DRAFT COMPLIANCE REVIEW REPORT by HU30t88

VIEWS: 0 PAGES: 57

									              New York City
Department of Transportation
 Title VI Compliance Review
                 Final Report
                        December 2012

                Federal Transit Administration
                                   PREPARED BY
                            The DMP Group, LLC
                                Washington, DC
                                              Table of Contents


I.      GENERAL INFORMATION ..............................................................................................1


II.     JURISDICTION AND AUTHORITIES .............................................................................2


III.    PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES ..........................................................................................3


IV.     BACKGROUND INFORMATION ....................................................................................5


VI.     FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS......................................................................15

        1.    Inclusive Public Participation .................................................................................... 16
        2.    Language Access to LEP Persons ............................................................................. 18
        3.    Title VI Complaint Procedures .................................................................................. 24
        4.    Record of Title VI Investigations, Complaints, and Lawsuits .................................. 27
        5.    Notice to Beneficiaries of Protection Under Title VI................................................ 28
        6.    Annual Title VI Certification and Assurance ............................................................ 31
        7.    Environmental Justice Analysis of Construction Projects ........................................ 31
        8.    Submit Title VI Program. .......................................................................................... 33
        9.    Demographic Data ..................................................................................................... 34
        10.   Systemwide Service Standards and Policies ............................................................. 36
        11.   Evaluation of Service and Fare Changes ................................................................... 41
        12.   Monitoring Transit Service ....................................................................................... 45

VII.    SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS .......................................49


VIII.   ATTENDEES ....................................................................................................................54
I.     GENERAL INFORMATION

Grant Recipient:      New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT)

City/State:           New York, NY

Grantee No:           1788

Executive Official:   Ms. Janette Sadik-Khan
                      Commissioner
                      New York City Department of Transportation
                      55 Water Street
                      New York, NY 10041


Report Prepared by:   The DMP Group
                      2233 Wisconsin Avenue, NW
                      Suite 405
                      Washington, DC 20007

Site Visit Dates:     March 13–16, 2012

Compliance Review
Team Members:         John Potts, Lead Reviewer
                      Donald Lucas, Reviewer
                      Gregory Campbell, Reviewer




                                      1
II.       JURISDICTION AND AUTHORITIES


The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Office of Civil Rights is authorized by the Secretary
of Transportation to conduct civil rights compliance reviews. The New York City Department of
Transportation (NYCDOT) is a recipient of FTA funding assistance and is therefore subject to
the Title VI compliance conditions associated with the use of these funds pursuant to the
following:
         Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (42 U.S.C. Section 2000d).
         Federal Transit Laws, as amended (49 U.S.C. Chapter 53 et seq.).
         Uniform Relocation Assistance and Real Property Acquisition Policies Act of 1970, as
          amended (42 U.S.C. 4601, et seq.).
         Department of Justice regulation, 28 CFR part 42, Subpart F, “Coordination of
          Enforcement of Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted Programs” (December 1, 1976,
          unless otherwise noted).
         DOT regulation, 49 CFR part 21, “Nondiscrimination in Federally-Assisted Programs of
          the Department of Transportation—Effectuation of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
          1964” (June 18, 1970, unless otherwise noted).
         Joint FTA/Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) regulation, 23 CFR part 771,
          “Environmental Impact and Related Procedures” (August 28, 1987).
         Joint FTA/FHWA regulation, 23 CFR part 450 and 49 CFR part 613, “Planning
          Assistance and Standards,” (October 28, 1993, unless otherwise noted).
         DOT Order 5610.2, “U.S. DOT Order on Environmental Justice to Address
          Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations,” (April 15,
          1997).
         DOT Policy Guidance Concerning Recipients’ Responsibilities to Limited English
          Proficient Persons, (December 14, 2005).
         Section 12 of FTA’s Master Agreement 18, (October 1, 2011).




                                                2
III.      PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES


Purpose

The Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Office of Civil Rights periodically conducts
discretionary reviews of grant recipients and subrecipients to determine whether they are
honoring their commitments, as represented by certification, to comply with the requirements of
49 U.S.C. 5332. In keeping with its regulations and guidelines, FTA determined that a
Compliance Review of the New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) Title VI
Program was necessary.


The Office of Civil Rights authorized the DMP Group to conduct the Title VI Compliance
Review of NYCDOT. The primary purpose of this Compliance Review was to determine the
extent to which NYCDOT has met its General Reporting and Program-Specific Requirements
and Guidelines, in accordance with FTA Circular 4702.1A, “Title VI and Title VI-Dependent
Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients.” Members of the Compliance Review
team also discussed with NYCDOT the requirements of the DOT Guidance on Special Language
Services to Limited English Proficient (LEP) Beneficiaries that is contained in Circular 4702.1A.
The Compliance Review had a further purpose to provide technical assistance and to make
recommendations regarding corrective actions, as deemed necessary and appropriate. The
Compliance Review was not an investigation to determine the merit of any specific
discrimination complaints filed against NYCDOT.


Objectives
The objectives of FTA’s Title VI Program, as set forth in FTA Circular 4702.1A, dated May 13,
2007, “Title VI and Title VI-Dependent Guidelines For Federal Transit Administration
Recipients” are to:


      Ensure that the level and quality of transportation service is provided without regard to race,
       color, or national origin.




                                                  3
   Identify and address, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health and
    environmental effects, including social and economic effects of programs and activities 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 benefits related to programs and activities that
    benefit minority or low-income populations.

   Ensure meaningful access to programs and activities by persons with limited English
    proficiency. The objectives of Executive Order 13166 and the “DOT Guidance to Recipients
    on Special Language Services to Limited English Proficient (LEP) Beneficiaries” are for
    FTA grantees to take reasonable steps to ensure “meaningful” access to transit services and
    programs for limited English proficient (LEP) persons.




                                                4
IV.     BACKGROUND INFORMATION


The New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT) was organized as a City
department in 1964. NYCDOT’s service area is the city of New York, which has five counties:
New York (Manhattan Borough), Queens, The Bronx, Kings (Brooklyn Borough), and
Richmond (Staten Island Borough). Of the five boroughs, Staten Island is the smallest and most
isolated (it is on an island about five miles from the southern tip of Manhattan). NYCDOT’s
service area population is 8,175,133. NYCDOT directly operates the Staten Island Ferry, which
provides free service 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. The Ferry carries more than 21 million
passengers annually on a 5.2-mile run with only two stops, one at each terminus: the St. George
Ferry Terminal in Staten Island and the Whitehall Ferry Terminal in Lower Manhattan. On a
typical weekday, five boats make 109 trips, carrying approximately 65,000 passengers. The
boats make more than 35,000 trips annually. Travel time is approximately 25 minutes or one
hour round trip.


The St. George Ferry Terminal was originally built in 1950. In 2005, the terminal reopened after
extensive reconstruction. The renovation brought the terminal into ADA compliance and added
20,000 square feet of retail space. The reconstructed Whitehall Ferry Terminal opened in 2005.
The terminal encompasses a total floor area of 200,000 square feet, including a 19,000-square-
foot waiting room (6,500 square feet larger than the previous terminal), 6,000 square feet of
retail, 10,000 square feet of office space, and 10,000 square feet of ancillary support and ferry
operation rooms.


NYCDOT is responsible for installing and maintaining bus stops, bus shelters, bus benches, and
bus stop signs. NYCDOT is also responsible for the city’s streets, highways, bridges, and
sidewalks, including day-to-day maintenance. NYCDOT is responsible for installing and
maintaining the city’s street signs, traffic signals, and street lights, as well as supervising street
resurfacing, pothole repair, parking meter installation and maintenance, and the management of a
citywide network of municipal parking facilities.



                                                 5
NYCDOT receives FTA grants to fund various projects. Several of the projects are managed by
other City departments and partners, including the New York City Economic Development
Corporation (NYCEDC) and the New York City Department of City Planning. NYCDOT also
passes funds through to a number of subrecipients/partners. These subrecipients/partners have
projects with NYCDOT functioning as the grantee. The subrecipients/partners are as follows:
      Greater Jamaica Development Corporation (through NYCEDC)
      Trust for Governor’s Island (through NYCEDC)
      New York City Department of Cultural Affairs (NYCDCA)
      Brooklyn's Children’s Museum (through NYCDCLA)
      New York Botanicia1 Gardens (through NYCDCLA)
      Wildlife Conservation Society (through NYCDCLA)
      New York City Human Resources Administration (HRA)
      New York City Department for the Aging (DFTA)
      Jewish Community Center of Greater Coney Island (through DFTA)
      HANAC East-West Connection (through DFTA)
      CASC Transportation Services (through DFTA)
      WHIST II South Bronx Transportation (through Department for the Aging (DFTA)

      New York City Health and Hospital Corporation (NYCHHC)
      Kings County Hospital (through NYCHHC)
      Jacobi Medical Center (through NYCHHC)
      Jewish Community Center of Borough Park
      State University of New York Downstate Hospital through its Research Foundation

      Hebrew Home for the Elderly and Disabled
      Mayor’s Office for People With Disabilities
      Project Relief Transportation of the Jewish Community Center of Greater Coney Island

Below is a description of some of the major FTA funded projects:
       Greater Jamaica: This project is being constructed by NYCEDC and Greater Jamaica
       Development Corporation (GJDC) within downtown Jamaica (Queens County), New
       York, NY. It is also known as the Jamaica Transportation Center lntermodal
       Enhancement project and consists of reconstruction of the Sutphin Underpass and Station

                                             6
Plaza. It is intended to improve the physical, aesthetic, and functional environments of
the transportation hub at the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA)-Long Island
Railroad (LIRR) Jamaica Station/Air Train Terminal/MTA-New York City Transit
(NYCT) Subway Station. The location of this project is at the Intersection of Archer
Avenue and Sutphin Boulevard. Construction is expected to begin in 2013.

Sutphin Underpass Reconstruction Project: This project is located directly below the
LIRR Jamaica Station Plaza platform, on the east side of Sutphin Boulevard between
Archer and 94th Avenue. The site is currently used for LIRR loading dock and related
activities. This project funds the reconstruction of the site to provide a well-lit pedestrian
walkway, create some retail spaces, and move the loading dock operation to a different
location on the south side of the block where there is less pedestrian traffic.

Select Bus Service (SBS) / Bus Rapid Transit (BRT): NYCDOT and the MTA-NYCT
are using SBS to improve bus speeds on three bus corridors in New York City. FTA
funds have been provided for completion of preliminary engineering, National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) evaluation, and preliminary design, final design, and
implementation for 1st and 2nd Avenues and the 34th Street in Manhattan and
Nostrand/Rogers Avenues bus routes in the borough of Brooklyn. The 34th Street
Avenue SBS received an $18.4 million Bus Livability grant. The 34th Street Corridor
received a Class II Categorical Exclusion—23CFR 771.117(d) determination on
December 29, 2011. The project is now in final design, and construction is expected to
start in calendar year 2012.

Fordham Plaza: This project, which is located in The Bronx, New York, received a $10
million TIGER grant to reconstruct the plaza starting in 2012. The project is a 1.75-acre
open-air, multimodal transit nexus, which serves as the terminal destination and provides
key stops for more than ten bus routes and service to approximately 43,000 daily riders.
The project will fully reconstruct the street-level plaza and replace the existing plaza
structures; reconfigure the circulation of buses through the plaza to create a more usable,
contiguous public space; implement a block-long bus-only transit mall to maximize
transit efficiency; and make geometric and operational modifications to the surrounding
streets to alleviate traffic congestion, increase pedestrian safety, and enhance the overall
coherence of the project area. The project will also reconfigure the roadways
surrounding the project area, enhancing bus circulation, operation, and efficiency and
increasing pedestrian safety and wheelchair accessibility in and around the project area.

St. George Ramps: This is a Design-Build project to rehabilitate eight vehicular bridges,
one pedestrian bridge, and one parking field that provide commuter access to the St.
George Ferry Terminal located on Staten Island. The bridges support pedestrian traffic,
MTA-NYCT bus routes and stations, drop-off and pick-up taxi service, and other
passenger vehicle traffic such as commuter vans. Eight vehicular ramp structures,
consisting of 73 spans, traverse the MTA-Staten Island Railway station building and
parking area.

                                        7
NYCDOT is also receiving FTA funding in support of the Staten Island Ferry System as follows:
      Funding for the maintenance of Staten Island Ferry System assets
      ARRA Operating Assistance funds for the Staten Island Ferry Operations
      Funding to conduct a Preliminary Design Investigation to determine the feasibility of
       purchase and use of small ferryboats with a capacity to carry 400-500 passengers and to
       conduct preliminary design studies
      Funding for security enhancements for the ferry system
      Funding to conduct a Title VI Survey of Staten Island ferry customers


Table 1 represents a demographic profile of the NYCDOT service area using data from the 2000
and the 2010 Census. The table shows the 2000 and 2010 population by racial/ethnic group, the
increase (or decrease) in population from 2000 to 2010, and the percentage of the racial/ethnic
group population to the total population in both 2000 and 2010. The table also shows the 2000
and 2010 population of individuals below the poverty level (low-income) and individuals who
speak English less than “very well” (Limited English Proficient, LEP).


From 2000 to 2010, the total population of the NYCDOT service area increased 2.1 percent. The
White population increased less than 1 percent, the Black population decreased 1.9 percent, the
Hispanic population increased 8.1 percent, the Asian population increased 31.9 percent, the
American Indian/Alaskan Native population increased 39.3 percent, and the Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander decreased 5.2 percent. In 2010, 44 percent of the total population was White, 25.5
percent was Black, 28.6 percent was Hispanic, 12.7 percent was Asian, 0.7 percent was
American Indian/Alaskan Native, and 0.1 percent was Hawaiian/Pacific Islander.


According to the 2000 Census, 1,768,977 persons (22.1 percent of the population) had income
below the poverty level and 1,668,938 persons (20.8 percent of the population) were LEP. The
information for low income and LEP for 2010 are estimates. (Per the 2000 and 2010 Census,
people of Hispanic origin can be, and in most cases are, counted in two or more race categories).




                                              8
                                 Table 1 – Demographics of New York City
                                         Racial/ Ethnic Breakdown
                           New York City          New York City
                                                                      Change in New York City
                                2000                   2010
 Racial/ Ethnic                                                             Percent    Percent
    Group                                                                    change    change
                         Number Percent Number Percent Number
                                                                             ethnic      total
                                                                              group   population
White                    3,576,385    44.7% 3,597,341        44.0%  20,956      0.6%       -0.7%
Black                    2,129,762    26.6% 2,088,510        25.5% -41,252     -1.9%       -1.0%
American Indian
                             41,289          0.5%          57,512    0.7%     16,223   39.3%    0.2%
and Alaska Native
Asian                       787,047          9.8%      1,038,388    12.7%    251,341   31.9%    2.9%
Hawaiian/Pacific
                               5,430         0.1%           5,147    0.1%       -283    -5.2%   0.0%
Islander
Other Race               1,074,406         13.4%       1,062,334    13.0%    -12,072    -1.1%   -0.4%
Two or More                393,959           4.9%        325,901      4.0%   -68,058   -17.3%   -0.9%
Hispanic Origin1         2,160,554         27.0%       2,336,076    28.6%    175,522     8.1%    1.6%
Total                    8,008,278          100%       8,175,133     100%    166,855             2.1%

Low Income               1,768,977         22.1%      1,561,450*    19.1%
Limited English          1,668,938         20.8%      1,770,464*    21.7%
* Per the 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.
Source: 2000 and 2010 U.S. Census




                                                            9
V.      SCOPE AND METHODOLOGY

Scope
The Title VI Compliance Review of NYCDOT examined the following requirements and
guidelines as specified in FTA Circular 4702.1A:


        1. General Reporting Requirements and Guidelines – All applicants, recipients and
           subrecipients shall maintain and submit the following:
               a. Annual Title VI Certification and Assurance
               b. Title VI Complaint Procedures
               c. Record of Title VI Investigations, Complaints, and Lawsuits
               d. Language Access to LEP Persons
               e. Notice to Beneficiaries of Protection under Title VI
               f. Submit Title VI Program
               g. Environmental Justice Analysis of Construction Projects
               h. Inclusive Public Participation

        2. Program-Specific Requirements and Guidelines for Recipients Serving Large
           Urbanized Areas – All applicants, recipients, and subrecipients that provide public
           mass transit service in areas with populations over 200,000 shall also submit the
           following:
               a. Demographic Data
               b. Systemwide Service Standards and Policies
               c. Evaluation of Service and Fare Changes
               d. Monitoring Transit Service
Methodology
Initial interviews were conducted with the FTA Headquarters Civil Rights staff and the FTA
Region II Director of Operations and Programs Management to discuss specific Title VI issues
and concerns regarding NYCDOT. Following these discussions, an agenda letter was sent to
NYCDOT advising it of the site visit and indicating additional information that would be needed
and issues that would be discussed. The NYCDOT Title VI Review team focused on the

                                             10
compliance areas that are contained in FTA Title VI Circular 4702.1A that became effective on
May 13, 2007. These compliance areas are: (1) General Reporting Requirements and
Guidelines, and (2) Program-Specific Requirements for Recipients Serving Large Urbanized
Areas. The General Reporting Requirements and Guidelines now include implementation of the
Environmental Justice (EJ) and Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Executive Orders.


NYCDOT was requested to provide the following documents in advance of the site visit:
          Description of NYCDOT’s service area, including general population and other
           demographic information using the most recent Census data.

          Current description of NYCDOT’s public transit service, including system maps,
           public timetables, transit service brochures, etc.

          Roster of current NYCDOT revenue vessels, to include acquisition date, fuel type,
           seating configurations and other amenities.

          Description of transit amenities owned, controlled, and/or maintained by NYCDOT
           for its service area. Amenities include stations, shelters, benches, restrooms,
           telephones, passenger information systems, etc.

          Any studies or surveys conducted by NYCDOT, its consultants or other interested
           parties (colleges or universities, community groups, etc.) regarding ridership, service
           levels and amenities, passenger satisfaction, passenger demographics or fare issues
           for its public transit service during the past three years.

          NYCDOT Organization Chart.

          Summary of NYCDOT’s efforts to seek out and consider the viewpoints of minority,
           low-income, and LEP populations in the course of conducting public outreach and
           involvement activities, since March 2011.

          A list of any investigations, lawsuits, or complaints naming NYCDOT that alleges
           discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin during the past three
           years. This list must include:
               o the date the investigation, lawsuit, or complaint was filed
               o a summary of the allegation(s)
               o the status of the investigation, lawsuit, or complaint
               o actions taken by NYCDOT in response to the investigation, lawsuit, or
                   complaint

          Copy of NYCDOT’s Notice to Beneficiaries of Protections Under Title VI.


                                              11
            Description of efforts made by NYCDOT to apprise members of the public of the
             protection against discrimination afforded to them by Title VI.

            Copies of any environmental justice assessments conducted for construction projects
             during the past three years and, if needed, a description of the program or other
             measures used or planned to mitigate any identified adverse impact on the minority or
             low-income communities.

            Any updates to NYCDOT’s demographic analysis of its urban beneficiaries that have
             occurred since its July 2011 Title VI Program Re-Submittal. This can include either
             demographic maps and charts prepared or a copy of any customer surveys conducted
             since the last Title VI submittal that contain demographic information on ridership, or
             NYCDOT’s locally developed demographic analysis of its customer’s travel patterns.

            Documentation of NYCDOT’s methodology for evaluating significant system-
             wide service and fare changes and proposed improvements at the planning and
             programming stages to determine whether those changes have a discriminatory
             impact (Note: Per Circular 4702.1A Chapter V Part 4, this requirement applies to
             “major service changes” only and NYCDOT should have established guidelines or
             thresholds for what it considers a “major” service change to be.) If NYCDOT has
             made significant service changes or fare changes in the past three years or is
             currently planning such changes, provide documentation of NYCDOT’s Title VI
             evaluations of the service or fare changes.

            Documentation of periodic service monitoring activities undertaken by NYCDOT
             since the submission of its “Program for Monitoring for Monitoring Compliance
             by the New York City Department of Transportation Transit Service with Title VI
             Requirements” to compare the level and quality of service provided to
             predominantly minority and low-income areas with service provided in other areas
             to ensure that the end result of policies and decision-making is equitable service,
             including the results of its most recent Staten Island Ferry Customer Survey. If
             NYCDOT’s monitoring determined that prior decisions have resulted in disparate
             impacts, provide documentation of corrective actions taken to remedy the
             disparities.

NYCDOT assembled most of the documents prior to the site visit and provided them to the
Compliance Review team for advance review. A detailed schedule for the four-day site visit was
developed.


The site visit occurred March 13–16, 2012. The individuals participating in the NYCDOT
Review are listed in Section VIII of this report. An Entrance Conference was conducted at the
beginning of the Compliance Review with NYCDOT senior management staff, FTA Regional

                                                12
staff, FTA Headquarters Office of Civil Rights staff, and the contractor review team. During the
Entrance Conference, the review team explained the goals of the review and the needed
cooperation of staff members. The review team also showed the participants a video on Title VI
during the Entrance Conference. The detailed schedule for conducting the on-site visit was
discussed.


Following the Entrance Conference, the Compliance Review team conducted a detailed
examination of documents submitted in advance of the site visit and documents provided at the
site visit by NYCDOT staff on behalf of the agency. The review team then met with various
staff members from NYCDOT to discuss how NYCDOT incorporated the FTA Title VI
requirements into its public transportation system.


At the end of the site visit, an Exit Conference was held with NYCDOT senior management
staff, several NYCDOT subrecipients, FTA Regional staff, FTA Headquarters Office of Civil
Rights Staff, and the contractor review team. At the Exit Conference, initial findings and
corrective actions were discussed with NYCDOT.


Site Visits
With the assistance of NYCDOT staff, the review team identified one minority SelectBus
Service (SBS) route and two non-minority SBS routes that served both minority and non-
minority areas. During the site visit, the review team toured each of these routes in their entirety
to observe ridership, vehicle assignment and condition, bus stops, and transit amenities. Table 2
identifies the three routes toured and their respective transit amenity characteristics:


              Table 2 – Transit Amenity Characteristics of NYCDOT Routes Toured
                                   1st Ave North       2nd Ave South      Fordham Road
           Transit Amenity        (non-minority)      (non-minority)        (minority)
          Benches                        14                 11                 14
          Shelters                       14                 10                 27
          Info Kiosks                    13                 14                 12
          Ticket Vending                 40                 42                 53



                                                13
As indicated in Table 2, no significant disparity in the distribution of transit amenities was
observed on the minority and non-minority routes toured.


The review team also rode the Staten Island Ferry and observed amenities on vessels and at
boarding stations. No disparities in the distribution of transit amenities were observed.




                                               14
VI.    FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS


The Title VI Compliance Review focused on NYCDOT’s compliance with the General
Reporting Requirements and Guidelines and the Program-Specific Requirements for Recipients
Serving Large Urbanized Areas. This section describes the requirements, guidance, and findings
at the time of the Compliance Review site visit. In summary, no deficiencies were identified in 5
of the 12 requirements of the Title VI Circular applicable to recipients serving large urbanized
areas. Deficiencies were identified in the following seven Title VI requirement areas:
              Inclusive Public Participation
              Language Access to LEP Persons
              Title VI Complaint Procedures
              Record of Title VI Investigations, Complaints and Lawsuits
              Notice to Beneficiaries of Protection Under Title VI
              Collect Demographic Data
              Systemwide Service Standards and Policies


After the site visit, NYCDOT submitted corrective actions adequate to close all deficiencies in
Title VI Complaint Procedures and Collect Demographic Data and one of the deficiencies in
Language Access to LEP Persons. Deficiencies remain in five areas.




                                                15
FINDINGS OF THE GENERAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS
AND GUIDELINES


   1.      Inclusive Public Participation

Guidance: FTA recipients should seek out and consider the viewpoints of minority, low-income,
and LEP populations in the course of conducting public outreach and involvement activities. An
agency’s public participation strategy shall offer early and continuous opportunities for the
public to be involved in the identification of social, economic, and environmental impacts of
proposed transportation decisions.


Finding: During this Title VI Compliance Review of NYCDOT, deficiencies were found
regarding NYCDOT’s compliance with FTA guidance for Inclusive Public Participation. While
it was determined that NYCDOT’s efforts to include minority and low-income persons early and
continuously in its planning process were sufficient, NYCDOT did not provide documentation
that its subrecipients had implemented inclusive public participation strategies, as required by
FTA Circular 4702.1A.


NYCDOT explained a process by which it conducted outreach and sought input from minority
and low-income persons through a combination of methods on a project-by-project basis. As a
part of its planning process for any project, NYCDOT, in coordination with New York City
Borough Commissioners, identified community stakeholders, including minority and low-
income persons, to engage in the planning process. Feedback was primarily provided to
NYCDOT through regular meetings with Citizen Advisory Committees (CAC) that were
organized and operated within each Borough. Other methods included outreach through:
              Community open houses
              Community boards
              Community organizations
              Community forums
              Community workshops
              Public workshops
              Newsletters, fliers, social media, website
              Email alerts
                                              16
              Online surveys
              Notices on MTA Bus and NYCDOT ferries


NYCDOT provided translated documents and interpreters at meetings where language assistance
was anticipated. The review team could not confirm NYCDOT advertised public participation
opportunities in minority newspapers or on minority radio stations.


NYCDOT indicated that communities were active and vocal when it came to NYCDOT
initiatives and almost always impacted their final result. As an example, NYCDOT provided
background on the Fordham Road SelectBusService BRT construction project. The alignment of
this portion of NYCDOT’s SelectBusService traversed a primarily minority community. Input
from members of this community affected final project design, as well as the construction
mitigation measures NYCDOT ultimately implemented.


Since NYCDOT developed inclusive public participation strategies on a project-by-project basis
and relied, in many cases, on the efforts and cooperation of the Borough Commissioners to
identify minority and low-income persons in their jurisdictions, the review team suggested that
NYCDOT develop procedures to ensure itself that a minimum level of outreach to minority and
low-income communities occurred for all of its planning efforts. It was noted that the Borough
Commissioners, in most cases, were not responsible for FTA Title VI compliance as was
NYCDOT and, therefore, the potential existed for efforts in a Borough to be insufficient with
respect to Title VI.


During the site visit, NYCDOT did not document that its subrecipients had developed and
implemented inclusive public participation strategies, as required by FTA Circular 4702.1A.
Since NYCDOT passed FTA funds through to its subrecipients, its subrecipients must comply
with the General Reporting Requirements and Guidelines of the Circular, which include the
Inclusive Public Participation requirement.




                                              17
In response to the Draft report, in a letter dated October 10, 2012, NYCDOT stated that in May
2012 it required all its subrecipients to submit a complete Title VI Program, to include an
inclusive public participation plan and a list of all outreach activities to minority and low-income
communities since March 2011. Subrecipients were provided with technical assistance which
included samples of the component parts of a Title VI program, as well as a document titled
“State DOT Best Practices for Title VI Compliance” by the National Cooperative Highway
Research Board. This document included a section called “Promote Inclusive Public
Participation,” which provided additional guidance on how to meet FTA Circular 4702.1A
Inclusive Public Participation requirements. NYCDOT subrecipients were required to submit
their Title VI Plans by November 30, 2012.


After NYCDOT receives its subrecipient responses on November 30, 2012, it must submit a
certification to FTA that all of its subrecipients have completed an inclusive public participation
plan.


Corrective Actions and Schedules: Within 60 days, NYCDOT must submit to the Region II
Civil Rights Officer documentation that its subrecipients seek out and consider the viewpoints of
minority, low-income, and LEP populations in the course of conducting public outreach and
involvement activities, per FTA Circular 4702.1A.



           2.      Language Access to LEP Persons

Requirement: FTA recipients shall take responsible steps to ensure meaningful access to the
benefits, services, information, and other important portions of its programs and activities for
individuals who are Limited English Proficient (LEP).


Finding: During this Title VI Compliance Review of NYCDOT, a deficiency was found
regarding NYCDOT’s compliance with FTA requirements for Language Access to LEP persons.
NYCDOT did not provide documentation that its subrecipients took responsible steps to ensure
meaningful access to the benefits, services, information, and other important portions of their
programs and activities for individuals who are Limited English Proficient (LEP).

                                               18
In its most recent Title VI Program Submittal, NYCDOT included its Language Assistance Plan
(LAP). As background information, the Plan established that on July 22, 2008, the Mayor of
New York City signed Executive Order 120, which outlined two primary responsibilities for
New York City agencies:
   1. Designate a Language Access Coordinator within 45 days of the date of the Executive
      Order to oversee the creation and execution of an agency-specific internal language
      access policy and implementation plan.

   2. Develop such Language Access Policy and Implementation Plan by January 1, 2009.


NYCDOT’s LAP also established the following with respect to New York City LEP
demographics:

   New York City’s unique customer base requires cultural competency and language access for
   its Limited English Proficient (LEP) customers. According to American Community Survey
   (ACS) U.S. Census data as prepared by the Population Division of the New York City
   Department of City Planning (DCP):

          NYC is home to approximately 3.4 million immigrants.
          Almost half of NYC residents speak a language other than English at home.
          1.8 million New Yorkers, or approximately ¼ of NYC’s population, identify
           themselves as limited English proficient.

   The most common languages spoken and read by LEP individuals in NYC are:
       Spanish
       Chinese
       Russian
       Korean
       Italian
       Haitian Creole


This information provided NYCDOT and other city government agencies with an understanding
of the general scope of the LEP populations they would likely encounter. Pursuant to
Presidential Executive Order13166 and Mayoral Executive Order 120, NYCDOT performed an
LEP four-factor analysis and developed and LAP plan, per FTA Circular 4702.1A.IV.4 and DOT
Policy Guidance, as illustrated in Table 3.

                                              19
Table 3 – Elements Required for LEP Four Factor Analysis and Language Assistance Plan
               (Per FTA C. 4702.1A, IV, 4. a. and DOT Policy Guidance)
       Elements Required for LEP Four Factor Analysis and Language Assistance Plan
                 (Per FTA C. 4702.1A, IV, 4. a. and DOT Policy Guidance)
                                            Included in
                                            NYCDOT’s              Notes/Comments
                                               Plan
                               Part A – Four-Factor Analysis
1. Demography – Number or proportion            Yes      NYCDOT utilized data from the
   of LEP persons eligible to be served or               U.S. Census 2000, American
   likely to be encountered                              Community Survey (ACS), and
                                                         the Population Division of the
                                                         New York City Department of
                                                         City Planning (DCP) to
                                                         determine LEP populations it is
                                                         likely to serve.

                                                         While there were six LEP
                                                         speaking populations throughout
                                                         New York City, in May of 2008,
                                                         NYCDOT conducted a LEP
                                                         analysis of its Staten Island Ferry
                                                         (SIF) ridership and determined
                                                         that only four (Spanish, Chinese,
                                                         Korean, and Russian) of the six
                                                         languages were regularly
                                                         encountered. Accordingly,
                                                         NYCDOT tailored its LEP
                                                         assistance measures to the actual
                                                         needs of its SIF ridership.




                                           20
       Elements Required for LEP Four Factor Analysis and Language Assistance Plan
                 (Per FTA C. 4702.1A, IV, 4. a. and DOT Policy Guidance)
2. Frequency of Contact – Frequency             Yes      NYCDOT organized its services
   with which LEP individuals come into                  into two primary categories:
   contact with the program and/or                       daily services and periodic
   activities                                            services. For its daily services,
                                                         NYCDOT measured frequency
                                                         of contact with LEP individuals
                                                         using Census data, internal
                                                         customer data, and call volume
                                                         data from the City’s 311
                                                         customer service number. Call
                                                         volume information was tracked
                                                         by language and organized by
                                                         the following functional areas:
                                                              Parking
                                                              Banner Unit
                                                              Bridges
                                                              Customer Service
                                                              Freight Mobility
                                                              Permit Management
                                                              Roadway Repair &
                                                                 Maintenance
                                                              Staten Island Borough
                                                                 Commissioner
                                                              Traffic Safety Education
                                                         NYCDOT also conducted a poll
                                                         of NYCDOT Borough Offices
                                                         and determined that for daily
                                                         services there were low instances
                                                         of encounters with LEP speaking
                                                         individuals.

                                                         For periodic services, NYCDOT
                                                         utilized Census data and DCP
                                                         community data, combined with
                                                         institutional knowledge and
                                                         ongoing observation and
                                                         feedback associated with
                                                         community outreach efforts.




                                           21
        Elements Required for LEP Four Factor Analysis and Language Assistance Plan
                  (Per FTA C. 4702.1A, IV, 4. a. and DOT Policy Guidance)
3. Importance – Nature and importance             Yes   NYCDOT identified the
   of the program, activity, or service to              following services and activities
   people's lives                                       as important to people’s lives:
                                                        public outreach, issuance of
                                                        violations, legal actions, and
                                                        safety tips.
4. Resources – Resources available and       Yes        NYCDOT assessed its current
   costs                                                LEP measures, which were
                                                        primarily characterized by
                                                        translation or interpretation
                                                        services of some kind. Costs
                                                        associated with the provision of
                                                        these services were considered
                                                        and will be included in
                                                        NYCDOT’s budget for the
                                                        foreseeable future.
                       Part B – Develop Language Assistance Plan
1. Identification of LEP Persons             Yes        See Factor 1.
2. Language Assistance Measures              Yes        NYCDOT identified the
                                                        following language assistance
                                                        measures in its LAP:
                                                             Translation of notices,
                                                                safety documents,
                                                                website, consent forms,
                                                                complaint forms,
                                                                program applications, and
                                                                announcements into six
                                                                languages
                                                             Language Line
                                                                Interpretation services
                                                             “I Speak” cards




                                             22
       Elements Required for LEP Four Factor Analysis and Language Assistance Plan
                 (Per FTA C. 4702.1A, IV, 4. a. and DOT Policy Guidance)
3. Training of Staff                             Yes      NYCDOT provided training to
                                                          its employees on its language
                                                          assistance requirements and
                                                          related LEP measures during a
                                                          one-time initial training across
                                                          the agency and then during new
                                                          hire orientation. New hires in
                                                          public contact positions were
                                                          provided with NYCDOT’s
                                                          language access policies and
                                                          procedures. Managerial
                                                          supervisory staff was also made
                                                          aware of LEP policies and
                                                          procedures. NYCDOT also
                                                          required employees to undergo
                                                          cultural sensitivity training.
4. Provide Notice to LEP Persons                 Yes      NYCDOT provided notice to
                                                          LEP persons of language
                                                          assistance available to them on
                                                          its website, on notices and
                                                          announcements, and on its Title
                                                          VI Notice to Beneficiaries.
5. Monitor and Update the LAP                   Partial   In 2009, NYCDOT established
                                                          the performance of an annual
                                                          LEP Language Access Summary
                                                          Report as part of its ongoing
                                                          monitoring of its Language
                                                          Access Plan. NYCDOT
                                                          monitored its LEP efforts in
                                                          2008–2009 and produced a
                                                          Summary Report accordingly;
                                                          however, NYCDOT did not
                                                          provide documentation
                                                          confirming its LEP monitoring
                                                          efforts in 2010 and 2011.
                                                          NYCDOT must provide
                                                          confirmation that it is monitoring
                                                          its LEP plan according to its
                                                          LAP by submitting its annual
                                                          LEP Language Access Summary
                                                          Report for 2010 and 2011.




                                           23
NYCDOT’s LEP four-factor analysis and the LAP it developed met the requirements of FTA
Circular 4702.1A, IV, 4; however, NYCDOT did not provide documentation that its
subrecipients had conducted a four-factor analysis, and, if necessary, developed an LAP, as
required by the Circular.


In response to the Draft report, in a letter dated October 10, 2012, NYCDOT stated that in May
2012, it required all its subrecipients to submit a completed Title VI Program, to include a
completed LEP four-factor analysis and LAP (if necessary), by November 30, 2012. NYCDOT
stated that it provided its subrecipients with technical assistance on how to meet this
requirement. NYCDOT further stated that LAPs from all city government agencies that are also
NYCDOT subrecipients were received by NYCDOT. NYCDOT was waiting until the
November 30, 2012, deadline to receive LEP four-factor analyses and LAPs from its other
nonprofit, non-city government subrecipients.


After NYCDOT receives its subrecipient responses on November 30, 2012, it must submit a list
of all its subrecipients to the FTA as an update to its December 2011 Title VI Program submittal,
indicating which subrecipients have submitted LEP four-factor analyses and LAPs and which
have not.


In its response to the Draft report, NYCDOT also submitted Language Access Summary Reports
for 2010 and 2011.


Corrective Actions and Schedules: Within 60 days, NYCDOT must submit to the Region II
Civil Rights Officer, documentation that its subrecipients had conducted a four-factor analysis
and, if necessary, developed an LAP, as required by FTA Circular 4702.1A, IV, 4.




   3.       Title VI Complaint Procedures

Requirement: FTA recipients and subrecipients shall develop procedures for investigating and
tracking Title VI complaints filed against them and make their procedures for filing a complaint
available to members of the public upon request.

                                               24
Finding: During this Title VI Compliance Review of NYCDOT, deficiencies were found
regarding NYCDOT’s compliance with FTA requirements for Title VI Complaint Procedures.
According to NYCDOT, complaints could be filed at the operating unit level (Staten Island
Ferry), directly with NYCDOT, through New York City’s citywide 311 customer service
telephone number, and through the New York City Commission on Human Rights. NYCDOT’s
complaint procedures did not adequately describe how it actively tracked, investigated, and
resolved Title VI complaints filed with the citywide 311 number. NYCDOT’s complaint
procedures did not include instructions on how a complainant could appeal an initial complaint
investigation determination. NYCDOT needed to determine if the Staten Island Ferry system
should have a complaint procedure separate from and specific to the unique needs of its service.
Finally, while NYCDOT provided sample Title VI complaint procedures for the benefit of its
subrecipients, it did not provide documentation that its subrecipients had Title VI complaint
procedures in place.


As described by NYCDOT, when a complaint was filed through the citywide 311 number, an
agent was trained to identify if the complaint was based on some form of discrimination.
Discrimination complaints were forwarded to the New York City Commission on Human Rights,
which was responsible for enforcing the New York City Human Rights Law, described as
follows:

       The New York City Human Rights Law is one of the most comprehensive civil rights laws
       in the nation. The Law prohibits discrimination in employment, housing and public
       accommodations based on race, color, creed, age, national origin, alienage or
       citizenship status, gender (including gender identity and sexual harassment), sexual
       orientation, disability, marital status, and partnership status. In addition, the Law affords
       protection against discrimination in employment based on arrest or conviction record
       and status as a victim of domestic violence, stalking and sex offenses. In housing, the Law
       affords additional protections based on lawful occupation, family status, and any lawful
       source of income. The City Human Rights Law also prohibits retaliation and bias-related
       harassment, (including cyberbullying).

With respect to the New York City Human Rights Law, NYCDOT explained that Title VI
complaints would fall under the category of “Public Accommodations.” While the Title VI


                                              25
classes of race, color, and national origin were protected under the public accommodations
provision of the New York City Human Rights Law, NYCDOT had no specific reconciliation
process in place for identifying those public accommodation complaints that were also, by
definition, FTA Title VI complaints. NYCDOT should include in its Title VI complaint
procedures steps it would take, in specific terms, to identify FTA Title VI complaints so that they
are properly investigated, tracked, and reported on, per FTA Circular 4702.1A.


In addition, according to the New York City Commission on Human Rights’ Complaint
Procedure, final determinations were made by a panel of Commissioners appointed to the
Commission by the Mayor of New York after reviewing a report and recommendation from an
administrative law judge. If it was NYCDOT’s position that the Commission was the prevailing
authority on race, color, and national origin discrimination complaints filed against NYCDOT
through the Commission, NYCDOT should confirm that the context of the Commission’s
investigation and final determination included Federal Title VI law and guidance.


Finally, according to both the New York City Commission on Human Rights Complaint
Procedure and NYCDOT’s Complaint Procedure, complainants were not provided with
instructions on how to appeal the Commission’s or NYCDOT’s initial investigation
determination.


After the site visit and before the issuance of the Draft report, NYCDOT submitted its Unified
Title VI Complaint Administration Procedure, dated and made effective May 29, 2012. This
document included revised Title VI complaint procedures that addressed the following:


      Identifying, investigating, tracking, and reporting Title VI complaints filed against it
       through the citywide 311 customer service number, and all NYCDOT administrative and
       operational units, including the Staten Island Ferry

      Title VI complaint appeals process; and
      Subrecipient assistance and monitoring to ensure subrecipient compliance




                                              26
Due to the submission of the May 29, 2012 complaint procedures, the deficiency in this area is
now closed.



   4.      Record of Title VI Investigations, Complaints, and Lawsuits

Requirement: FTA recipients shall prepare and maintain a list of any active investigations
conducted by entities other than FTA, lawsuits, or complaints naming the recipients that allege
discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin. This list shall include the date that
the investigation, lawsuit, or complaint was filed; a summary of the allegation(s); the status of
the investigation, lawsuit, or complaint; and actions taken by the recipient in response to the
investigation, lawsuit, or complaint.

Finding: During this Title VI Compliance Review of NYCDOT, deficiencies were found
regarding NYCDOT’s compliance with FTA requirements for Record of Title VI Investigations,
Complaints, and Lawsuits. In its most recent Title VI Program Submittal, NYCDOT indicated
that it had not received any Title VI complaints since its previous submittal.


During the review, NYCDOT was asked to confirm that it had identified and recorded all Title
VI complaints filed against it through the citywide 311 customer service number and/or with the
New York City Human Rights Commission. Following the Review, NYCDOT confirmed that it
had reviewed the complaints filed against it through the citywide 311 customer service number
and/or with the New York City Human Rights Commission and provided a list of three
discrimination complaints, none of which were related to Title VI. The list provided by
NYCDOT contained all required elements, per FTA Circular 4702.1A, IV.3.


Regarding its subrecipients, NYCDOT had developed a sample Title VI Complaint Log it shared
with its subrecipients; however, NYCDOT did not confirm its subrecipients were recording and
reporting Title VI complaints filed against them, as required by FTA Circular 4702.1A, IV, 3.


In response to the Draft report, in a letter dated October 10, 2012, NYCDOT stated that in May
2012 it required all its subrecipients to submit a completed Title VI Program, to include a list of
Title VI investigations, complaints, and lawsuits, per FTA Circular 4702.1A. NYCDOT


                                               27
reported that it received lists of Title VI complaints from some of its subrecipients but not all of
them. NYCDOT expected an update from those subrecipients who have not complied with this
requirement by October 25, 2012.


After NYCDOT receives its subrecipient responses, it must submit a summary of all subrecipient
investigations, complaints, and lawsuits to FTA as an update to its December 2011 Title VI
Program submittal.


Corrective Actions and Schedules: Within 60 days, NYCDOT must submit to the Region II
Civil Rights Officer documentation confirming its subrecipients are recording and tracking Title
VI complaints filed against them, as required by FTA Circular 4702.1A, IV, 3.



   5.      Notice to Beneficiaries of Protection Under Title VI

Requirement: FTA recipients shall provide information to the public regarding their Title VI
obligations and apprise members of the public of the protections against discrimination afforded
to them by Title VI. Recipients shall disseminate this information to the public through measures
that can include but shall not be limited to a posting on its Web site.

Finding: During this Title VI Compliance Review of NYCDOT, deficiencies were found
regarding NYCDOT’s compliance with FTA requirements for Notice to Beneficiaries of
Protection Under Title VI. NYCDOT’s Notice included two of the three elements required by
FTA Circular 4702.1A, IV.5 as shown in the Table 4.
          Table 4 – NYCDOT Notice to Beneficiaries of Protection Under Title VI
Elements Required in Title VI Notification                               Included in NYCDOT
(per FTA Circular 4702.1A Chapter IV Section 5.a)                            Draft Policy?
A statement that the agency operates programs without regard to
                                                                                   Yes
race, color, and national origin.
A description of the procedures that members of the public should
follow in order to request additional information on the recipient’s                No
nondiscrimination obligations.
A description of the procedures that members of the public should
follow in order to file a discrimination complaint against the                     Yes
recipient.


                                               28
It was also noted that in its Notice, NYCDOT’s instructions on how to file a complaint could be
communicated more clearly. For example, NYCDOT’s Notice stated the following:
   If you believe that you have been subjected to discrimination under Title VI, you may address
   a written complaint during regular business hours to: Director of Passenger Services, New
   York City Department of Transportation, Staten Island Ferries Division, 1 Ferry Terminal
   Drive, Staten Island, New York 10301. At other times individuals should dial 311.

It is unclear whether the complainant should address their complaint in person during regular
business hours or send their complaint to the address provided via U.S. Mail. If NYCDOT’s
intention was to have the complainant do the latter, the statement “during regular business hours”
would not apply.


It was also noted that NYCDOT’s Notice, as written, provided notice only to ferry passengers.
Other NYCDOT services are subject to Title VI protections, and as such, NYCDOT must
provide Notice to the beneficiaries of those services as well.


Following the site visit, NYCDOT revised its existing Notice to include information on how to
request additional information as follows:
       If you believe that you have been subjected to discrimination under Title VI, you may
       address a written complaint during regular business hours to: Director of Passenger
       Services, New York City Department of Transportation, Staten Island Ferries Division, 1
       Ferry Terminal Drive, Staten Island, New York 10301. At other times, or if you would
       like additional information about the City’s nondiscrimination policies, you may dial
       311.

       Translations into Spanish, Chinese, Russian, Korean, Italian, Haitian Creole.

In addition, NYCDOT created a new Notice targeted at beneficiaries of non-ferry related
services, as follows:
       DOT is committed to ensuring that no person is excluded from participation in, or denied
       the benefits of, or subjected to discrimination in the receipt of its services on the basis of
       race, color or national origin as protected by Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as
       amended (“Title VI”). If you believe you have been subjected to discrimination under
       Title VI or would like additional information about the City’s nondiscrimination policies,
       you may dial 311.

       Translations into Spanish, Chinese, Russian, Korean, Italiaan, Haitian Creole.

                                               29
NYCDOT stated that it will distribute its Notice targeted at ferry passengers on vessels and on
the ferry system website. NYCDOT stated that it will distribute its Notice targeted at
beneficiaries of non-ferry related services on its website and in at least one other way (i.e., on
agency brochures).


In response to the Draft report, in a letter dated October 10, 2012, NYCDOT stated that in May
2012 it required all its subrecipients to submit a completed Title VI Program, to include a Notice
to Beneficiaries of Protection Under Title VI, per FTA Circular 4702.1A. NYCDOT reported
that it received Notices from some of its subrecipients but not all of them. NYCDOT expected
an update from those subrecipients who have not complied with this requirement by October 25,
2012.


After NYCDOT receives its subrecipient responses, it must document that its subrecipients all
have Title VI Notices and are distributing their notices per FTA Circular 4702.1A. NYCDOT
must submit its documentation to FTA as an update to its December 2011 Title VI Program
submittal.


In its response to the Draft report, NYCDOT also stated that both the NYCDOT Notice and the
Staten Island Ferry Notice will be translated into the four languages found to be most prevalent
among LEP-speaking people in its service area and posted in all facilities that are open to
members of the public by November 30, 2012. Once this is completed, NYCDOT must submit
documentation to the FTA that it has posted its Notices per FTA Circular 4702.1A.


Corrective Actions and Schedules: Within 60 days, NYCDOT must submit to the Region II
Civil Rights Officer documentation confirming that its subrecipients provide a Notice to
Beneficiaries of Protection Under Title VI, per FTA Circular 4702.1A. In addition, NYCDOT
must provide documentation confirming that its Notice was distributed per FTA Circular
4702.1A.




                                                30
   6.       Annual Title VI Certification and Assurance

Requirement: FTA recipients shall submit its annual Title VI certification and assurance as
part of its Annual Certifications and Assurances submission to FTA (in the FTA web based
Transportation Electronic Award Management (TEAM) grants management system.

Findings: During this Title VI Compliance Review of NYCDOT, no deficiencies were found
regarding NYCDOT’s compliance with FTA requirements for Annual Title VI Certification and
Assurance. The FTA Civil Rights Assurance is incorporated in the Annual Certifications and
Assurances submitted annually to FTA through the Transportation Electronic Award and
Management (TEAM) system. NYCDOT executed its FY 2012 Annual Certifications and
Assurances in TEAM on December 12, 2011. NYCDOT checked, as applicable, 01.
Certifications and Assurances, which is required of all applicants. This is the category in which
the nondiscrimination assurance is located.



   7.       Environmental Justice Analysis of Construction Projects

Guidance: FTA recipients should integrate an environmental justice analysis into its National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation of construction projects. (Recipients are not
required to conduct environmental justice analyses of projects where NEPA documentation is
not required.). In preparing documentation for a categorical exclusion (CE), recipients can
meet this requirement by completing and submitting FTA’s standard CE checklist, which
includes a section on community disruption and environmental justice.

Findings: During this Title VI Compliance Review of NYCDOT, no deficiencies were found
regarding NYCDOT’s compliance with FTA requirements for Environmental Justice Analysis of
Construction Projects. Prior to the site visit, NYCDOT submitted four construction projects for
which NYCDOT prepared Categorical Exclusions (CEs). Each of the projects was a part of
NYCDOT’s implementation of its SelectBusService (SBS) Bus Rapid Transit service, as
follows:
           Hylan Boulevard SBS (Staten Island)
           Nostrand Avenue SBS (Brooklyn)
           1st Avenue SBS and 2nd Avenue SBS (Manhattan)
           34th Street SBS (Manhattan)

                                              31
NYCDOT presented the environmental justice (EJ) documentation for each project as a CE. The
documentation, however, contained significantly more information than was required for a CE
and was more consistent with the information and level of effort required for an Environmental
Assessment (EA). The review team explained, in detail, the requirements for a CE (including the
completion of the FTA CE Checklist), EA, and EIS. FTA Circular 4702.1A, IV.8 requires the
following:

       Recipients preparing documentation for a categorical exclusion (CE) can meet this
       requirement by completing and submitting FTA’s standard CE checklist, which includes
       a section on community disruption and environmental justice. FTA recommends that
       recipients preparing an environmental assessment (EA) or environmental impact
       statement (EIS) integrate into their documents the following components:

             a. A description of the low-income and minority population within the study area
                affected by the project, and a discussion of the method used to identify this
                population (e.g., analysis of Census data, minority business directories, direct
                observation, or a public involvement process).
             b. A discussion of all adverse effects of the project both during and after
                construction that would affect the identified minority and low-income population.
             c. A discussion of all positive effects that would affect the identified minority and
                low-income population, such as an improvement in transit service, mobility, or
                accessibility.
             d. A description of all mitigation and environmental enhancement actions
                incorporated into the project to address the adverse effects, including, but not
                limited to, any special features of the relocation program that go beyond the
                requirements of the Uniform Relocation Act and address adverse community
                effects such as separation or cohesion issues; and the replacement of the
                community resources destroyed by the project.
             e. A discussion of the remaining effects, if any, and why further mitigation is not
                proposed.
             f. For projects that traverse predominantly minority and low-income and
                predominantly non-minority and non-low-income areas, a comparison of
                mitigation and environmental enhancement actions that affect predominantly low-
                income and minority areas with mitigation implemented in predominantly non-
                minority or non-low-income areas. Recipients and subrecipients that determine
                there is no basis for such a comparison should describe why that is so.

NYCDOT was advised that for future construction projects, it should reference FTA EJ
requirements in the planning stage to ensure that it was taking the appropriate steps to address
FTA EJ concerns.



                                               32
    8.     Submit Title VI Program.

Requirement: FTA recipients serving large urbanized areas are required to document their
compliance with the general reporting requirements by submitting a Title VI Program to FTA’s
Regional Civil Rights Officer once every three years.

Findings: During this Title VI Compliance Review of NYCDOT, no deficiencies were found
regarding NYCDOT’s compliance with FTA requirements to Submit Title VI Program. The
New York City Department of Transportation Title VI Program for 2011, dated April 8, 201l,
was determined by FTA to be missing critical elements. Specifically, in a letter dated May 19,
2011, FTA indicated that NYCDOT’s submittal was not prepared in accordance with the current
guidance, FTA Circular 4702.1A, dated May 13, 2007, as follows.


                      Table 5 – Elements Required for Title VI Program
                  ELEMENTS REQUIRED FOR TITLE VI PROGRAM
                                                                                 In NYCDOT
GENERAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES                                       Title VI
(per FTA C. 4702.1A, IV, 7. a. (1) – (5))                                          Program
                                                                                  Submittal?
   A summary of public outreach and involvement activities undertaken
    since the last submission and a description of steps taken to ensure that
                                                                                    Yes
    minority and low-income people had meaningful access to these
    activities.
   A copy of the agency’s plan for providing language assistance for
    persons with limited English proficiency that was based on the DOT
                                                                                    Yes
    LEP Guidance or a copy of the agency’s alternative framework for
    providing language assistance.
   A copy of the agency procedures for tracking and investigating Title VI
                                                                                    Yes
    complaints.
   A list of any Title VI investigations, complaints, or lawsuits filed with
    the agency since the time of the last submission. This list should
    include only those investigations, complaints, or lawsuits that pertain to      Yes
    the agency submitting the report, not necessarily the larger agency or
    department of which the entity is a part.
   A copy of the agency’s notice to the public that it complies with Title
    VI and instructions to the public on how to file a discrimination                No
    complaint.




                                               33
PROGRAM-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES
(per FTA C. 4702.1A, V, 6. a. (1) – (4))
 A copy of the agency’s demographic analysis of its beneficiaries. This
   should include either any demographic maps and charts prepared or a
   copy of any customer surveys conducted since the last report that                Yes
   contain demographic information on ridership, or the agency’s locally
   developed demographic analysis of its customer’s travel patterns.
 Copies of system-wide service standards and system-wide service
                                                                                    No
   policies adopted by the agency since the last submission.
 A copy of the equity evaluation of any significant service changes and
                                                                                    No
   fare changes implemented since the last report submission.
 A copy of the results of either the level of service monitoring, quality
   of service monitoring, demographic analysis of customer surveys, or
                                                                                    No
   locally developed monitoring procedures conducted since the last
   submission.


In addition, NYCDOT’s Submittal included information not required by the current Circular.


In July 2011, NYCDOT submitted its New York City Department of Transportation Title VI
Program which included all required elements.


FINDINGS OF THE PROGRAM-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS
AND GUIDELINES FOR RECIPIENTS SERVING LARGE
URBANIZED AREAS


       9.     Demographic Data

Requirement: FTA recipients serving large urbanized areas shall collect and analyze racial
and ethnic data showing the extent to which members of minority groups are beneficiaries of
programs receiving Federal financial assistance.

Findings: During this Title VI Compliance Review of NYCDOT, deficiencies were found
regarding NYCDOT’s compliance with FTA requirements for demographic data. At the time of
the site visit, NYCDOT submitted demographic data in a variety of ways, including maps, charts
and tables, and data obtained from Staten Island Ferry survey information. NYCDOT’s
demographic maps included a map for each of the four largest race categories (White, Black,
Hispanic, Asian) showing the respective population distributions throughout each of the five

                                             34
New York City boroughs. Census tracts on the maps were shaded in grayscale, with different
shades representing different population ranges, in actual numbers not percentages.


The review team discussed the Circular’s requirements for demographic and service profile maps
and charts in relation to NYCDOT’s practices at the time of the site visit, as follows.


                       Table 6 – NYCDOT Demographic Data Practices
Elements Required for Demographic Data                               Included in NYCDOT’s
(per FTA C. 4702.1A, V, 1. a.)                                         Title VI Submittals?
A base map of the agency’s service area that includes each          No
census tract or traffic analysis zone (TAZ), major streets, etc.,
fixed transit facilities and major activity centers. The map
should also highlight those transit facilities that were recently
modernized or are scheduled for modernization in the next
five years.
A demographic map that plots the above information and also         No. Current maps do not
shades those Census tracts or TAZ where the percentage of           clearly establish the
the total minority and low-income population residing in these      relationship between the
areas exceeds the average minority and low-income                   average minority population
population for the service area as a whole.                         in a particular Census tract to
                                                                    the average minority
                                                                    population for the service
                                                                    area as a whole.

                                                                    No maps for low-income
                                                                    persons.
A chart for each Census tract or TAZ that shows the actual          No
numbers and percentages for each minority group within the
zone or tract.


In addition to revising its demographic maps to include all the elements required by the Circular,
NYCDOT must also update its maps to include data from the 2010 U.S. Census.


During the site visit, NYCDOT explained that its practice of collecting demographic data
pursuant to FTA Circular 4702.1A was to do so according to FTA Circular 4702.1A, V.1 Option
C: Locally Developed Alternative. NYCDOT did, however, ask the review team for technical
assistance to confirm whether this was the most appropriate option. Since NYCDOT received
FTA grants to fund various projects, passed FTA funds through to subrecipients, and operated

                                               35
the Staten Island Ferry, it was recommended that NYCDOT do a combination of FTA Circular
4702.1A, V.1 Option A: Demographic and Service Profile Maps and Charts for non-Staten
Island Ferry activities, and Option B: Survey Information of Customer Demographics and
Travel Patterns for the Staten Island Ferry. NYCDOT agreed with this approach.


Following the site visit, NYCDOT submitted new demographic maps and charts using 2010 U.S.
Census data that included all the elements required by FTA Circular 4702.1A, V.1 Option A:
Demographic and Service Profile Maps and Charts. In addition, NYCDOT submitted the final
results of its Staten Island Ferry Title VI Survey Project, dated April 5, 2012, which included
customer demographics and travel patterns for NYCDOT’s Staten Island Ferry service.


The deficiency in this area is now closed.



        10.     Systemwide Service Standards and Policies

Requirement: FTA recipients serving large urbanized areas shall adopt quantitative system-
wide service standards necessary to guard against discriminatory service design or operations
decisions. Recipients serving large urbanized areas shall adopt system-wide service policies
necessary to guard against discriminatory service design or operations decisions. Service
standards differ from service policies in that they are not based necessarily on a quantitative
threshold.

Findings: During this Title VI Compliance Review of NYCDOT, deficiencies were found
regarding NYCDOT’s compliance with FTA requirements for Systemwide Service Standards
and Policies. FTA Circular 4702.1A describes effective practices to fulfill the Title VI service
standard requirements. FTA recommends that recipients set standards for the following
indicators, giving transit agencies latitude to set standards for different/or additional indicators at
their discretion:




                                                36
           Service Standards                       Service Policies
              Vehicle Load                           Vehicle Assignment
              Distribution of Transit                Transit Security
               Amenities
              Vehicle Headway
              Service Availability
              On-time Performance

NYCDOT had adopted quantifiable service standards and/or system-wide service policies that
were described in its most recent Title VI Program Submittal. These standards addressed the
following factors:


           NYCDOT                                  NYCDOT
           Service Standards                       Service Policies
              Vehicle Headway                        Vehicle Assignment
              On-time Performance                    Transit Security
              Missed Trips

       System-Wide Service Standards:

       The Staten Island Ferry is a shuttle service, operating on a fixed route with only two
       stops. It is free and open to all segments of the population. All riders receive the same
       service in terms of vehicle loads, vehicle headways, on-time performance, distribution of
       transit amenities, and transit access. Because all passengers use the same vessels and the
       same two terminals, standards for vehicle load, distribution of transit amenities and
       transit access are not applicable to the service since there is no opportunity to introduce
       changes such as additional stops that would address disparities in the system.

       In accordance with 49 CFR Section 21, the Staten Island Ferry sets standards for two
       indicators that are applicable (headways and on-time performance), and for an
       additional indicator (missed trips) in lieu of the three above, which are not applicable.




                                              37
Table 6: NYCDOT Staten Island Ferry Standards of Service for Headways
        FROM STATEN ISLAND                           FROM MANHATTAN
                 Weekdays                                          Weekdays
   7 pm - 12:30 pm                30 minutes           8 pm - 1 am               30 minutes
      1 am - 5 am                 60 minutes        1:30 am - 5:30 am            60 minutes
    5:30 am - 7 am                20 minutes           6 am - 7 am               20 minutes
      7 am - 9 am                 15 minutes        7:15 am - 9:30 am            15 minutes
    9 am - 3:30 pm                30 minutes          9:30 am - 4 pm             30 minutes
  3:30 pm - 5:30 pm               20 minutes           4 pm - 5 pm               20 minutes
    5:30 pm - 7 pm                15 minutes           5 pm - 7 pm               15 minutes
                                                       7 pm - 8 pm               20 minutes
                Saturdays                                           Saturdays
   midnight - 1 am                30 minutes        midnight - 1:30 am           30 minutes
     1 am - 6 am                  60 minutes        1:30 am - 6:30 pm            60 minutes
     6 am - 7 pm                  30 minutes        6:30 am - 7:30 pm            30 minutes
   7 pm - midnight                60 minutes        7:30 pm - midnight           60 minutes
                  Sundays                                           Sundays
     9 am - 7 pm                  30 minutes        9:30 am - 7:30 pm            30 minutes
   7 pm - midnight                60 minutes        7:30 pm - 9:30 am            60 minutes

The Staten Island Ferry schedule is mandated by New York City Local Law 55 of 2005,
and cannot be changed without a change in the law. The schedule governs the headways
listed above.

Table 7: SI Ferry Standards of Service for Missed Trips and On-Time Performance
                                                         2011
             City Fiscal Years*                    (July-Dec 2010)       2010      2009        2008
           INDICATOR                      Target        Actual          Actual    Actual      Actual

   - # Round Trips Missed                  N.A.           46              70        98         102
   - # Round Trips Completed               N.A.         8,791           17,520    17,424      17,874
   - % Round Trips Missed                  1%           0.51%           0.40%     0.56%       0.56%
   - % Round Trips Completed
 On Time                                   90%           90%            91%        91%        91%
       - Weekday Peak Hours                90%           90%            91%        92%        n.a.
       - Weekday Off-Peak Hours            90%           92%            93%        93%        n.a.
       - Weekends & Holidays               90%           84%            85%        86%        n.a.

    - Passengers Carried (000)             N.A.         11,088          21,464    20,118      19,756
*City Fiscal Years begin July 1




                                               38
System-Wide Service Policies:

Vehicle assignment:
The Staten Island Ferry is a free service on a fixed route with two stops. All riders travel
on the same route, using the same vessels. There is currently a fleet of eight ferries
consisting of six large ferry boats and two small ferry boats as follows:

   Table 8: Staten Island Ferry Fleet
   Class             # boats       Passenger Capacity         Age of boats
   Molinari          3             4.400                      6 years
   Barberi           2             6,000                      30 & 31 years
   Austen            2             1,280                      35 years
   Kennedy           1             3,500                      46 years

      During peak hours, the fleet consists of the six largest ferryboats with four ferries
       active for the peak passenger loads and two spare vessels. The two spares are
       required to enable the Staten Island Ferry Division to meet the U.S. Coast Guard
       requirement to drydock each vessel for major preventive maintenance twice in
       every five years.
      The weekday and weekend off-peak loads are met with two large boats and one
       spare vessel with headways of 30 minutes and 60 minutes.
      During overnight hours, there is one trip each hour. One of the small boats is in
       use, with the other small boat available as a spare. Should one of the small boats
       be in dry dock, one of the large boats is used as spare. .

   Table 9: Vehicle Assignment
                                                               # Boats       # Boats
           Time period                  Ferry Class
                                                                Active        Spare
   Weekday peak period             Molinari/Barberi/JFK           4             2
   Weekday off-peak                Molinari/Barberi/JFK           2             4
   Weeknights                      Austen                         1             1
   Saturday                        Molinari/Barberi/JFK           2             4
   Sunday                          Molinari/Barberi/JFK           2             4

Transit Security:
The Staten Island Ferry’s transit security policy is to provide the same level of transit
security on all its routes and at all its station facilities. The ferry travels on only one
route, with two station facilities (terminals). Both terminals are used by all passengers.
The ferries and terminals are all in full compliance with the Staten Island Ferry
Combined Security Plan, developed under the regulations of the Unites States Marine
Transportation Security Act of 2002. The Combined Security Plan defines random
screening to avoid any incident of racial or other discriminatory profiling.




                                       39
At the time of the site visit, NYCDOT’s service standards and service policies were developed
only for its Staten Island Ferry system. After discussions with NYCDOT about its existing
standards and the nature of its Staten Island Ferry Service, it was determined that NYCDOT
should also have a service standard for vehicle load and transit amenities standards for its Staten
Island Ferry terminals in Manhattan and Staten Island.


During the site visit, it was confirmed that NYCDOT was also responsible for the placement and
installation of bus stops and bus shelters along bus routes throughout New York City. Therefore,
NYCDOT should have a transit access standard for bus stop placement and a transit amenity
standard for the placement of bus shelters. NYCDOT indicated that it had a standard for
streetscape design related to its SelectBusService BRT; however, NYCDOT did not provide
documentation confirming the existence and use of this standard.


In response to the Draft report, in a letter dated October 10, 2012, NYCDOT submitted as an
attachment a document titled “Attachment: Proposed Service Standards for the New York City
Department of Transportation (NYCDOT).” This document included quantifiable standards for
vehicle load on the Staten Island Ferry and a statement that the placement of bus stops was the
responsibility of local governing bodies (Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Westchester
County, New Jersey Transit, and Nassau County) that operate bus service on New York City
streets. This statement was inconsistent with what was discussed during the site visit and noted
in the Draft report. NYCDOT must provide an explanation to FTA addressing this discrepancy
and confirming its role in the placement of bus stops.


While NYCDOT did not provide a transit access standard for the placement of bus stops, it did
provide quantifiable standards for identifying SelectBus BRT corridors.


NYCDOT’s “Attachment: Proposed Service Standards for the New York City Department of
Transportation (NYCDOT)” did not include transit amenity standards for the Staten Island Ferry
terminals or quantifiable transit amenity standards for the placement of benches, bus shelters,
and other amenities along New York City bus routes (as appropriate). In the case of benches,
NYCDOT listed five criteria for placing a bench at a bus stop; three were based on the proximity

                                               40
of a bus stop to medical, commercial, and transit facilities; one was based on suggestions from
individuals and community organizations; and one was based on whether a bus stop was located
on one of the top five ridership routes and for some physical reason the bus stop could not
accommodate a bus shelter. In the case of bus shelters, NYCDOT established that a bus stop
was eligible for a bus shelter if it had a high volume of passengers, or it was in an area with high
housing density. These service standards were not quantifiable. NYCDOT must establish
quantifiable standards for the placement of transit amenities, per FTA Circular 4702.1A.


Corrective Actions and Schedules: Within 60 days, NYCDOT must submit to the Region II
Civil Rights Officer documentation confirming that it has developed the following systemwide
service standards:
      Quantifiable transit amenities standards for the Staten Island Ferry terminals

      Quantifiable transit amenities standards for New York City Bus shelters, benches and
       other amenities along city bus routes, as appropriate


NYCDOT must also provide an explanation to FTA addressing its role in and responsibility for
the placement of bus stops.



       11.     Evaluation of Service and Fare Changes

Requirement: FTA recipients shall evaluate significant system-wide service and fare
changes and proposed improvements at the planning and programming stages to determine
whether those changes have a discriminatory impact. For service changes, this requirement
applies to “major service changes” only. Recipients should have established guidelines or
thresholds for what it considers a “major” change.

Findings: During this Title VI Compliance Review of NYCDOT, no deficiencies were found
regarding NYCDOT’s compliance with FTA requirements for Evaluation of Service and Fare
Changes. Since NYCDOT’s Staten Island Ferry service was free and it has been running the
same service for a century, it was not anticipated by NYCDOT that a service or fare change
would occur in the foreseeable future. In light of this reality, during the site visit, the review



                                                41
team discussed the following related requirements and guidance with NYCDOT so it would
understand what was required if a fare and/or service change was implemented:
      FTA Circular 4702.1A.V.4
      FTA Administrator’s Dear Colleague Letter dated March 8, 2011, titled “Civil Rights”
      “Transit Service & Fare Equity Analysis Under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 –
       Training Overview for FTA Funding Recipients” webinar PowerPoint presentation


It was also recommended that NYCDOT reference the following requirements in FTA Circular
4702.1A, V, 4 when developing procedures for conducting equity evaluations for service and
fare changes during the planning phase:


       Table 7 – Elements Required for Evaluation of Service and Fare Changes
                         (per FTA C. 4702.1A, V, 4a and 4b)
ELEMENTS REQUIRED FOR EVALUATION OF SERVICE AND FARE CHANGES
(PER FTA C. 4702.1A, V, 4a.) – Option A
1. ASSESS THE EFFECTS OF THE PROPOSED FARE OR SERVICE CHANGE ON MINORITY
   AND LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS.
       a) Route changes: For proposed major service changes that would reduce or expand
          frequency of service or add or eliminate routes, the recipient should produce maps
          of the routes that would be eliminated, reduced, added, or expanded, overlaid on a
          demographic map of the service area, that highlights those Census tracts or traffic
          analysis zones where the total minority and low-income population is greater than
          the service area average.
       b) Span of service: For proposed changes that would reduce or expand hours and
          days of service, the recipient should analyze any available information generated
          from ridership surveys that indicates whether minority and low-income riders are
          more likely to use the service during the hours and/or days that would be
          eliminated.
       c) Fare changes: For proposed changes that would increase or decrease fares on
          certain transit modes or by fare payment type or payment media, the recipient
          should analyze any available information generated from ridership surveys
          indicating whether minority and low-income riders are more likely to use the mode
          of service, payment type, or payment media that would be subject to the fare
          increase.




                                            42
2. ASSESS THE ALTERNATIVES AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE AFFECTED BY THE
    FARE INCREASE OF MAJOR SERVICE CHANGE.
        a) Service changes: For proposed service changes, the recipient should analyze
            what, if any, modes of transit or transit routes are available for people affected by
            the service expansions or reductions. This analysis should compare the travel time
            and cost of the current route with the travel time and cost to the rider of the
            alternatives.
        b) Fare changes: For proposed fare changes, the recipient should analyze what, if
            any, alternative transit modes, fare payment types, or fare payment media are
            available for people affected by the fare change. This analysis should compare the
            fares paid under the change with fares that would be paid through available
            alternatives.
3. DESCRIBE THE ACTIONS THE AGENCY PROPOSES TO MINIMIZE, MITIGATE,
    OR OFFSET ANY ADVERSE EFFECTS OF PROPOSED FARE AND SERVICE
    CHANGES ON MINORITY AND LOW-INCOME POPULATIONS.
4. DETERMINE WHICH, IF ANY OF THE PROPOSALS UNDER CONSIDERATION
    WOULD HAVE A DISPROPORTIONATELY HIGH AND ADVERSE EFFECT ON
    MINORITY AND LOW-INCOME RIDERS. RECIPIENTS CAN IMPLEMENT A
    FARE INCREASE OR MAJOR SERVICE REDUCTION THAT WOULD HAVE
    DISPROPORTIONATELY HIGH AND ADVERSE EFFECTS PROVIDED THAT THE
    RECIPIENT DEMONSTRATES THAT THE ACTION MEETS A SUBSTANTIAL
    NEED THAT IS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND THAT ALTERNATIVES WOULD
    HAVE MORE SEVERE ADVERSE EFFECTS THAN THE PREFERRED
    ALTERNATIVE.
ELEMENTS REQUIRED FOR EVALUATION OF SERVICE AND FARE CHANGES
(PER FTA C. 4702.1A, V, 4b.) – Option B
Recipients have the option of modifying the above option or developing their own procedures
to evaluate significant system-wide service and fare changes and proposed improvements at
the planning and programming stages to determine whether those changes have a
discriminatory impact. This locally developed alternative shall include a description of the
methodology used to determine the impact of the service and fare change, a determination as
to whether the proposed change would have discriminatory impacts, and a description of
what, if any, action was taken by the agency in response to the analysis conducted.


Finally, the review team presented the “Title VI Service and Fare Equity Analysis” presentation
found on the FTA website at http://fta.dot.gov/civilrights/ 12328.html. This presentation
provided additional guidance and best practices for conducting Title VI service and fare equity
analyses.


In response to a request for documentation of its most recent equity evaluations and service
changes in preparation for this review, NYCDOT provided the following:


                                               43
NYCDOT’s policy is to perform a service and fare equity analysis whenever there is a
proposal to make a major change in service or any change in fare for the Staten Island
Ferry. NYCDOT defines a major service change as one affecting at least 30% of service
hours.

Both the SIF fare and schedule are fixed by local law; therefore, any changes to the fare
and/or schedule would require legislation by the City Council.

Because the ferry has only one route with two stops, and has been operating the same
route for over a century, it is not anticipated that there will be a proposal to change the
route or the number or location of the stops. Therefore potential changes that might
require analysis are limited to a change in schedule or fare.

If NYCDOT were to consider making a major change to its schedule, it would use the
following methodology:
     Using data gathered in the 2011 Title VI Compliance Monitoring Survey of ferry
       passengers, determine the distribution of minority and low-income passengers
       among different time periods of operation. The Staten Island Ferry has headways
       that vary depending on the time of day and whether the trip takes place on a
       weekday or a weekend.
     Based on the observed distribution, an adverse effect would be expected if the
       headway were increased during times when minority or low-income passengers
       were over-represented among ferry riders.
     NYCDOT would then seek alternatives to the service change that would not have
       a disparate adverse effect.
     If it were necessary to make a service change that adversely affected minority or
       low-income passengers, NYCDOT would develop mitigation measures to reduce
       or eliminate the adverse impact.

If NYCDOT were to consider bringing back a fare for riding the ferry, the expectation
would be that a new fare would affect all passengers equally, regardless of their minority
or income status. However, qualitative data might be available from the testimony of
passengers and other stakeholders at the public hearings that would be held by the New
York City Council as part of the legislative process.
     Using data from the public hearings, NYCDOT would determine whether a fare
       would have a disparate adverse impact on minority and low-income riders.
       Different fares would have different impacts.
     If a disparate adverse impact were expected, NYCDOT would seek alternatives to
       a ferry fare that would not have a disparate adverse effect.
     If it were necessary to begin charging a fare, NYCDOT would develop mitigation
       measures to reduce or eliminate the adverse impact. For example, a free transfer
       to MTA buses and trains might be possible. This would have a disparate positive
       affect on minorities and low-income passengers, because they are more likely
       than other passengers to use buses and trains rather than to drive to and from the
       ferry.

                                       44
This explanation and proposed methodology were sufficient to address the requirement FTA
Circular 4702.1A to conduct equity evaluations of fare and service changes.



       12.    Monitoring Transit Service


Requirement: FTA recipients shall monitor the transit service provided throughout its service
area. Periodic service monitoring activities shall be undertaken to compare the level and quality
of service provided to predominantly minority areas with service provided in other areas to
ensure that the end result of policies and decision-making is equitable service. Monitoring shall
be conducted at minimum once every three years. If recipient monitoring determines that prior
decisions have resulted in disparate impacts, it shall take corrective action to remedy the
disparities.

Findings: During this Title VI Compliance Review of the NYCDOT, no deficiencies were
found regarding NYCDOT’s compliance with FTA requirements for Monitoring Transit Service.
NYCDOT recently conducted comprehensive monitoring of its Staten Island Ferry system to
ensure that potential problems, if any, were found and addressed in a timely manner. NYCDOT
selected Option C: Title VI Analysis of Customer Surveys, as described in Table 8.


        Table 8 – Elements Required for Monitoring – Option C: Title VI Analysis of
                        Customer Surveys (per FTA C. 4702.1A, V, 5. c.)
   Elements Required for Monitoring – Option C: Title VI Analysis of Customer
                                         Surveys
                              (Per FTA C. 4702.1A, V, 5. c.)
1. For their most recent survey, recipients should compare the responses from
   individuals who identified themselves as members of minority groups and/or in low-
   income brackets, and the responses of those who identified themselves as white
   and/or in middle and upper-income brackets.
2. To the extent that survey data is available, recipients should determine whether the
   different demographic groups report significant differences in the travel time,
   number of transfers, and overall cost of the trip or if different demographic groups
   gave significantly different responses when asked to rate the quality of service, such
   as their satisfaction with the system, willingness to recommend transit to others, and
   value for fare paid.
3. If the agency concludes that different demographic groups gave significantly
   different responses, it should take corrective action to address the disparities.


                                             45
The following describes NYCDOT’s approach, survey results, and mitigation efforts planned for
and/or taken by NYCDOT:
       This memorandum documents NYCDOT’s activities to monitor the Staten Island Ferry’s
       compliance with Title VI requirements by surveying ferry passengers.

       Survey Objective

       The main objective of the survey was to determine whether ferry users who fall into three
       categories—Limited English Proficiency (LEP), Low Income (LI), and members of
       minority groups - are discriminated against in, denied the benefit of, or excluded from
       ferry service. The categories correspond to the three protected classes under Title VI, as
       described in FTA circular 4702.1A. The three categories are also called “target” groups
       or classes in this memorandum.

       The survey focused on collecting demographic information about the ferry users,
       information about overall ferry service rating, 311 service awareness, and multilingual
       ferry schedule availability awareness. This information has aided NYCDOT in
       determining whether or not any group(s) of persons is underserviced or treated unfairly.

       EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

       Methodology

       The questionnaire was designed to determine whether or not the survey respondent was a
       member of one or more of the three target classes and ascertain the individual’s rating of
       the ferry service. In order to have enough responses from members of the target classes,
       target numbers were set for each protected class.

       Surveys were collected randomly until a predetermined number of respondents who were
       not members of protected classes were reached. After that, interviewers targeted people
       who appeared to be members of minority groups, non-English speakers, or low-income
       individuals.

       Surveys were conducted in July, August and September 2011 and were performed during
       weekdays (7 AM to 6 PM) and weekends (10 AM to 4 PM). There were two phases: a
       pilot test phase and a final full-scale phase. In the pilot test phase, 1,328 surveys were
       collected. In the final phase, 1,693 surveys were collected. In each phase, some surveys
       were collected randomly, and some were targeted.

       The survey form was printed on 8 ½ by 11 inch heavy card-stock paper. There were
       survey versions in six languages: English, Spanish, Chinese, Korean, Italian and
       Russian. Answers were recorded by the interviewers by filling in circles on the form. The
       forms were electronically scanned to input the survey data for the analysis portion of the
       study.


                                             46
In total, the team interviewed 3,021 ferry riders when responses from the pilot and final
testing data were combined. The total number of completed surveys yielded 100% more
surveys than were originally determined to be needed to provide an adequate sampling
with statistically valid results.

Basis of Survey Questions

To evaluate the equality of service amongst the ferry riding population, NYCDOT
analyzed responses addressing the following issues:

1. Quantity of Usage: Do the protected classes use the ferry service at least as much as
   their non-protected fellow passengers do? This is measured by comparing their
   proportion in the ferry service area to their proportion among respondents chosen at
   random by survey interviewers.

2. Satisfaction with the Staten Island Ferry Service: Are the protected classes as
   satisfied with ferry service as their non-protected fellow passengers? Satisfaction is
   measured by comparing ratings by each pair of groups (e.g. LEP and non-LEP) of
   ferry services and of terminal amenities.

3. Access to Information: Are the three protected classes as aware as their non-
   protected fellow passengers of information related to ferry service? Access to
   information is measured by comparing each pair of groups’ awareness of the
   availability of the city’s all-purpose 311 phone number to report complaints and
   receive help in languages other than English, and the availability of printed
   schedules in languages other than English.


Overview of Results

Analysis of the 3,021 surveys collected between July and September 2011 indicates that
the SIF has been successful in delivering an equal level of service to all passengers
regardless of race or ethnic origin.

The survey analysis focused on eight variables, including residency, ferry ratings, and
questions on knowledge of 311 and multilingual services. For each variable, we
compared the responses of ferry passengers in each of the three protected classes to their
non-targeted fellow passengers.

The survey results did not substantially prove any discrimination against members of the
three targeted groups. However, three potential issues were revealed: 1) Minority
respondents were more likely than others to give low ratings for the weekend ferry
schedule; 2) Limited English Proficiency respondents were less likely to be aware of the
translated ferry schedules; and, 3) All three targeted groups were less aware of 311as a
resource to report ferry issues.


                                      47
      In terms of demographics, low-income people and members of minority groups
      comprised a larger proportion of the ferry ridership as compared to their representation
      within the population of Staten Island, suggesting that ferry service is particularly
      valuable to these groups.

      Proposed Mitigation of Potential Issues:

      1) Minority respondents were more likely than others to give low ratings to the weekend
      ferry schedule:
      Analysis of additional variables suggests that the low ratings for the weekend ferry
      schedule by minority respondents were due to intermediate variables rather than
      minority group membership. Members of minority groups were more likely to be bus
      riders than other groups, and to be going to work or school/college, rather than
      conducting leisure activities. Bus riders expressed more discontent with the weekend
      schedule than users of other modes, because there are long waits for buses, which are
      exacerbated by hour-long waits between some weekend ferry trips. Passengers going to
      work or college were also less satisfied than other travelers with the weekend schedule,
      which is likely to be due to inflexible arrival times required for work and school/college.

      NYCDOT ferry service schedule is mandated by the City’s independently elected body of
      legislators known as the City Council and NYCDOT has no flexibility to add service.
      However, NYCDOT will seek to enter into discussions with the Metropolitan
      Transportation Authority (MTA) regarding the potential for coordinating MTA – New
      York City Transit bus schedules and MTA-Staten Island Railway train schedules with that
      of NYCDOT ferry departures, and how to address bus and train delays on weekends. The
      bus and train schedules are wholly within the MTA board’s jurisdiction and MTA is able
      to adjust schedules as needed.

      2) LEP respondents were less likely to be aware of the translated ferry schedules:
      NYCDOT will develop a plan to address this finding. One element will be communication
      with community organizations working with immigrant populations, to let them know
      how to obtain translated ferry schedules. NYCDOT will also explore the possibility of
      putting signs saying “Ferry Schedules” in multiple languages at the distribution points
      for ferry schedules and/or make announcements over the public address system as
      needed.

      3) All three targeted groups were less aware of 311’s resource to report ferry issues: this
      is an issue requiring action beyond NYCDOT. The finding suggests that New York City
      needs to improve outreach regarding the existence of 311 as an all-purpose way to
      communicate about city services. NYCDOT will communicate this finding to the Mayor’s
      Office of Operations, which operates the 311 service line.

In summary, NYCDOT was doing adequate service monitoring.



                                             48
     VII. SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND CORRECTIVE ACTIONS

      Title VI
 Requirements For         Site        Description of
                                       Deficiencies                                   Response      Date
 Recipients Serving     Review                              Corrective Action(s)      Days/Date    Closed
 Large Urbanized        Finding
       Areas
                                     GENERAL REQUIREMENTS
1.   Inclusive Public     D       Insufficient oversight NYCDOT must submit           60 Days
     Participation                of Title VI compliance to the Region II Civil
                                                         Rights Officer
                                                         documentation that its
                                                         subrecipients seek out
                                                         and consider the
                                                         viewpoints of
                                                         minority, low-income,
                                                         and LEP populations
                                                         in the course of
                                                         conducting public
                                                         outreach and
                                                         involvement activities,
                                                         per FTA Circular
                                                         4702.1A.

2.   LEP Language         D       Insufficient oversight   NYCDOT must submit
     Assistance Plan              of Title VI compliance   to the Region II Civil
                                                           Rights Officer the
                                                           following:
                                                            Language Access
                                                               Summary Reports        60 Days     10/10/12
                                                               for 2010 and 2011;
                                                               and
                                                            Documentation
                                                               that its               60 Days
                                                               subrecipients had
                                                               conducted a four-
                                                               factor analysis, and
                                                               if necessary,
                                                               developed a LAP,
                                                               as required by FTA
                                                               Circular 4702.1A,
                                                               IV, 4.



                                                  49
      Title VI
 Requirements For       Site        Description of
                                     Deficiencies                                   Response     Date
 Recipients Serving   Review                               Corrective Action(s)     Days/Date   Closed
 Large Urbanized      Finding
       Areas
3.   Title VI           D       Complaints not           NYCDOT must submit
     Complaint                  addressed properly       to the Region II Civil
     Procedures                                          Rights Officer the
                                                         following:
                                                          Procedures for
                                                             handling Title VI      60 Days     5/29/12
                                                             complaints filed
                                                             against it through
                                                             the citywide 311
                                                             customer service
                                                             number that
                                                             specifically address
                                                             the investigation,
                                                             tracking, and
                                                             reporting of Title
                                                             VI complaints, per
                                                             FTA Circular
                                                             4702.1A.
                                                          Development of
                                                             complaint              60 Days
                                                             procedures for the
                                                             Staten Island Ferry
                                                             if these procedures
                                                             are determined
                                                             necessary by
                                                             NYCDOT.
                                                          Documentation that
                                Insufficient oversight       its subrecipients      60 Days
                                of Title VI compliance       have Title VI
                                                             complaint
                                                             procedures and that
                                                             those procedures
                                                             are made available
                                                             to the public, per
                                                             FTA Circular
                                                             4702.1A.




                                                50
      Title VI
 Requirements For          Site        Description of
                                        Deficiencies                                  Response     Date
 Recipients Serving      Review                               Corrective Action(s)    Days/Date   Closed
 Large Urbanized         Finding
       Areas
4.   List of Title VI      D       Insufficient oversight   NYCDOT must submit        60 Days
     Investigations,               of Title VI compliance   to the Region II Civil
     Complaints, and                                        Rights Officer
     Lawsuits                                               documentation
                                                            confirming that its
                                                            subrecipients are
                                                            recording and tracking
                                                            Title VI complaints
                                                            filed against them, as
                                                            required by FTA
                                                            Circular 4702.1A.
5.   Notice to             D       Insufficient oversight   NYCDOT must submit        60 Days
     Beneficiaries of              of Title VI compliance   to the Region II Civil
     Protection                                             Rights Officer
     Under Title VI                                         documentation
                                                            confirming that its
                                                            subrecipients provide a
                                                            Notice to Beneficiaries
                                                            of Protection Under
                                                            Title VI, per FTA
                                                            Circular 4702.1A. In
                                                            addition, NYCDOT
                                                            must provide
                                                            documentation that its
                                                            Notice was distributed
                                                            per FTA Circular
                                                            4702.1A
6.   Annual Title VI      ND
     Certification and
     Assurance
7.   Environmental        ND
     Justice Analyses
     of Construction
     Projects
8.   Prepare and          ND
     Submit a Title
     VI Program




                                                   51
                    PROGRAM-SPECIFIC REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES
                             FOR LARGE URBANIZED AREAS
9.   Demographic        D    Demographic data        NYCDOT must submit       60 Days   4/12/12
     Data                    lacking                 to the Region II Civil
                                                     Rights Officer
                                                     NYCDOT Title VI
                                                     demographic maps and
                                                     charts of its service
                                                     area using the 2010
                                                     census. NYCDOT
                                                     should also include
                                                     low-income
                                                     populations in its
                                                     demographic maps, per
                                                     FTA Circular 4702.1A.
10. System-wide         D    Service standards       NYCDOT must submit
    Service                  and/or policies lacking to the Region II Civil
    Standards and                                    Rights Officer
    Policies                                         documentation that it
                                                     has developed the
                                                     following systemwide
                                                     service standards:
                                                       Transit amenities
                                                          standards for the   60 Days
                                                          Staten Island Ferry
                                                          terminals
                                                       Transit amenities
                                                          standards for New   60 Days
                                                          York City Bus
                                                          shelters, benches,
                                                          and other
                                                          amenities along
                                                          city bus routes, as
                                                          appropriate; and a
                                                      NYCDOT must also
                                                      provide an explanation
                                                      to FTA addressing its
                                                      role in and
                                                      responsibility for the
                                                      placement of bus
                                                      stops.
11. Evaluation of      ND
    Fare and
    Service
    Changes

                                              52
12. Monitoring               ND
    Transit Service
   Findings at the time of the site visit: ND = No Deficiencies; D = Deficiency; NA = Not Applicable;
   NR = Not Reviewed; AC = Advisory Comment




                                                          53
      VIII. ATTENDEES


                                                                  PHONE
NAME                  ORGANIZATION/TITLE                                           E-MAIL ADDRESS
                                                                  NUMBER
GRANTEE – New York City Department of Transportation (NYCDOT)
Margaret Newman       Chief of Staff to the Commissioner          (212) 839-6408   mnewman@dot.nyc.gov
Lawrence Price        Director Audit Coordination                 (212) 834-4434   lprice@dot.nyc.gov
                      Associate Commissioner, Grants
Jai Therattil                                                     (212) 839-6943   jtherattil@dot.nyc.gov
                      Administration
Janet Luke            Director, FTA Grants Program Unit           (212) 839-4460   jluke@dot.nyc.gov
Sandra Balmir         FTA Grants Program Unit                     (212) 839-4452   sbalmir@dot.nyc.gov
Alan Olmsted          Grants Administration                       (212) 839-6685   aolmsted@dot.nyc.gov
Linda Ostreicher      FTA Grants Program Unit                     (212) 839-4454   lostreicher@dot.nyc.gov
Meseret Yilma         FTA Grants Program Unit                     (212) 839-6991   myilma@dot.nyc.gov
Elsa Gomez            FTA Grants Program Unit                     (212) 839-4459   egomez@dot.nyc.gov
Dan Scott             FTA Grants Program Unit                     (212) 839-4462   dscott1@dot.nyc.gov
James DeSimone        COO, Staten Island Ferry                    (718) 876-2657   j.deSimone@dot.nyc.gov
George (Paddy)        Director of Administration, Staten Island
                                                                  (718) 876-5831   gmahoney@dot.nyc.gov
Mahoney               Ferry
Desiree Mercado       Chief of Staff – Staten Island Ferry        (718) 876-8442   dmercado@dot.nyc.gov
Chevenne Gordon       Assistant General Counsel                   (212) 839-6525   cgordon@dot.nyc.gov
                      Agency Chief Contracting Officer
Nancy Carolan                                                     (212) 839-9292   ncarolan@dot.nyc.gov
                      (ACCO)
Susane Gabriele       Deputy ACCO                                 (212) 839-9295   sgabriele@dot.nyc.gov
Carlos Bannister      Investigator, ACCO’s Office                 (212) 839-9421   cbannister@dot.nyc.gov
Josephine Uzochukwu   Deputy ACCO                                 (212) 839-9462   juzochukwu@dot.nyc.gov
Eric Beaton           Director, Transit Development               (212) 839-6697   ebeaton@dot.nyc.gov
                      Deputy Borough Commissioner –
Dalila Hall                                                       (212) 839-2515   dhall@dot.nyc.gov
                      Queens
                      Lower Manhattan Borough
Jennifer Leung                                                    (212) 839-7135   jleung@dot.nyc.gov
                      Commissioner’s Office
Margaret Forgione     Manhattan Borough Commissioner              (212) 839-6210   mforgione@dot.nyc.gov
Onyinye Akujuo        Subregional Program Management              (212) 839-6937   oakujuo@dot.nyc.gov
Carren Simpson        Traffic and Planning                        (212) 839-7766   csimpson@dot.nyc.gov
Michael Griffith      Traffic and Planning                        (212) 839-7703   mgriffith@dot.nyc.gov
Ophelia Ray-Fenner    Traffic and Planning                        (212) 839-6995   oray@dot.nyc.gov
Seth Berman           City Planner – Traffic and Planning         (212) 839-7707   sberman@dot.nyc.gov
William Henning       Investigator/Trainer EEO                    (212) 839-6610   whenning@dot.nyc.gov
Katelyn Mikuliak      Deputy Director, External Affairs           (212) 839-6429   kmikuliak@dot.nyc.gov
                      Assistant Commissioner – Street
Brook McKenna                                                     (212) 839-4478   bmckenna@dot.nyc.gov
                      Furniture
Michael Hagan         Project Manager                             (212) 839-4945   mhagan@dot.nyc.gov
                      Assistant Commissioner, Customer
Catherine Messana                                                 (212) 839-7298   cmessana@dot.nyc.gov
                      Service

                                                        54
                                                             PHONE
NAME                   ORGANIZATION/TITLE                                     E-MAIL ADDRESS
                                                             NUMBER
Other City Agencies
Bob Bernstein          Mayor’s Office – Audit Liaison        (212) 788-1511   bbernstein@cityhall.nyc.gov
                       Deputy Commissioner to the New York
Clifford Mulqueen      City Commission on Human Rights       (212) 306-7741   cmulqueen@cchr.nyc.gov
                       (CCHR)
NYCDOT Partners/Subrecipients – New York City Economic Development Corporation (NYCEDC), Greater Jamaica
Development Corporation (GJDC), and Trust for Governor's Island (TGI)
Liza Kent               NYCEDC Grants Director                   (212) 312-3766 lkent@nycedc.com
Carolyn Cubitto-Smith   NYCEDC Grants Manager                    (212) 312-3770 ccsmith@nycedc.com
Robert Holbrook         NYCEDC Planning                          (212) 312-3706 rholbrook@nycedc.com
                        NYCEDC Assistant Vice President
Jessica Pavone                                                   (212) 312-4239 jpavone@nycedc.com
                        Development
David Hopkins           NYCEDC Vice President, Maritime          (212) 312-3771 dhopkins@nycedc.com
Brian Larsen            NYCEDC Capital                           (212) 312-3740 blarsen@nycedc.com
                        NYCEDC Government and Community
Ali Davis                                                        (212) 312-3591 adavis@nycedc.com
                        Relations
                        NYCEDC Senior Vice President, Asset
Richard Cote                                                     (212) 312-4069 rcote@nycedc.com
                        Management
                        NYCEDC Assistant Vice President,
Adam Zaranko                                                     (212) 618-5740 azaranko@nycedc.com
                        Asset Management
                        NYCEDC Assistant Vice President,
James Kelly                                                      (212) 312-4273 jkelly@nycedc.com
                        Funding Agreements
                        NYCEDC Project Manager,
Gillian Connell                                                  (212) 312-3735 gconnell@nycedc.com
                        Development
Nathan Bliss            NYCEDC Vice President, Development       (212) 312-4263 nbliss@nycedc.com
Mark Nieves             GJDC Director, Capital Projects          (718) 291-0282 mnieves@gjdc.org
Claire Kelly            TGI Director, Capital Development        (212) 440-2230 ckelly@govisland.nyc.gov
Federal Transit Administration – FTA
Anthony G. Carr         Acting Regional Administrator            (212) 668-2170 anthony.carr@dot.gov
                        Director, Office of Operations and
Larry Penner                                                     (212) 668-2170 larry.Penner@dot.gov
                        Programs Management
Donovan Vincent         Regional Engineer                        (212) 668-2170 donovan.vincent@dot.gov
                        Program Analyst, Office of Civil Rights,
Anita Heard                                                      (202) 493-0318 anita.heard@dot.gov
                        Headquarters
Margaret Griffin        Regional Civil Rights Officer            (617) 494-2397 margaret.griffin@dot.gov
Tim Steinitz            Program Analyst                          (212) 668-2324 timothy.steinitz@dot.gov
REVIEW TEAM – The DMP Group, LLC
John Potts              Lead Reviewer, The DMP Group             (202) 726-2630 johnpotts@thedmpgroup.com
Donald Lucas            Reviewer, The DMP Group                  (202) 726-2630 donald.lucas@thedmpgroup.com
Gregory Campbell        Reviewer, The DMP Group                  (202) 726-2630 gregorycampbell@thedmpgroup.com




                                                        55

								
To top