Inline image 1


Title VI Program

Recertification Document


Title VI of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, Section 601 Specific to Federal Transit Administration Programs


March 16, 2017


Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission 6100 Southport Road

Portage, Indiana 46368

Phone (219) 763.6060

Fax (219) 762.1653

e-mail: nirpc@nirpc.org


Inline image 1


2017

Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission Title VI Program Certification Document


Table of Contents


NIRPC’S RESOLUTION ADOPTING TITLE VI PLAN

IDENTIFICATION OF DESIGNATED RECIPIENT, DIRECT GRANTEE, AND SUBRECIPIENTS 1

PART I. NIRPC GENERAL REPORTING REQUIREMENTS 3

  1. REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE AN ANNUAL TITLE VI CERTIFICATION AND

    ASSURANCES 3

  2. REQUIREMENT TO DEVELOP TITLE VI COMPLAINT PROCEDURES 3

  3. REQUIREMENT TO RECORD TITLE VI INVESTIGATIONS, COMPLAINTS, & LAWSUITS 3

  4. REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE MEANINGFUL ACCESS TO LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY (LEP) PERSONS 3

  5. REQUIREMENT TO NOTIFY BENEFICIARIES OF PROTECTION UNDER TITLE VI 3

  6. SUMMARY OF PUBLIC OUTREACH AND INVOLVEMENT ACTIVITIES 4

  7. MINORITY REPRESENTATION ON PLANNING & ADVISORY BOARDS 11

  8. MONITORING SUBRECIPIENTS 12

  9. REQUIREMENT TO CONDUCT EQUITY ANALYSIS 13

PART II. MPO REQUIREMENTS 15

  1. DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE 15

  2. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE BENEFITS AND BURDENS ANALYSIS 15

  3. DESCRIPTION OF PROCEDURES WITHIN PLANNING PROCESS 15

  4. DEMOGRAPHIC MAPS SHOWING IMPACTS OF STATE AND FEDERAL FUNDS 17

  5. ANALYSIS OF TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM INVESTMENTS 18

  6. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCEDURES THE MPO USES TO PASS THROUGH FTA

    FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO SUBRECIPIENTS IN A NON-DISCRIMINATORY MANNER 19

  7. DESCRIPTION OF THE PROCEDURES THE MPO USES TO PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO POTENTIAL SUBRECIPIENTS APPLYING FOR FUNDING, INCLUDING ITS EFFORTS TO ASSIST APPLICANTS THAT WOULD SERVE PREDOMINANTLY MINORITY POPULATIONS 19

    PART III. NIRPC RECERTIFICATION ATTACHMENTS 21

    ATTACHMENT #1: NIRPC’S TITLE VI COMPLAINT PROCEDURES 22

    ATTACHMENT #2: LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY STRATEGY 29

    ATTACHMENT #3: 2010 LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE 38

    ATTACHMENT #4: MINORITY & LOW INCOME POPULATION DISTRIBUTION MAPS 47

    ATTACHMENT #5: MINORITY & LOW INCOME POPULATION DISTRIBUTION CHART... 49 PART IV. TRANSIT OPERATOR SUBMISSIONS 57

    NORTHERN INDIANA COMMUTER TRANSPORTATION DISTRICT (NICTD) 58

    CITY OF EAST CHICAGO, IN (EAST CHICAGO TRANSIT) 59

    NORTH TOWNSHIP, LAKE COUNTY, IN (NORTH TWP DIAL-A-RIDE) 92

    SOUTH LAKE COUNTY COMMUNITY SERVICES, INC. (SOUTHLAKE TRANSIT) 105

    OPPORTUNITY ENTERPRISES, INC. (OE EXPRESS) 122

    PORTER COUNTY AGING & COMMUNITY SERVICES, INC 141

    CITY OF VALPARAISO, IN (V-LINE/ CHICAGO DASH) 160

    CITY OF LA PORTE, IN (TRANSPORTE) 192


    Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission 6100 Southport Road

    Portage, Indiana 46368


    Phone (219) 763.6060

    Fax (219) 762.1653

      1. ail: nirpc@nirpc.org


        Ty Warner AICP Executive Director

        Identification of Designated Recipient, Direct Grantee, and Subrecipients


        Recipient: Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC) 6100 Southport Road, Portage, IN 46368-6409

        FTA Grantee: 1193 Subrecipients:

        City of East Chicago, IN (East Chicago Transit)

        North Township, Lake County, IN (North Twp Dial-a-Ride) South Lake County Community Services, Inc.

        Opportunity Enterprises, Inc. (OE Express)

        Porter County Aging & Community Services, Inc. City of Valparaiso, IN (V-Line & ChicaGo Dash) City of La Porte, IN (TransPorte)


        NIRPC also functions as the cognizant Designated Recipient and executes supplemental agreements for the following transit operator, which is itself a direct grantee of Federal Transportation Administration (FTA) funds:


        Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District (NICTD) (South Shore Commuter Rail)

        FTA Grantee: 1201


        NICTD will be submitting their own Title VI Certification to FTA. Please see their submitted document.



        image

        1. | P a ge

          Part I. NIRPC General Reporting Requirements


          The information contained in this report reflects the Title VI requirement per Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Circular 4702.1B of October 1, 2012. The Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC) functions as a Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO): FTA direct grantee that passes through funding to seven (7) different transit operators; and as the “cognizant” Designated Recipient for a commuter rail provider. As a recipient of FTA funds, NIRPC submits the following information under General Reporting Requirements of Chapter III of the Circular.


          Requirement to Provide an Annual Title VI Certification and Assurances

          The Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC) submitted the FY 2017 Certifications and Assurances on TRAMS on January 9, 2017.


          Requirement to Develop Title VI Complaint Procedures

          In 2010 NIRPC updated its Title VI complaints procedures. This update included the addition of a complaint form and was approved by the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT) in May of 2010. NIRPC’s Title VI Complaint Procedures (see Attachment #1) are posted on the bulletin board in NIRPC’s reception area and are available for the public to download from NIRPC’s website.


          Requirement to Record Title VI Investigations, Complaints, & Lawsuits

          NIRPC has no active lawsuits or complaints alleging discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin with respect to service or other transit benefits.


          Requirement to Provide Meaningful Access to Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Persons

          NIRPC’s Public Participation Plan was updated and adopted in December 2014. NIRPC receives federal financial assistance from the US Department of Transportation (US DOT). For this reason it is subject to the US DOT’s Limited English Proficiency Guidance, issued on December 14, 2005. NIRPC has elected not to prepare a formal Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Plan. In 2011 NIRPC completed the LEP Four Factor Analysis (see Attachments #2 & Attachment #3). NIRPC has elected not to update the four factor analysis at this time. This is due to the low number of LEP persons historically accessing NIRPC services, and the low frequency at which LEP persons encounter NIRPC’s services. NIRPC will update the four factor analysis and revisit the possibility of creating a formal Limited English Proficiency Plan upon the release of more detailed data. The conclusions to the four factor analysis have been updated to reflect the steps taken and the future steps that will be taken to expand NIRPC’s access to LEP populations (See Attachment #3).


          Requirement to Notify Beneficiaries of Protection Under Title VI

          NIRPC’s Title VI Complaint Procedures (see Attachment #1) are posted on the bulletin board in NIRPC’s reception area and are available for the public to download from NIRPC’s website. NIRPC staff updated its Non- Discrimination Statement in 2010 to fulfill the INDOT ADA review. A Request for Alternate Formats statement was developed in 2010. It is NIRPC’s policy to incorporate both the Non-Discrimination and Request for


          image

        2. | P a ge

          Alternate Format Statements into all public documents. Below are the Non-Discrimination and Request for Alternate Format Statements.


          Non-Discrimination Statement


          The Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, sex, religion, national origin, age, disability, marital status, familial status, parental status, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual's income is derived from any public assistance program.


          Request for Alternate Formats


          Requests for alternate formats please Allen Hammond at NIRPC at (219)763-6060 (extension 141) or ahammond@nirpc.org. Individuals with hearing impairments may contact us through the Indiana relay 711 service by calling 711 or (800) 743-3333.


          Public Participation Plan & Summary of Public Outreach and Involvement Activities

          NIRPC’s Public Participation Plan was updated and adopted in December 2014. NIRPC’s plan outlines goals and objectives for public participation in the Commission’s transportation, economic development, and environmental plan and programs. It identifies public involvement activities that NIRPC will use to achieve the plan’s goals. The Public Participation Plan also outlines strategies NIRPC utilizes to involve citizens including low income, minority and non-English speaking participants in the decision making process. Please see NIRPC’s Public Participation Plan submitted along with this document as well located on NIRPC’s website.


          Several steps have been taken since the last Title VI submission in 2014 to ensure that the general public, including minority and low income populations, are involved in and have meaningful access to NIRPC activities and events. These steps include, but are not limited to:

          • Adopting a new Public Participation Plan in December of 2014. The Plan includes many improvements, including a list of essential accessibility features for venues for NIRPC events.

          • Appointing a staff member as the Public Involvement and Communications Coordinator to oversee the implementation of the Public Participation Plan.

          • Engaging in a large number of public workshops and public outreach events in multiple locations throughout the region. This includes organizing several events in minority and low income communities.

          • Hosting topical listening sessions throughout the region, including minority and low income communities, for the 2040 CRP Update Companion and the Greenways + Blueways 2020 Plan prior to the start of any work on those documents.

          • Broadcasting information regarding NIRPC activities and public involvement opportunities through radio, newspaper, and television. This activity ranged from press releases to special appearances and feature articles. This includes monthly appearances on “The Green Commuter,” a local radio show hosted by NIRPC planning partner South Shore Clean Cities.

          • Posting NIRPC activities, information, publications and events on NIRPC’s website.

          • NIRPC provides public notice through media notices, public service announcements, web site meeting calendar, and announcements at monthly policy board and stakeholder meetings. Notices of regularly scheduled meetings are sent out and posted at least 48 hours in advance. A notice is also sent prior to


            image

        3. | P a ge

          January for the entire years’ worth of meetings. Notices of formal public hearings are done 30 days in advance of the hearing.

          • Providing sign language interpreters and or Spanish translators at NIRPC outreach events upon request.

          • Releasing various draft plans, programs and other documents for 30-45 day public comment periods, following the guidelines as established I the Public Participation Plan.

          • NIRPC has established a social media presence that includes Facebook, YouTube, and Twitter as additional tools for outreach and engagement.

          • NIRPC launched a redesigned web page in January of 2017 to further improve upon the user experience.

          • Hosted and presented numerous webinars.


            In addition to the above steps, the following is a summary of specific public outreach and involvement activities undertaken since the submission of the last Title VI certification in May of 2014.


            2040 Comprehensive Regional Plan (CRP) Update Companion Listening Sessions

            In 2014, in anticipation of updating the 2040 Comprehensive Regional Plan (CRP) as required by federal regulation, the Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC) conducted a series of listening sessions to gain public input on the areas of motorized surface transportation, public transportation, and the environment and land use. This input will be used to inform the update process. A series of fifteen public meetings were held during September and October. The schedule was as follows:


            Motorized Surface Transportation

            • Thursday, September 18, 2014, 1:00 pm-3:00 pm & 4:00 pm-6:00 pm, Michigan City City Hall, 100 East Michigan Boulevard, Michigan City

            • Wednesday, October 1, 2014, 2:00 pm-4:00 pm & 5:00 pm-7:00 pm, Merrillville Town Hall, 7820 Broadway, Merrillville

            • Tuesday, October 21, 2014, 1:00 pm-3:00 pm & 4:00 pm-6:00 pm, Munster Town Hall, 1005 Ridge Road, Munster

            • Wednesday October 22, 2014, 1:00 pm-3:00 pm & 4:00 pm-6:00 pm, Valparaiso Public Library, 103 Jefferson Street, Valparaiso


Public Transit



Notification of the meetings was distributed to NIRPC’s media contacts, as well as NIRPC’s stakeholder and committee lists, including the Transportation Policy Committee and NIRPC Commission. Information was also distributed via the NIRPC website (www.nirpc.org) and NIRPC’s social media outlets.

In addition to the public meetings, comments could also be submitted by email to comments@nirpc.org, by telephone at 219-763-6060, ext. 160, or by United States Postal Service.


image

      1. | P a ge

    1. Added Travel Lanes & Cline Avenue Bridge Amendments to the 2040 CRP, 2014-2017 TIP, and AQCA

      The Indiana Department of Transportation proposed amendments to add the expansion of I-65 from US 231 south to SR 2, and United Bridge Partners proposed amendments to add their Cline Avenue bridge project to the following documents:

      • 2040 Comprehensive Regional Plan (2040 CRP)

      • 2014-2017 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP)

      • Air Quality Conformity Analysis, a new version which includes the proposed projects


        Additionally, the Town of Porter proposed to amend the existing State Road 49 project in the 2040 CRP and Air Quality Conformity Analysis from a three lane configuration to the existing four lane configuration.


        Together, these items constitute Amendment #4 to the 2040 CRP and Amendment #11 to the 2014-2017 TIP. These items were subject to a formal 30-day public comment period which commenced on February 3, 2014 and ended on March 21, 2014. During the public comment period, NIRPC hosted two public meetings to gather comments. The meeting schedule was:

      • February 18, 2014: Merrillville Town Hall, 7820 Broadway, 1:00 to 3:00 pm

      • February 19, 2014: East Chicago Public Library Main Branch, 2401 E. Columbus Drive, 2:00 to 4:00 pm


        The comments received at these meetings were compiled into a comment report, along with comments received on NIRPC’s telephone comment line at (219) 763-6060, ext. 160, via email, and via the United States Postal Service.


        NIRPC 2014 Public Participation Plan 45 Day Comment Period on Draft

        NIRPC conducted a 45-day comment and review period and held one public meeting on the draft 2014 Public Participation Plan.


        The comment and review period will ran from Monday, September 15, 2014 to Wednesday, October 29, 2014. The public meeting was held on Tuesday, October 28, 2014 at the downtown branch of the Hammond Public Library, 654 State Street, from 4:00 to 6:00 pm.


        Comments received were compiled into a public comment report that was made available to the public.

        This comment period was the conclusion of a process that began in 2012 and included several public meetings, multiple drafts, a task force, an ad-hoc committee, and comment periods totaling over 200 days’ worth of availability for public comment.


        Greenways + Blueways 2020 Listening Sessions

        The Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC) held a series of listening sessions in preparation for creating the Greenways + Blueways 2020 plan. This plan combines the 2007 Greenways + Blueways plan and the 2010 Ped & Pedal Plan. It is the first time that the areas of conservation, transportation, and recreation have all been combined into a single document for Lake, Porter, and LaPorte Counties.

        The public was invited to attend these listening sessions and provide input to guide NIRPC’s planning process. The sessions were especially of interest to those interested in conservation of natural areas and open lands and non-motorized transportation such as walking, biking, hiking, and paddling.


        image

        1. | P a ge

          A total of six listening sessions were held at locations throughout the region. They were:

      • May 27: LaPorte County Solid Waste & Water Conservation District, 2057 W. State Road 2, La Porte, IN, 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.

      • June 4: Munster Town Hall, 1005 Ridge Road, Munster, IN, 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.

      • June 16: Crown Point Public Library, 122 N. Main Street, Crown Point, IN, 5:30 p.m. to 7:30 p.m.

      • June 18: Valparaiso City Hall, 166 Lincolnway, Valparaiso, IN, 6:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m.

      • June 23: Gary Public Library Woodson (Miller) Branch, 501 S. Lake Street, Gary, IN, 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.

      • June 24: Construction Advancement Foundation, 6050 Southport Road, Portage, IN, 4:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m.


        The public was invited to attend any and all of these public meetings. Comments could also be submitted to comments@nirpc.org, by calling NIRPC at 219-763-6060, ext. 160, or by mailing to NIRPC at 6100 Southport Road, Portage, IN 46368. Additionally, targeted workshops were held with NIRPC’s Environmental Management Policy Committee and Ped, Pedal, & Paddle Committee.


        Greenways + Blueways 2020 30 Day Public Comment Period

        NIRPC held a 30-day public comment period on the draft Greenways + Blueways 2020 plan. The comment period began on October 21, 2016 and ended on November 21, 2016.


        Greenways + Blueways 2020 combines the 2007 Greenways + Blueways plan and the 2010 Ped & Pedal Plan, and environmental elements of the 2040 Comprehensive Regional Plan. It is the first time that the areas of conservation, transportation, and recreation have all been combined into a single document for Lake, Porter, and LaPorte Counties. The plan was formed with input from public listening sessions and stakeholders with an interest in conservation of natural areas and open lands and non-motorized transportation such as walking, biking, hiking, and paddling.


        As part of the public comment period, four public meetings were held:

      • November 2, 2016: NIRPC, 6100 Southport Road, Portage, IN, 6:00 to 8:00 p.m.

      • November 3, 2016: Merrillville Branch, Lake County Public Library, 1919 81st Avenue, Merrillville, IN, 6:00 to 8:00 p.m.

      • November 14, 2016: East Chicago Public Library Main Branch, 2401 E. Columbus Drive, East Chicago, IN, 5:30 to 7:30 p.m.

      • November 16, 2016: Michigan City City Hall, 100 E. Michigan Boulevard, Michigan City, IN, 6:00 to 8:00 p.m.


A draft of the plan was made available at www.nirpc.org, and stakeholders were made aware via email, a news release, and social media. The public was able to comment via email, telephone, regular mail, and at the public meeting.


Some comments received were deemed significant according to the definition set forth in the 2014 Public Participation Plan. Therefore, after proper edits are made, the plan will be made available for another 30 day public comment period.



image

  1. | P a ge

      1. Added Travel Lanes from SR 2 to SR 10 2040 CRP Amendment, TIP Amendment, & AQCA

        NIRPC convened a 30-day public comment period to amend added travel lanes on I-65 from SR 2 to SR 10 to the 2040 Comprehensive Regional Plan Update Companion (CRP), the 2016-2019 Transportation Improvement Program (TIP), and a new Air Quality Conformity Analysis. The request for this came from the Indiana Department of Transportation. The comment period began on Wednesday, March 16, 2016 and ended on Friday, April 15, 2016. A public meeting was held at the Lowell Public Library on March 31, 2016 from 2:00 to 4:00 pm. A comment report was prepared and made available.


        City of Hobart & City of Portage Transit Feasibility Studies

        NIRPC held a 30 day public comment period on requests from the Cities of Hobart and Portage for Federal Transit Administration funds to support studies to explore the potential for public transit in their respective communities. The comment period began on December 10, 2014 and ended on Friday, January 9, 2015. A comment report was prepared and made available.


        During the planning process, NIRPC staff helped to promote the public outreach activities and provided support when possible and appropriate.


        Meetings on Public Transit in Northwest Indiana

        NIRPC hosted two meetings about public transportation in northwest Indiana at the Wicker Park Social Center on October 29, 2014. The first session was from 1:00 pm to 3:30 pm. The second session was from 5:00 pm to 7:30 pm and will be a repeat of the first session. The Wicker Park Social Center is located in Wicker Park at 2215 Ridge Road, Highland.


        The purpose of the meetings was twofold. The first purpose was to present current information on existing public transportation, including fixed route bus, train, demand response and paratransit. Information on who operates public transit, how it is funded, and where it is currently offered was discussed by NIRPC staff.


        The second purpose of the meetings was to gather public opinion on the performance of existing transit services and the needs for future public transportation services. The regional planners wanted to hear about how the existing services are meeting transit needs, where people would like to see public transit offered, and how public transit might be paid for.


        All were encouraged to participate, especially current and former users of public transit, those who would like to use it, and members of the disability community, the elderly, minorities and low-income persons. The meetings were videotaped and transcribed American Sign Language interpreters and Real Time Captioning.


        Marquette Plan 2015 Update

        NIRPC, in partnership with the Regional Development Authority and Indiana Landmarks, held a series of public workshops prior to updating the Marquette Plan, Northwest Indiana’s signature livable lakefront plan. The plan provides policy frameworks and promotes local sub-area planning that can purposefully move Northwest Indiana toward environmental, economic, and social sustainability of our shoreline, with new and mixed uses, as well as increased public access to Lake Michigan.


        The 2015 update of the plan included progress reports from each of the subareas addressed in the original documents, integration of the two phases into one plan, an enhanced digital mapping and web presence, examined


        image

  2. | P a ge

    the expansion of public transit, and new strategies for building upon the historical and cultural landmarks and resources near the lakefront. In April, 2015 this process concluded with three public open houses throughout the NIRPC region.


    Environmental Public Outreach

    NIRPC’s Environmental Department provides a public education program for both its Air Quality Program and Stormwater Management Program. The environmental division has produced a large amount of public outreach materials, several of which have been translated into Spanish. These materials are distributed each year to the public at several events, including gas can exchanges, the Porter County Earth Day event and a yearly beach clean-up along the Lake Michigan shoreline. The environmental division also held several meetings and workshops throughout every year for Hoosier Riverwatch, and the Stormwater Management Program, including numerous workshops from 2014-2016.


    To promote cleaner air throughout the region the Environmental Department also organizes the Partners for Clean Air Award Breakfast/Luncheon and Asthma Awareness Day at Gary RailCats baseball games. The breakfast is open to the public and NIRPC distributes free tickets to the baseball game at asthma and health clinics throughout the region, with a focus on those in the urban and minority communities. Outreach materials and public education is also done at events throughout the year including, Working Women’s Wednesday, the Annual Porter County Master Gardening Show, and the Girl’s and Boy’s Club biking event in Valparaiso. In addition billboard, newspaper, and radio, space has been purchased to educate the public on Air Quality and Stormwater Management and to promote events. This includes space in Que Viva, Northwest Indiana’s Spanish speaking newspaper.


    image

  3. | P a ge

    Minority Representation on Planning and Advisory Bodies

    The table below depicts membership of NIRPC Committees broken down by race based on 2010 Census for the NIRPC Region of Lake, Porter and LaPorte Counties.


    NIRPC Committee Membership Broken Down by Race Based on 2010 Census for the NIRPC Region of Lake, Porter and LaPorte Counties.


    Body

    2010

    Population

    Technical Planning Committee

    Ped, Pedal, Paddle Committee

    NIRPC Board

    Transit Operators Roundtable

    Finance & Personnel Committee

    Outreach Committee

    White alone

    65.6%

    93.8%

    94.2%

    92.5%

    75%

    77.8%

    84%

    Black or African American

    18.4%

    6.2%

    2.9%

    7.5%

    16.7%

    22.2%

    16%

    American Indian and Alaska Native alone

    0.2%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    Asian alone

    1.1%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    Some Other Race alone

    0.1%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    Two or More Races

    1.3%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    0.0%

    Hispanic or Latino

    13.3%

    0.0%

    2.9%

    0.0%

    8.3%

    0.0%

    0.0%


    Membership on the NIRPC Board is made under the NIRPC Enabling Legislation (P.L.165-2003, and as amended by P.L. 2-2007) that states the following:

    IC 36-7-7.6-4

    Commission Membership

    Sec. 4. (a) The following members shall be appointed to the commission:

        1. A member of the county executive of each county described in section I of this chapter, to be appointed by the county executive.

    1. A member of the county fiscal body of each county described in section I of this chapter, to be appointed by the county fiscal body.

    2. The county surveyor of each county described in section I of this chapter.


      image

  4. | P a ge

    1. For a county having a population of not more than four hundred thousand (400,000), one (1) person appointed by the executive of each of the eleven (11) largest municipalities.

    2. For a county having a population of more than four hundred thousand (400,000) but less than seven hundred thousand (700,000), one (1) person appointed by the executive of each of the nineteen (19) largest municipalities.

    3. Beginning July 1, 2007, one (1) person appointed by the trustee of each township that:

      1. Is located in a county described in section 1 of this chapter;

      2. Has a population of at least eight thousand (8,000); and

      3. Does not contain a municipality.

    1. One (1) voting member of the commission shall be appointed by the governor. The member appointed under this subsection may not vote in a weighted vote under section 9 of this chapter.

    2. A member of the commission who is a county surveyor may not vote in a weighted vote under section 9 of this chapter.

    As added by P.L.165-2003, SEC.6. Amended by P.L.169-2006, SEC.57. IC 36-7-7.6-5

    Sec. 5. (a) All commission members must be elected officials.


    NIRPC’s Board of Commissioners established a new Committee structure of NIRPC to ensure diverse and equal representation and function of all the agency’s Committees. Membership includes representation from minority agencies and organizations, transportation, environmental, environmental justice, economic development, universities and representatives from the Urban Core Communities, including Gary, Hammond, East Chicago and Michigan City.


    According to the Federal Register 23 CFR 450, NIRPC MPO policy committees, such as the Technical Planning Committee, shall consist of the following, “each MPO that serves a TMA shall consist of local elected officials, public transportation agencies or appropriate State officials on their policy boards”. NIRPC’s Board of Commissioners selects the representation on the Technical Planning Committee.


    Monitoring Subrecipients

    NIRPC conducts Biennial Reviews of all Subrecipients, which includes addressing Title VI Federal Requirements. The purpose of a Biennial Review is to assess the subrecipient’s management practices and program implementation to evaluate compliance with federal requirements. The Biennial Review consists of two stages. The first stage is a desk review conducted at NIRPC to review documentation pertaining to the subrecipient. The second stage is a site visit for NIRPC to discuss any outstanding items, examine FTA-funded facilities and equipment, and review any additional documents.


    The review package details the information needed for the Biennial Review Site Visit, most of which is provided in advance. This information request is organized into three parts: Subrecipient Profile, Requested Documents and Questions for the Review. The Biennial Reviewers may request additional information during the site visit.


    A draft report is issued at the end of the process, describing any deficiencies in the subrecipient’s program that have been identified and the necessary corrective actions. In order to enable NIRPC to make these determinations during the site visit, the subrecipient must submit the information requested, and written responses to the questions.


    image

  5. | P a ge

    Requirement to Conduct Equity Analysis to Determine Site or Location of Facilities

    No such projects requiring land acquisition or the displacement of persons from their residences and businesses was conducted during this reporting period.


    image

  6. | P a ge

    Part II. MPO Requirements


    As a recipient of Federal Transit Administration (FTA) funds, NIRPC submits the following information under the Metropolitan Transportation Planning Organizations Reporting Requirements of Chapter VI of the Circular.


    Demographic Profile

    Northwest Indiana’s population of just over 770,000 people is concentrated in northern and central Lake County, northern Porter County, in and around Valparaiso in central Porter County, and in the cities of La Porte and Michigan City in LaPorte County. The remainder of northwest Indiana is mostly rural and not densely populated. Minority and low-income residents of northwest Indiana are concentrated almost exclusively in the “urban core” communities of Hammond, Gary, East Chicago, and Michigan City, as well as parts of Merrillville and Hobart (see Attachment #5). Fixed route transit services serve these areas of minority and low-income residents, however, the recent shut down of the Regional Bus Authority (formerly Hammond Transit) left gaps in service that have only been partially filled by other regional operators. Demand response services serve these areas as well, in addition to serving the more suburban and rural parts of the region. The attached tables and maps show each operator’s service area by Census Tract for the entire region, and identify minority and low-income tracts as well (see Attachment #6).


    Environmental Justice Benefits and Burdens Analysis

    As part of the 2040 Comprehensive Regional Plan (CRP), NIRPC conducted an Environmental Justice Benefits and Burdens Analysis to determine what, if any, benefits or burdens the transportation projects selected for the plan would have on Environmental Justice (EJ) populations. The analysis examined 11 performance measures related to accessibility and mobility, and found that if all projects in the plan are implemented, EJ communities would have no undue burdens placed upon them as a result of the projects, and would most likely see benefits from the projects. The EJ analysis that NIRPC developed was commended by the Federal Highway Administration and Federal Transit Administration during NIRPC’s recent Certification Review, and was called “a model for other Metropolitan Planning Organizations”. Additionally, in 2015 NIRPC added an analysis of the zoning in communities adjacent to projects in order to provide recommendations to mitigate sprawl, with the goal of encouraging more development in EJ communities and less on the periphery.


    Description of Procedures Within Planning Process

    The planning process that produces an MPO’s long range and short range plans is the initial source of the procedures used to identify and consider the mobility needs of the minority populations. The most recent long range planning process for northwest Indiana took place beginning in 2008 and was completed in 2011. The 2040 Comprehensive Regional Plan (CRP) involved the largest, most representative group of participants from every corner of the three-county region. The resultant goals and objectives reflect the input of citizens from every component of northwest Indiana’s diverse population. Minority population input was specifically sought out by holding multiple public workshops in neighborhoods of minority concentrations.


    The CRP’s goals and objectives formed the basis for setting priorities for the federal transportation funds NIRPC programs for Lake, Porter and LaPorte Counties in the short range Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). Once priorities are determined criteria are developed and projects are solicited from eligible public transit operators. Projects are then ranked according to the criteria and funded until available dollars are programmed. The public transit operators oversee the development of the criteria and subsequent ranking of projects.


    image

  7. | P a ge

    For the new TIP developed under the goals and objectives of the CRP, priorities were determined to be preservation and maintenance of the existing system. Consequently, projects supporting the continued operating assistance and replacement of revenue vehicles for existing systems in the urbanized area rank the highest. This benefits systems serving the urban areas of Gary, Hammond, East Chicago and Michigan City which are the center of concentrations of minority populations. On-going input occurs each time the transit providers complete a rider survey. The transit operators then have the option to include a new project that may be amended into a TIP when an unanticipated need arises to add or improve a service.


    image

  8. | P a ge

    Demographic Maps Showing Impacts of State and Federal Funds

    Transit Operator Service Areas (NIRPC Subrecipients)

    image

    Figure 1: Transit Operators and Minority Populations in Northwest Indiana


    image

  9. | P a ge


    Population 1

    Funding

    Estimated Expenditures2


    Operator3

    Non-

    Total Minority Minority

    5307 Funds $ per FY2013 Capita


    Non-Minority


    Minority

    ECT

    133,751 51,988 81,763

    $ 570,758

    $ 4.27

    $

    221,849

    $

    348,909

    NTDR

    162,855 76,135 86,720

    $ 177,027

    $ 1.09

    $

    82,760

    $

    94,267

    SLCCS

    251,319 186,717 64,602

    $ 523,470

    $ 2.08

    $

    388,911

    $

    134,559

    OE

    276,987 222,820 54,167

    $ 216,092

    $ 0.78

    $

    173,833

    $

    42,259

    PCACS

    201,225 170,349 30,876

    $ 308,031

    $ 1.53

    $

    260,767

    $

    47,264

    V-line/Dash

    51,705 45,592 6,113

    $ 606,423

    $ 11.73

    $

    534,727

    $

    71,696

    TransPorte

    33,009 28,810 4,199

    $ 288,482

    $ 8.74

    $

    251,785

    $

    36,697

    NICTD

    771,810 506,095 265,715

    $3,737,520

    $ 4.84

    $

    2,450,785

    $

    1,286,735

    GPTC

    197,326 50,853 146,473

    $5,385,544

    $ 27.29

    $

    1,387,912

    $

    3,997,632

    MCT

    37,463 24,933 12,530

    $ 633,603

    $ 16.91

    $

    421,686

    $

    211,917

    Total

    $

    6,175,015

    $

    6,271,935

    Per Capita

    $ 12 $ 24

    Figure 2: Transit Operator Funding and Estimated Expenditures by Minority/Non-Minority Population


    The Figures, 1 and 2, demonstrate a clear commitment to providing transit service to low-income and minority areas in northwest Indiana. While it is not possible using aggregate numbers to identify exactly where and how funding is distributed, if the assumption that funding is distributed by transit operators in relative proportion to where people live then on a per capita basis, then roughly twice as much money is spent on the minority population ($24/person) than the non-minority population ($12). Figure 1 shows that in areas with higher concentrations of minority residents, there is also a higher concentration of transit service.


    Analysis of Transportation System Investments

    From the previously demonstrated mapping and funding analyses, there are no disparate impacts based on race, color, or national origin.


    image

    1 Population numbers are derived by aggregating the census tracts which fall within (or partially within) each transit operator’s service area. 2 Estimated expenditures are derived by taking the per capita funding calculation and multiplying that number by minority and non-minority population data for each transit operator’s service area.

    3 ECT = City of East Chicago Transit NTDR = North Township Dial-a-Ride

    SLCCS = South Lake County Community Services, Inc OE = Opportunity Enterprises, Inc

    PCACS = Porter County Aging and Community Services, Inc V-Line/Dash = City of Valparaiso

    TransPorte = City of La Porte

    NICTD = Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District GPTC = Gary Public Transportation Corporation

    MCT = Michigan City Transit

  10. | P a ge

    A description of the procedures the MPO uses to pass through FTA financial assistance to subrecipients in a non-discriminatory manner.

    NIRPC is both the MPO and the direct recipient and does not operate public transit. In order to pass through FTA funds to sub-recipients, NIRPC requires the affected transit operators to participate in the MPO’s project solicitation process for the required Transportation Improvement Program (TIP). The TIP project selection process utilizes criteria based on the goals and objectives contained in the current adopted long range plan (2040 Comprehensive Regional Plan). The project selection process results in a prioritized list of projects to be included in the TIP. The project criteria are applied to every application for FTA funds, regardless of mode or size.


    The project selection process is conducted every two years to maintain a current list of eligible projects. The call for projects is issued via media and mailings to known public transit operators. The call notes that operators must be eligible for FTA programs that support operations and maintenance of public transit.


    Once applications are received, projects are listed by score. The Transit Operators’ Roundtable is the primary transit stakeholder group and acts to review and evaluate the submittals. Every public transit operator in the three- county area has a seat and a vote on the Roundtable. As both the MPO and the direct recipient, NIRPC does not operate public transit and therefore does not have a vote on the Roundtable.


    Once the Roundtable has completed its review the list of recommended projects is forwarded to the MPO Transportation Policy Committee for approval to release for public comment as part of the proposed TIP. Upon completion of the public review period, and assuming a positive outcome, the TIP is presented to the NIRPC Board of Commissioners for adoption. Once the TIP has been approved, the direct recipients may proceed with the FTA process of grants.


    A description of the procedures the MPO uses to provide assistance to potential subrecipients applying for funding, including its efforts to assist applicants that would serve predominantly minority populations.

    NIRPC is both the MPO and the direct recipient and does not operate public transit. Procedurally, NIRPC includes all known private providers of transit in the distribution of the TIP call for projects. The solicitation notes the need to establish eligibility for non-public operators as a condition of participation in the grant process. The solicitation is distributed to the four major daily papers, multiple radio stations, and posted on NIRPC’s website and Facebook page. Three of the major daily papers serve areas with concentrations of minority and low income persons.


    When an inquiry is received about accessing federal transit funds, an opportunity to meet with staff is always offered, regardless of where the service may be provided. Staff reviews the proposed services based on project eligibility, financial capacity of operator, and long-term sustainability of the service.


    The first meeting is to exchange information about the proposed service, and about the federal funding programs. If a potential provider has prepared documents (usually a business plan) the staff will review them with the provider. Staff provides information on FTA, its funding opportunities, and oversight requirements. If appropriate, staff will recommend contacting a specific public operator to determine partnership opportunities, particularly in areas underserved by existing transit. Staff will help identify project weaknesses and recommend solutions, if possible.



    image

  11. | P a ge

    Follow-up meetings and inspection of facilities are scheduled if the proposed service is found eligible and the operator is interested in proceeding. More detailed information on the operator’s past experience and financial capacity to manage federal funds is generally the subject of the first follow-up meeting. Staff will maintain close contact with the operator for as long as the operator wishes to pursue a grant. Staff will continue to provide technical assistance as needed as is done for all of the transit operators in the MPO planning area.


    image

  12. | P a ge

    Part III. NIRPC Recertification Attachments


    Attachment #1: NIRPC’s Title VI Complaint Procedures Attachment #2: Limited English Proficiency Strategy

    Attachment #3: 2010 Limited English Proficiency Demographic Profile Attachment #4: Minority & Low Income Population Distribution Maps Attachment #5: Minority & Low Income Population Distribution Chart


    image

  13. | P a ge

    Attachment #1: NIRPC’s Title VI Complaint Procedures

    NIRPC Procedures for Tracking and Investigating Civil Rights Complaints


    Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin in programs and services funded, in whole or part, by financial assistance from the United States Government. NIRPC extends this prohibition to individuals on the basis of disability, religion and gender. Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504) and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) prohibit discrimination on the basis of disability.


    All services and programs operated or sponsored by the Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission, 6100 Southport Road, Portage, Indiana, 46368 are subject to the requirements and obligations of Title VI, Section 504 and the ADA. It is the intention of the Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC) to comply fully with Title VI, Section 504 and the ADA.


    Under the provisions of Title VI, Section 504 and the ADA, persons who believe that they have experienced or witnessed any act or inaction, intentional or otherwise, in any program, service, or activity operated by or sponsored by the NIRPC that results in or may result in disparate treatment or impact, or perpetuates the effects of prior discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, gender, religion, or disability may file a written complaint with the NIRPC or directly with the U.S. Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), or the Indiana Department of Transportation (INDOT).


    Complaints filed directly with FTA must be mailed within 180 days of any alleged discrimination. Complaints should be mailed to:


    Federal Transit Administration Office of Civil Rights Attention Title VI Program Coordinator

    East Building, 5th Floor – TCR 1200 New Jersey Ave. , SE Washington, D. C, 20590


    Complaints filed directly with FHWA must be mailed within 180 days of any alleged discrimination. Complaints should be mailed to:


    Federal Highway Administration Office of Civil Rights Attention: Title VI Program Coordinator

    1200 New Jersey Ave. SE Washington, D.C. 20590


    Complaints filed directly with INDOT must be mailed within 180 days of any alleged discrimination. Complaints should be mailed to:


    Indiana Department of Transportation Attention Title VI Program Coordinator 100 N. Senate Ave. Room 750

    Indianapolis, Indiana 46204

    Or via the INDOT website at: http://www.in.gov/indot/div/legal/dbe/titlesix.htm#complaints


    image

  14. | P a ge

    How to File a Complaint to NIRPC


    A person with a Title VI or ADA complaint may also submit the complaint to NIRPC using the following procedures:


    1. A complaint may be submitted in writing and must include the person’s name and contact information, the date of the incident, and the identity of the person or department or service that caused the complaint. Complaints may be sent via mail, email, fax, or hand delivered and shall be addressed to the NIRPC Compliance Manager 6100 Southport Road, Portage, IN 46368. ahammond@nirpc.org


    2. A complaint may be taken verbally and must include the person’s name and contact information, the date of the incident, and the identity of the person, department or service that caused the complaint.


    3. Persons with a complaint may request a neutral third party to hear a verbal complaint or assist with a written complaint. The selection of the neutral third party shall be made cooperatively between NIRPC and the person filing the complaint.


    4. All complaints shall be addressed to the NIRPC Compliance Manager.


    NIRPC Complaint Procedure


    1. The person filing a complaint on the basis of discrimination based on race, color, gender, religion, national origin or disability will be informed that the complaint may be either filed directly with the FTA, FHWA, INDOT or with NIRPC. It shall be the responsibility of the Compliance Manager of NIRPC, or his designee, to track, investigate and document Title VI, Section 504, and ADA complaints.


    2. If the person opts to file the complaint with NIRPC, the complaint will be directed by the Compliance Manager to the appropriate department manager for a fact-finding review. The manager will prepare a written response to the complaint and submit it to the NIRPC Compliance Manager.


    3. If the NIRPC Compliance Manager determines that the fact-finding review substantiated the complaint, he shall report the same to the NIRPC Executive Director, who will order, or authorize the Compliance Manager to order, corrective action be taken as warranted.


    4. The person who filed the complaint will be consulted as to the adequacy of the proposed remedy. If acceptable, the matter is concluded.


    5. If the proposed remedy is not acceptable, the person who filed the complaint may appeal and request a hearing with the NIRPC Finance and Personnel Committee for purposes of stating their complaint and identifying an appropriate remedy.


    6. The Finance and Personnel Committee will issue a response and recommend a remedy within ten days of the hearing.


    7. If acceptable, the matter is concluded. If not, the person is again advised of the appropriate steps to appeal the complaint with the FTA, FHWA or INDOT.


      image

  15. | P a ge

    1. The NIRPC Director of Finance and Administration shall maintain the files and records of the NIRPC relating to the complaints filed verbal and written for a period of three years.


    Requests for this document in alternate format or assistance in preparing a complaint may be directed to NIRPC staff Allen Hammond at ahammond@nirpc.org, or by phone at 219/763-6060. TTY users may utilize the Relay Indiana Service by calling 711 or (800) 743-3333.



    image

  16. | P a ge

    CONFIDENTIAL


    The Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission

    COMPLAINT FORM

    All written complaints about any matter relating to civil rights, shall be submitted on this form. NIRPC will assist those who submit verbal complaints to transfer these complaints onto this written form. You are required to complete all sections. Before completing this form, please ensure that you have read NIRPC’s Procedures for Tracking and Investigating Civil Rights Complaints. You should expect an acknowledgement within 10 working days and will be informed of the outcome of your complaint within 90 days, unless NIRPC notifies you that the investigation will need additional time.

    This form should be sent to the Compliance Manager of the Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission

    Please keep a copy of this form for your records, plus any material you submit.


    SECTION A - YOUR DETAILS



    Title ..….… Name(s).………………………………………..….. Address

    ..………………………………………………………………………………………………… City …………………………………….……State…………. Zip …………………… Telephone Number ……………………………………


    SECTION B – NATURE OF THE COMPLAINT

    Please set out below the main points of your complaint.



    Use additional sheets if necessary.


    image

  17. | P a ge

    PLEASE LIST ANY DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE ATTACHED AND MAKE SURE YOU KEEP A COPY.

