted from Ap- pendices A, B, and C of FTA Circular 4702.1A. The U.S. DOT’s Title VI regulations at 49 CFR 21.9(b) state that, “Each recipient shall keep such records and submit to the Secretary timely, complete, and accu- rate compliance reports at such times and in such form and containing such information as the Secre- tary may determine to be necessary to enable him to ascertain whether the recipient has complied or is complying with this part.” In accordance with this provision, FTA re- quires that states submit a compliance report (also known as its Title VI Program) to the FTA Civil Rights Officer for their region once every 3 years. The state Title VI Program documents compliance with both the general and program-specific re- quirements in FTA Circular 4702.1A. These re- quirements are discussed in more detail in Sec- tions 3, 4, and 5. 22 State Check: Has your state submitted a Title VI Program that includes general require- ments for the state and subrecipients, as well as state-specific program reporting? Has the state’s Title VI Program been approved by FTA? If yes, when does the approval expire?

General Reporting Requirements—State and Subrecipients States must keep required Title VI general re- porting information on file for both the state pro- gram and for subrecipients. This includes: • Notification of Title VI rights—a copy of a notice to the public that covers Title VI and pro- cedures for filing a discrimination complaint. • Inclusive public participation—a summary of public outreach and involvement activities that includes how minority and low-income popula- tions had meaningful access to activities. • Title VI complaint procedures—a copy of the procedures for filing a complaint. • Record of Title VI investigations, com- plaints, and lawsuits—a list and description of active lawsuits, and a statement of the sta- tus and outcomes. • Access to services by persons with LEP—an LEP Plan or a description of how the agency provides access to activities and programs for LEP populations. State-Specific Program Reporting When the state has collected the Title VI plans from subrecipients and has determined that obliga- tions from the general requirements for all grantees have been satisfied, the state must also submit the following information in the Title VI report: • Statewide Planning Activities—a copy of the procedures used to certify that the statewide planning process complies with Title VI. • Program Administration—a description of the procedures the agency uses to pass-through federal funds to ensure non- discrimination and a description of proce- dures for offering assistance to potential and current subrecipients. • Subrecipient Monitoring—a description of compliance monitoring procedures and the results. Large Urban Area Reporting Finally, state agencies operating or contracting for service in urban areas with 200,000 population or more or administering the funding for transit agencies that serve such areas are responsible for ensuring that the following information is a part of the Title VI report that is submitted: • Demographic data—demographic maps and charts. • Service standards—system-wide service standards. • Service policies—system-wide policies. • Equity evaluation of service and fare changes—an analysis of impacts on minority and low-income populations for any signifi- cant service or fare changes. • Service monitoring—a discussion of moni- toring results. This could be based on the level of service, quality of service, analysis of cus- tomer surveys, or a locally developed moni- toring procedure. REFERENCES 1. Washington State Department of Transportation. Title VI Responsibilities. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/ NR/rdonlyres/CFBDOE84-54DD-462D-AB2E-43D FE28E339A/0/WSDOTTitleVIResponsibilities.pdf. 2. California Department of Transportation. Civil Rights, Title VI Program Annual Element Update. Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2004/05. Page 1. 3. California Department of Transportation. “Title VI Training Videos.” http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/bep/title_ vi/t6_training_videos.htm. 4. California Department of Transportation. “Language Assistance for Limited-English Proficient (LEP) Per- sons Your Responsibilities under the Dymally- Alatorre Bilingual Services Act.” http://www.dot. ca.gov/hq/bep/title_vi/training/training_video_2_ choice.htm. 5. Examples of Language Implementation Plans De- veloped by Transit Agencies. http://www.fta.dot.gov/ civilrights/civil_rights_5088.html. Accessed February 2009. 6. Federal Transit Administration. Title VI and Title VI- Dependent Guidelines for Federal Transit Adminis- tration Recipients. Circular 4702.1A, page VI-1. U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., May 13, 2007. 7. Federal Transit Administration. Title VI and Title VI- Dependent Guidelines for Federal Transit Adminis- tration Recipients. Circular 4702.1A, Chapter IV. U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., May 13, 2007. 23

Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 These digests are issued in order to increase awareness of research results emanating from projects in the Cooperative Research Programs (CRP). Persons wanting to pursue the project subject matter in greater depth should contact the CRP Staff, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP.