Prioritization of Public Transportation Investments: A Guide for Decision-Makers (2021)

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.

36 C H A P T E R 5 5.1 Introduction to Equity Analysis e purpose of this section is to provide guidance on incorporating equity analysis into a transit prioritization framework. is spotlight on equity assessments demonstrates how the many objectives of transit investments can be observed through two “lenses,” both of which are important. e rst lens is an aggregate outcome lens. is approach focuses on measuring performance outcomes for all users of a transit system or all travelers. While this approach supports cost-eective transit investments through methods like BCA, aggregate measures also have disadvantages. Specically, a narrow focus on aggregate outcomes to guide investment decisions can leave out the equity goals and implica- tions of many transit investments. e second lens for transit prioritization is distributional equity, which considers the distributive impacts of transportation investments. Studying transit performance through this lens requires an assessment of the relative impacts of transit projects or investments for specic disadvantaged populations compared to the overall population or to non-disadvantaged populations. ese groups include those facing any type of mobility disadvantage, whether due to income, location, race, ability, age, or the intersection of these characteristics. Minority popu- lations that have historically been excluded from mobility options may also belong to this category. e importance of considering and evaluating equity was a key theme in the interviews with practitioners. Many interviewees argued that equity analysis can help transit agencies achieve an important aspect of their mission: serving populations that cannot easily meet their travel needs by car. Beyond the requirement from Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 that public transportation service be provided in a nondiscriminatory manner, transit expansion or enhancement also has the potential to compensate for historic underinvestment in specic communities and to expand travel options for the mobility disadvantaged. Equity analysis prioritizes transit services that achieve this goal by prioritizing service for riders with the greatest need. Another reason why interviewees stressed the importance of equity analysis is that distri- butional equity can be a category of performance where transit is competitive relative to other Spotlight on Equity Assessments Transit performance can be observed through two lenses: • Aggregate outcomes: How well does the transit system serve its riders overall? • Distributional equity: How well does the transit system serve specific populations of interest? Does the transit system help address historic inequality in transportation access? What are Vertical and Horizontal Equity? The distributional equity lens refers primarily to vertical equity. Vertical equity refers to the concept that investments should favor disadvantaged populations in order to compensate for the existing/ historic distribution of impacts between these populations. Horizontal equity, on the other hand, refers to the idea that all populations should be treated the same in terms of the distribution of benefits and costs (Litman 2019b).

Spotlight on Equity Assessments 37   travel modes. Transit plays an important role in the social equity arena because it provides non-drivers (who may not benet from investments in highway travel) access to employment opportunities and essential services. Non-drivers include many of the mobility-disadvantaged populations described above, including low-income users, elderly users, and people with disabilities. Transit is typically more aordable and accessible than other modal options, such as owning and operating a personal vehicle. Successful transit planning responds to the needs of this group of travelers, which comprise a core demographic of transit users. As a result, transit projects, when well planned, are likely to score competitively on equity measures. Given the importance of social equity considerations in project prioritization, this section introduces methods for conducting transit equity assessments. While a full treatment of plan- ning and analytical approaches to incorporating equity into decision-making is beyond the scope of this project, the remainder of this section highlights methods for analyzing transit equity and provides several examples from practice. 5.2 Methods for Analyzing Equity Quantitative equity scores can add an objective element to considerations of distributional equity. Equity performance measures oen compare other aggregate metrics, such as safety, travel time, transportation costs, or accessibility between the general population and the population of interest (oen termed “vulnerable populations” or “communities of concern”). Dening the population(s) of interest. One challenge for mea- suring equity is dening the population of interest. Equity is multi- faceted and studying equity requires a clear denition of communities of concern according to sociodemographic characteristics, most oen income, race/ethnicity, language ability, age, vehicle ownership, mobility needs, or physical ability. Many agencies rely on the American Com- munity Survey to identify these populations according to U.S. Census geographies, such as tract or block group (U.S. Census Bureau n.d.-a). Populations may be considered individually (e.g., low-income or non- English speaking populations relative to the general population) or as part of a geographic index that combines multiple characteristics of interest for equity analysis. In one example of the latter approach, the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments (MWCOG) and its partners dene “Equity Emphasis Areas” as census tracts with signicant concentrations of low-income, African American, Asian, and Hispanic or Latino popu- lations (National Capital Region Transportation Planning Board 2017). In long-range planning activities, these geographical areas are analyzed for their accessibility and travel time to jobs, educational insti- tutions, and hospitals compared to the rest of the region. According to MWCOG’s methodology, Equity Emphasis Areas are identied as tracts with a high concentration of individuals identied as low-income or minority relative to the regional average. MWCOG uses a point- based system, where for each population and each census tract, the ratio between the concentration of individuals in a given tract to the regional average is translated into an index, and scores over a certain threshold are deemed Equity Emphasis Areas. Section 5.3, Practices in How Does Equity Relate to Environmental Justice? Equity, synonymous with justice or fairness, refers to the fair and appropriate distribution of positive/negative impacts. Environmental justice is related to equity but is more specific regarding impacts. It refers to efforts that avoid, minimize, or mitigate disproportionately high negative human health and environmental effects on minority and low-income populations (Oregon Department of Transportation 2018). FTA Circular 4703.1: Environmental Justice Policy Guidance for FTA Recipients FTA Circular 4703.1 provides guidance on incorporating environmental justice principles into plans, projects, and activities that receive funding from FTA by highlighting existing requirements and highlighting examples of good practice (FTA 2012).

38 Prioritization of Public Transportation Investments: A Guide for Decision-Makers Transit Equity Analysis, describes several additional methods for measuring these characteristics and setting thresholds for inclusion in equity analysis. Assessments of impacts. Following the denition of the population of interest, perfor- mance measures can be used to study impacts of any type. Example measures include categories like user costs/benets (e.g., household transportation costs); service quality (e.g., travel time, access); external impacts (e.g., air quality, noise); or economic impacts (e.g., impacts on labor income). Equity analysis requires 1. Selecting among these performance measures, 2. Disaggregating results based on geographic and/or demographic characteristics, and 3. Assessing dierences in outcomes, rating more equitable outcomes more highly. While equity analysis can help prioritize projects that promote equitable outcomes, it can also be used to establish baselines to inform future decision-making. e King County (Washington) report, e Determinants of Equity, is a useful example of this step (King County Oce of Perfor- mance, Strategy and Budget 2015). e report identies characteristics to include in equity analysis: households with incomes under $35,000 per year and racial/ethnic minorities, then compares these groups to the general population according to several performance measures, including out-of-pocket transportation costs, Metro Transit on-time performance, and proximity to Metro Transit. 5.3 Practices in Transit Equity Analysis is section presents examples of transit equity analysis used in project evaluation and invest- ment prioritization practice. e examples include the use of both quantitative and qualitative evaluation criteria and represent a range of analytical requirements. Atlanta-Region Transit Link Authority: e ATL’s 2019 Regional Transit Plan includes equity as one of six “Governing Principles” that shape the development of the plan. According to the plan, the objective of this principle is to ensure that new and expanded transit services “address geographic and demographic equity needs through more targeted consideration of transit solutions that enable people to meet their daily needs” (Atlanta-Region Transit Link Authority 2019). is principle supports four performance measures in the plan. • Communities of interest. e rst performance measure considers the presence and concentration of communities of interest near proposed service expansions. Communities of interest include (1) low-income, (2) racial and ethnic minorities, and/or (3) zero-car households. e ATL calculates the concentration of communities of interest as a composite score based on the concentration of the three individual communities of interest, specically the standard deviations relative to the regional average. • Low-wage employment density. A second performance measure scores projects according to low-wage employment density within the proposed transit investment area, recognizing the importance of transit for access to employment, especially for lower-income riders. • Community impacts. A third qualitative performance measure— referred to as “community impacts”—considers whether a project would support aordable housing or reduce overall transportation costs for low-income, minority, and zero-car households. While denitions of equity vary, they always consider the distribution of impacts. The ATL’s 2019 Regional Transit Plan defines equity as a feature of a project that: “Provides new or expanded service to and from low- and moderate-income areas to improve connectivity and focuses on investments that better enable people to meet their day-to-day needs.” ODOT’s 2018 Public Transportation Plan defines equity as “the measure or distribution of public transportation impacts—both positive and negative— throughout a community and the state.”

Spotlight on Equity Assessments 39   • Redevelopment potential. Finally, the fourth performance measure considers redevelop- ment potential, dened as the ratio of residential and commercial property values within a proposed transit investment area to the average residential and commercial values for the entire county in which a project is located. A lower ratio indicates a greater ability to absorb property value increases. is measure is intended to ensure that all communities within the region have the opportunity to benet from the property value impact of transit invest- ments. is measure also supports geographic equity by balancing transit investment across the region in the context of higher-value areas already being served by transit. Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT): ODOT’s 2018 Oregon Public Transportation Plan (OPTP) explains that, as in many states, people who are transportation disadvantaged in Oregon (dened as those who are low-income, minorities, people with disabilities, or have limited English prociency), are more likely to use public transportation (Oregon Department of Transportation 2018). Reflecting this understanding, ODOT’s Public Transportation Division employs equity- oriented evaluation criteria when scoring projects submitted to the Statewide Transporta- tion Improvement Fund (STIF) Discretionary Program and the Statewide Transit Network Program. Applicants (transit agencies across the state) are asked to describe how their project would support and improve access for vulnerable populations and/or historically marginalized communities. They describe expected benefits and may include quantitative indicators (for example, 30% of population in the project area are older adults). However, these quantitative measures are not incorporated directly into the evaluation. Reviewers determine the number of points in each category based on descriptive and quantitative indicators. Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning (CMAP): Considering air quality impacts and environmental justice, CMAP uses a sensitive population score in its CMAQ project selection process. While CMAP’s project selection process prioritizes air quality cost-eectiveness (i.e., cost per kilogram of VOC or PM2.5 reduced), the sensitive population score also evaluates all transportation projects for air quality benets to sensitive populations, including people who are over 65 and those under 5 years of age, minority, and low-income (Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning 2018). To score a project, the sensitive population index by census tract is multiplied by an esti- mate of the population beneting from the project, the magnitude of the emissions reduction, and the time of exposure. Furthermore, all projects (transit and non-transit) are evaluated based on the percent of travelers using a facility who are people of color or below the poverty line, as modeled by the CMAP travel demand model. Metropolitan Transportation Commission: MTC’s Horizon/Plan Bay Area 2050 initiative conducted a wide-ranging evaluation of major transportation projects that included an equity assessment under multiple future scenarios. is equity assessment considers the distri- bution of benets by income level and geography and identies projects with the strongest potential to advance equity (Tapase 2018). e rst component of the equity score is the ratio of accessibility benets experienced by a low-income person to the sum of accessi- bility benets experienced by the overall population. Ratios over 60% While denitions of equity vary, they always consider the distribution of impacts. MTC’s Plan Bay Area 2050 defines equity as “just inclusion into a Bay Area where everyone can participate, prosper, and reach their full potential.” MTC pursues equity by “investing resources for historically underserved, systemically marginalized groups including low-income and communities of color at a scale to meaningfully reverse disparities in access.” MassDOT’s State Fiscal Year 2020–2024 Capital Investment Plan includes social equity and fairness criteria indicating that projects should “equitably distribute both benefits and burdens of investments among all communities.”

40 Prioritization of Public Transportation Investments: A Guide for Decision-Makers indicate that a project “advances equity,” while a ratio of 40–60% indicates that a project offers an “even distribution of benefits,” and a ratio under 40% “challenges equity.” The second component of the equity score is a geographic assessment that determines whether a project would serve a community of concern. To calculate this, MTC uses GIS to check whether a project provides a point of access directly to one or more communities of concern. Communities of concern are defined according to eight tract-level variables from the American Community Survey (U.S. Census Bureau n.d.-a), including the share of households that are minority (70% threshold), low-income (less than 200% of the federal poverty level, 30% threshold), not proficient in English (20% threshold), elderly (10% threshold), zero-vehicle (10% threshold), single-parent households (20% threshold), disabled (25% threshold), or rent-burdened. Massachusetts Department of Transportation: MassDOT has developed an approach that measures the equity of inputs/investments rather than the equity of outputs or outcomes. Specifically, the Capital Investment Plan includes a social equity analysis that considers the distribution of MassDOT investments across communities with a minority population above the state average (over 24%), communities with median household incomes at or below 65% of the statewide household median income (under $44,100), communities where 6.25% of the population have limited English proficiency, and communities with 11% or more of individuals with disabilities (Massachusetts Department of Transportation 2019). MassDOT compares per capita investments in each of these communities, compared to communities that do not fall into these categories. MassDOT conducts this social equity analysis to establish compliance with federal and state nondiscrimination laws and regulations, including Title VI.