    (E.g., any correspondence, list of dates when events occurred, or other documentation related to your complaint)

    image


    SECTION C - AN OUTLINE OF THE ACTION YOU HAVE TAKEN SO FAR

    Please outline the steps you have already taken to resolve your complaint informally:

    With whom was it discussed? …………………………………………………..….……….. Date ..………………………

    Position ………………………………………………………………………………………………….. Department(s) …………………………………………………...…………………………………………………


    Describe the outcome of any action taken so far and explain why you believe that the matter has not yet been resolved.

    image


    SECTION D - DESIRED OUTCOME

    Please describe the action you would like to see taken in order to resolve the complaint to your satisfaction.

    image


    SECTION E – DECLARATION

    I believe that the above information is accurate. I confirm that details of this complaint can be passed on to the NIRPC Finance and Personnel Committee for appeal (if applicable).


    Signature: …………………………………………………………………. Name ……………………………………………………………………… Contact Information ……………………………………………………… Date: ...…………………………………………


    image

  18. | P a ge


    FOR OFFICE USE ONLY:


    Acknowledgement sent …………………………..…………………… Reply sent ………………………………………


    Complaint forwarded to department …………………………… Response received ………………………….

    What action (if any) is now needed?

    ………………………………………………………………………………………..


    ………………………………………………………………………………………..



    image

  19. | P a ge

    Attachment #2: Limited English Proficiency Strategy


    Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission Lake, Porter, and LaPorte Counties, Indiana


    Northwestern Indiana Regional Planning Commission (NIRPC) receives federal financial assistance from the US Department of Transportation (US DOT). For this reason it is subject to the US DOT’s Limited English Proficiency Guidance, issued on December 14, 2005. NIRPC has prepared a Limited English Proficiency (LEP) strategy, as well as completed the Four Factor Analysis suggested in the guidance.


    NIRPC offers services to outside entities that include: 1) Transportation Planning & Technical Assistance;

    2) Public Transit Grants Management, Oversight, Procurement, and Technical Assistance; and 3) Environmental Public Education. NIRPC also passes FTA public transit funds through to seven (7) public transit operators in Lake, Porter, and LaPorte Counties.


    Pass-Through Public Transit Operators. The Public Transit Grants division, among other things, passes FTA funds through to seven (7) public transit operators in the three county area. A separate LEP analysis was not prepared for these operators. The three operators serving identified LEP areas have long acknowledged the need for and developed second language schedules and rider guides, and other service information. These operators include East Chicago Transit, North Township Dial-a-Ride and City of La Porte Transporte.


    Demographic Data. Demographic data for northwest Indiana shows a significant concentration of Limited English Proficiency (LEP) persons in ten census tracts in northern Lake County. One of these is in Gary (Indiana), which is outside of the area covered by NIRPC’s transit subrecipients but within the area of our other services (Planning and Environmental Education).


    The Four Factor Analysis.


    Number or proportion of LEP persons eligible to be served or likely to be served or encountered by a program, activity, or service.


    Transportation Planning & Technical Assistance: Fewer than 10 persons per year.


    Persons served or encountered under these programs on a regular (ongoing) basis are those regular participants in the metropolitan transportation planning process, representatives of cities, towns, and counties, and technical personnel, including engineers and federal/state transportation officials.


    image

  20. | P a ge

    Persons served or encountered on a sporadic basis are members of the general public who are asked to serve on planning focus groups to comment on transportation plans and projects. These are usually one-time only encounters.


    Public Transit Grants Management, Oversight, Procurement, and Technical Assistance: Fewer than 10 persons per year.


    Most encounters are the representatives of local transit operators, chief elected officials, and State/FTA officials.


    Environmental Services: Over 500 persons per year (estimated)


    Most encounters here are with the public at outreach events, which occur at public schools, county fairs, recycling events, and other sometimes unusual locations and venues.


    Frequency with which LEP persons come in contact with the program.


    Transportation Planning and Technical Assistance: Low Frequency


    The public is involved in the transportation planning process through purposeful, intentional interactions (such as open houses, focus groups, and other venues established with the intent of obtaining thoughts, ideas, comments, and suggestions regarding a vision of the future. These events are usually held in conjunction with a long range transportation plan development (every four years) and transportation improvement program development (every two years).


    There is also a Transportation Policy Committee (TPC) that meets monthly at which topics of interest, including policy recommendations are considered & recommended for approval by the NIRPC Board.


    Public Transit Grants Management, Oversight, Procurement, and Technical Assistance: Low Frequency


    This function within NIRPC is responsible for all post-grant activities associated with FTA grants. Environmental Services: Moderate Frequency

    This division of NIRPC operates an air quality public education program funded with FHWA Congestion Mitigation/Air Quality Program funds. There is significant interaction with school-age children, environmental organizations, public officials, and community groups on an ongoing basis.


    The nature and importance of the program, activity, or service provided by the recipient to people’s lives.


    All Services: Very Low to Low


    image

  21. | P a ge

    NIRPC’s services to the public are neither life-sustaining nor critical to the daily needs of people. Transportation planning, transit grant administration, transit subrecipient oversight/procurement, and environmental education are not quite as significant in comparison to the need for food, human services, medical services, transportation, and other similar, life-sustaining services.


    The resources available to the recipient and costs.


    The cost of developing written materials in multiple languages has not been explored. However, given the low encounter rates discussed earlier, it is likely that a large scale production of written documents, such as transportation plans, transportation improvement programs, and air quality conformity determinations within the metropolitan planning division would be expensive. In these instances the cost of translating these documents would likely not be cost-effective.


    The environmental education program does not generate any significant planning studies and related documents. It already produces some Spanish-language materials that are intended for direct distribution to the public in northern Lake County.


    Planning funds may be used for document translation.


    Conclusion.


    The low number of LEP persons accessing services in the past, the low frequency at which LEP persons encounter NIRPC’s services, and the insignificant value of our services to the daily lives of people all seem to indicate that only very limited measures are needed to address needs of the LEP (primarily Spanish- speaking) population.


    A staff person who is fluent in Spanish has been assigned to handle all telephone calls and respond to e-mail messages that are placed or sent by a person speaking Spanish.


    Se habla español “Spanish is spoken” is placed on public documents and NIRPC’s website.


    The NIRPC website can be translated into Arabic, Chinese, French, German, Greek, Hindi, Italian, Korean, Macedonian, Polish, Portuguese, Russian, Serbian, Spanish and Thai using the “Translate This Page” option available on the NIRPC website.


    Regarding metropolitan planning, when NIRPC communicates with the public regarding an opportunity for anyone to participate in, comment on, or provide input to, some effort is needed to communicate with LEP persons so that their thoughts, concerns, and suggestions may be heard and understood.


    Upon-request, up to 48 hours before a transportation outreach event, a staff person fluent in Spanish will be assigned to attend the outreach event and translate comments made in Spanish. If a staff person is not available a translator will be hired.



    image

  22. | P a ge

    There is no need for grant administration, oversight, and procurement program-related materials to be translated.


    The number of encounters with LEP populations is higher in the environmental department than other NIRPC divisions. There is a need for bilingual environmental education materials in locations where there is a significant Spanish-speaking population. Due to this, the Environmental Division has and will continue to translate core educational materials into Spanish and distribute these materials in these areas. Materials include a asthma awareness guide, a watershed protection booklet, and a Citizens Guide to the MS4 Program.


    image

  23. | P a ge


    image


    image

  24. | P a ge


    image


    image

  25. | P a ge


    image


    image

  26. | P a ge

    image


  27. | P a ge



    image

  28. | P a ge

    Attachment #3: Limited English Proficiency by Census Tract – Demographic Profile

    Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2008-2012 American Community Survey, Table S1601: Language Spoken at Home

    Cell shading shows limited English populations of <1x

    1-2x

    2-3x

    3-4x

    >4x

    ...the regional average (3.84%)



    Geography

    Population 5 years and over

    Speak Spanish or Spanish Creole and Speak English less

    Speak Other Indo- European languages and Speak English

    Speak Asian and Pacific Island Languages and

    Speak Othe Languages and

    Speak English

    r


    less

    Speak English less that "very well": Total


    Operator Code

    Census Tract

    County

    Persons

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    101

    Lake

    4,250

    7

    0.2%

    10

    0.2%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    17

    0.4%

    9

    102.01

    Lake

    5,659

    -

    -

    -

    -

    11

    0.2%

    31

    0.5%

    42

    0.7%

    9

    102.03

    Lake

    2,410

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    9

    102.05

    Lake

    1,199

    33

    2.8%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    13

    1.1%

    46

    3.8%

    9

    103.02

    Lake

    2,899

    35

    1.2%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    35

    1.2%

    9

    103.04

    Lake

    2,976

    80

    2.7%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    80

    2.7%

    9

    104

    Lake

    2,573

    -

    -

    10

    0.4%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    10

    0.4%

    9

    105

    Lake

    1,106

    15

    1.4%

    5

    0.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    20

    1.8%

    9

    106

    Lake

    1,325

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    9

    109

    Lake

    1,109

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    9

    110

    Lake

    1,660

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    7

    0.4%

    7

    0.4%

    9

    111

    Lake

    4,166

    14

    0.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    14

    0.3%

    9

    112

    Lake

    3,852

    20

    0.5%

    10

    0.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    30

    0.8%

    9

    113

    Lake

    1,597

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    9

    114

    Lake

    1,188

    6

    0.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    6

    0.5%

    9

    115

    Lake

    2,160

    29

    1.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    29

    1.3%

    4, 9

    116

    Lake

    2,446

    28

    1.1%

    8

    0.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    36

    1.5%

    9

    117

    Lake

    845

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    9

    118

    Lake

    1,306

    5

    0.4%

    19

    1.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    24

    1.8%

    9

    119

    Lake

    1,985

    1

    0.1%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    1

    0.1%

    9

    120

    Lake

    932

    5

    0.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    5

    0.5%

    9

    121

    Lake

    1,187

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    9

    122

    Lake

    1,263

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    9

    123

    Lake

    3,245

    44

    1.4%

    -

    -

    7

    0.2%

    -

    -

    51

    1.6%

    4, 9

    124

    Lake

    4,493

    85

    1.9%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    85

    1.9%

    9

    image

  29. | P a ge

    image



    Geography

    Population 5 years and over

    Speak Spanish or Spanish Creole and Speak English less

    Speak Other Indo- European languages and Speak English

    Speak Asian and Pacific Island Languages and

    Speak Othe Languages and

    Speak English

    r


    less

    Speak English less that "very well": Total


    Operator Code

    Census Tract

    County

    Persons

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    125

    Lake

    4,108

    29

    0.7%

    28

    0.7%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    57

    1.4%

    9

    126

    Lake

    2,643

    37

    1.4%

    10

    0.4%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    47

    1.8%

    9

    127

    Lake

    3,878

    -

    -

    11

    0.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    11

    0.3%

    9

    128

    Lake

    2,105

    9

    0.4%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    9

    0.4%

    9

    201

    Lake

    4,557

    351

    7.7%

    30

    0.7%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    381

    8.4%

    1, 3, 9

    202

    Lake

    2,739

    163

    6.0%

    21

    0.8%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    184

    6.7%

    1, 3, 9

    203

    Lake

    6,383

    732

    11.5%

    45

    0.7%

    7

    0.1%

    42

    0.7%

    826

    12.9%

    1, 3, 9

    204

    Lake

    4,740

    857

    18.1%

    12

    0.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    869

    18.3%

    1, 3, 9

    205

    Lake

    3,453

    747

    21.6%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    747

    21.6%

    1, 3, 9

    206

    Lake

    1,922

    79

    4.1%

    9

    0.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    88

    4.6%

    1, 3, 9

    207

    Lake

    4,457

    647

    14.5%

    26

    0.6%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    673

    15.1%

    1, 3, 9

    208

    Lake

    3,976

    229

    5.8%

    19

    0.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    248

    6.2%

    1, 3, 9

    209

    Lake

    3,704

    131

    3.5%

    -

    -

    90

    2.4%

    9

    0.2%

    230

    6.2%

    1, 3, 9

    210

    Lake

    4,951

    458

    9.2%

    54

    1.1%

    104

    2.1%

    121

    2.4%

    737

    14.9%

    1, 3, 9

    211

    Lake

    2,823

    209

    7.4%

    8

    0.3%

    12

    0.4%

    -

    -

    229

    8.1%

    1, 3, 9

    213

    Lake

    3,170

    71

    2.2%

    8

    0.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    79

    2.5%

    1, 3, 9

    214

    Lake

    4,606

    674

    14.6%

    -

    -

    7

    0.2%

    -

    -

    681

    14.8%

    1, 3, 9

    215

    Lake

    2,408

    142

    5.9%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    142

    5.9%

    1, 3

    216

    Lake

    3,085

    144

    4.7%

    11

    0.4%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    155

    5.0%

    1, 3, 9

    217

    Lake

    4,102

    192

    4.7%

    35

    0.9%

    26

    0.6%

    -

    -

    253

    6.2%

    1, 3, 9

    218

    Lake

    3,349

    167

    5.0%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    167

    5.0%

    1, 3, 9

    219

    Lake

    5,053

    301

    6.0%

    31

    0.6%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    332

    6.6%

    1, 3, 9

    220

    Lake

    4,599

    121

    2.6%

    21

    0.5%

    9

    0.2%

    10

    0.2%

    161

    3.5%

    1, 3, 9

    301

    Lake

    761

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    1, 3, 9

    302

    Lake

    1,593

    226

    14.2%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    226

    14.2%

    1, 3, 9

    303

    Lake

    2,601

    43

    1.7%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    43

    1.7%

    1, 3, 9

    304

    Lake

    3,303

    711

    21.5%

    11

    0.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    722

    21.9%

    1, 3, 9

    305

    Lake

    3,511

    733

    20.9%

    26

    0.7%

    38

    1.1%

    -

    -

    798

    22.7%

    1, 3, 9

    306

    Lake

    5,168

    1,128

    21.8%

    9

    0.2%

    -

    -

    19

    0.4%

    1,157

    22.4%

    1, 3, 9

    307

    Lake

    1,970

    134

    6.8%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    134

    6.8%

    1, 3, 9

  30. | P a ge

    image



    Geography

    Population 5 years and over

    Speak Spanish or Spanish Creole and Speak English less

    Speak Other Indo- European languages and Speak English

    Speak Asian and Pacific Island Languages and

    Speak Othe Languages and

    Speak English

    r


    less

    Speak English less that "very well": Total


    Operator Code

    Census Tract

    County

    Persons

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    308

    Lake

    3,829

    790

    20.6%

    7

    0.2%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    797

    20.8%

    1, 3, 9

    309

    Lake

    3,108

    283

    9.1%

    34

    1.1%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    317

    10.2%

    1, 3, 9

    310

    Lake

    1,242

    25

    2.0%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    25

    2.0%

    1, 3, 9

    401

    Lake

    1,362

    21

    1.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    21

    1.5%

    3, 9

    402

    Lake

    3,250

    240

    7.4%

    58

    1.8%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    298

    9.2%

    3, 9

    403

    Lake

    7,347

    290

    3.9%

    209

    2.8%

    98

    1.3%

    -

    -

    597

    8.1%

    3, 9

    404.01

    Lake

    4,820

    65

    1.4%

    85

    1.8%

    42

    0.9%

    59

    1.2%

    251

    5.2%

    3, 9

    404.02

    Lake

    4,233

    9

    0.2%

    184

    4.3%

    23

    0.5%

    21

    0.5%

    237

    5.6%

    3, 9

    404.03

    Lake

    5,776

    96

    1.7%

    131

    2.3%

    47

    0.8%

    -

    -

    274

    4.7%

    3, 9

    405.01

    Lake

    3,451

    49

    1.4%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    8

    0.2%

    57

    1.7%

    3, 9

    405.02

    Lake

    3,086

    75

    2.4%

    84

    2.7%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    159

    5.1%

    3, 9

    406

    Lake

    3,481

    34

    1.0%

    122

    3.5%

    42

    1.2%

    -

    -

    198

    5.7%

    3, 9

    407

    Lake

    4,932

    77

    1.6%

    44

    0.9%

    34

    0.7%

    -

    -

    155

    3.1%

    3, 9

    408.01

    Lake

    3,611

    31

    0.9%

    7

    0.2%

    14

    0.4%

    -

    -

    52

    1.4%

    3, 9

    408.02

    Lake

    3,813

    25

    0.7%

    33

    0.9%

    10

    0.3%

    -

    -

    68

    1.8%

    3, 9

    409

    Lake

    6,847

    107

    1.6%

    162

    2.4%

    76

    1.1%

    -

    -

    345

    5.0%

    1, 4, 9

    410.01

    Lake

    4,949

    18

    0.4%

    18

    0.4%

    40

    0.8%

    62

    1.3%

    138

    2.8%

    1, 4, 9

    410.02

    Lake

    3,966

    96

    2.4%

    -

    -

    17

    0.4%

    -

    -

    113

    2.8%

    1, 4, 9

    411

    Lake

    2,173

    26

    1.2%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    26

    1.2%

    9

    412

    Lake

    2,623

    88

    3.4%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    88

    3.4%

    9

    413.02

    Lake

    2,722

    60

    2.2%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    60

    2.2%

    9

    414

    Lake

    2,584

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    9

    415

    Lake

    1,556

    7

    0.4%

    16

    1.0%

    6

    0.4%

    -

    -

    29

    1.9%

    9

    416

    Lake

    4,372

    225

    5.1%

    -

    -

    3

    0.1%

    -

    -

    228

    5.2%

    4, 5, 9

    417

    Lake

    4,176

    319

    7.6%

    48

    1.2%

    -

    -

    21

    0.5%

    388

    9.3%

    4, 5, 9

    418

    Lake

    6,212

    193

    3.1%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    193

    3.1%

    4, 5, 6, 9

    419

    Lake

    4,687

    59

    1.3%

    16

    0.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    75

    1.6%

    4, 5, 6, 9

    420

    Lake

    5,673

    128

    2.3%

    -

    -

    41

    0.7%

    -

    -

    169

    3.0%

    4, 5, 6, 9

    421

    Lake

    5,310

    79

    1.5%

    80

    1.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    159

    3.0%

    4, 5, 9

    422

    Lake

    6,243

    87

    1.4%

    43

    0.7%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    130

    2.1%

    4, 5, 9

  31. | P a ge

    image



    Geography

    Population 5 years and over

    Speak Spanish or Spanish Creole and Speak English less

    Speak Other Indo- European languages and Speak English

    Speak Asian and Pacific Island Languages and

    Speak Othe Languages and

    Speak English

    r


    less

    Speak English less that "very well": Total


    Operator Code

    Census Tract

    County

    Persons

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    423

    Lake

    6,622

    45

    0.7%

    140

    2.1%

    54

    0.8%

    -

    -

    239

    3.6%

    4, 5, 6, 9

    424.01

    Lake

    5,624

    112

    2.0%

    12

    0.2%

    -

    -

    15

    0.3%

    139

    2.5%

    4, 9

    424.02

    Lake

    6,610

    238

    3.6%

    79

    1.2%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    317

    4.8%

    4, 5, 9

    424.03

    Lake

    4,086

    208

    5.1%

    45

    1.1%

    9

    0.2%

    12

    0.3%

    274

    6.7%

    4, 9

    425.01

    Lake

    5,861

    101

    1.7%

    60

    1.0%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    161

    2.7%

    4, 9

    425.03

    Lake

    3,113

    188

    6.0%

    45

    1.4%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    233

    7.5%

    4, 5, 9

    425.04

    Lake

    6,867

    101

    1.5%

    259

    3.8%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    360

    5.2%

    4, 5, 9

    425.05

    Lake

    5,856

    71

    1.2%

    32

    0.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    103

    1.8%

    4, 5, 9

    426.02

    Lake

    6,032

    -

    -

    132

    2.2%

    -

    -

    16

    0.3%

    148

    2.5%

    1, 4, 9

    426.05

    Lake

    6,730

    -

    -

    191

    2.8%

    -

    -

    10

    0.1%

    201

    3.0%

    4, 9

    426.06

    Lake

    2,980

    65

    2.2%

    133

    4.5%

    71

    2.4%

    -

    -

    269

    9.0%

    4, 9

    426.07

    Lake

    6,740

    41

    0.6%

    168

    2.5%

    9

    0.1%

    46

    0.7%

    264

    3.9%

    4, 9

    426.08

    Lake

    4,164

    144

    3.5%

    6

    0.1%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    150

    3.6%

    4, 9

    426.09

    Lake

    7,942

    23

    0.3%

    170

    2.1%

    8

    0.1%

    -

    -

    201

    2.5%

    4, 9

    427.02

    Lake

    5,163

    51

    1.0%

    126

    2.4%

    34

    0.7%

    76

    1.5%

    287

    5.6%

    4, 9

    427.03

    Lake

    4,319

    -

    -

    101

    2.3%

    23

    0.5%

    25

    0.6%

    149

    3.4%

    4, 9

    427.04

    Lake

    4,438

    73

    1.6%

    86

    1.9%

    -

    -

    19

    0.4%

    178

    4.0%

    4, 9

    428.01

    Lake

    8,902

    26

    0.3%

    213

    2.4%

    51

    0.6%

    9

    0.1%

    299

    3.4%

    4, 9

    428.02

    Lake

    5,197

    36

    0.7%

    24

    0.5%

    9

    0.2%

    -

    -

    69

    1.3%

    4, 9

    429.01

    Lake

    5,577

    61

    1.1%

    64

    1.1%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    125

    2.2%

    4, 9

    429.02

    Lake

    5,520

    122

    2.2%

    93

    1.7%

    75

    1.4%

    -

    -

    290

    5.3%

    4, 9

    430.01

    Lake

    4,362

    46

    1.1%

    71

    1.6%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    117

    2.7%

    4, 9

    430.02

    Lake

    4,720

    174

    3.7%

    45

    1.0%

    -

    -

    10

    0.2%

    229

    4.9%

    4, 9

    431.01

    Lake

    2,775

    29

    1.0%

    -

    -

    13

    0.5%

    -

    -

    42

    1.5%

    4, 9

    431.02

    Lake

    7,273

    37

    0.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    37

    0.5%

    4, 9

    432.01

    Lake

    3,370

    -

    -

    17

    0.5%

    11

    0.3%

    -

    -

    28

    0.8%

    4, 9

    432.02

    Lake

    7,538

    35

    0.5%

    257

    3.4%

    33

    0.4%

    9

    0.1%

    334

    4.4%

    4, 5, 9

    433

    Lake

    9,375

    90

    1.0%

    106

    1.1%

    -

    -

    36

    0.4%

    232

    2.5%

    4, 5, 6, 9

    434.01

    Lake

    6,299

    1

    0.0%

    50

    0.8%

    16

    0.3%

    -

    -

    67

    1.1%

    4, 9

    434.03

    Lake

    6,428

    41

    0.6%

    17

    0.3%

    -

    -

    17

    0.3%

    75

    1.2%

    4, 9

  32. | P a ge



    Geography

    Population 5 years and over

    Speak Spanish or Spanish Creole and Speak English less

    Speak Other Indo- European languages and Speak English

    Speak Asian and Pacific Island Languages and

    Speak Othe Languages and

    Speak English

    r


    less

    Speak English less that "very well": Total


    Operator Code

    Census Tract

    County

    Persons

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    434.04

    Lake

    1,739

    8

    0.5%

    61

    3.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    69

    4.0%

    4, 6, 9

    434.05

    Lake

    4,825

    17

    0.4%

    26

    0.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    43

    0.9%

    4, 9


    Lake Total

    462,030

    15,658

    3.39%

    4,697

    1.02%

    1,220

    0.26%

    723

    0.16%

    22,297

    4.83%

    1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 9


    501.01

    Porter

    8,590

    -

    -

    22

    0.3%

    52

    0.6%

    2

    0.0%

    76

    0.9%

    5, 6, 9

    501.03

    Porter

    7,868

    7

    0.1%

    111

    1.4%

    21

    0.3%

    -

    -

    139

    1.8%

    5, 6, 9

    502.02

    Porter

    5,470

    20

    0.4%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    20

    0.4%

    5, 6, 9

    502.03

    Porter

    6,331

    12

    0.2%

    38

    0.6%

    17

    0.3%

    -

    -

    67

    1.1%

    5, 6, 9

    503

    Porter

    6,082

    43

    0.7%

    12

    0.2%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    55

    0.9%

    5, 6, 9

    504.02

    Porter

    7,439

    300

    4.0%

    47

    0.6%

    14

    0.2%

    6

    0.1%

    367

    4.9%

    5, 6, 9

    504.05

    Porter

    1,046

    -

    -

    3

    0.3%

    5

    0.5%

    -

    -

    8

    0.8%

    5, 6, 9

    504.07

    Porter

    3,820

    98

    2.6%

    25

    0.7%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    123

    3.2%

    5, 6, 9

    505.01

    Porter

    5,515

    72

    1.3%

    16

    0.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    88

    1.6%

    5, 6, 9

    505.03

    Porter

    4,973

    23

    0.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    23

    0.5%

    5, 6, 9

    505.05

    Porter

    2,302

    43

    1.9%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    43

    1.9%

    5, 6, 9

    505.06

    Porter

    5,731

    250

    4.4%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    250

    4.4%

    5, 6, 9

    505.07

    Porter

    3,519

    45

    1.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    45

    1.3%

    5, 6, 9

    505.08

    Porter

    5,389

    77

    1.4%

    65

    1.2%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    142

    2.6%

    5, 6, 9

    505.09

    Porter

    4,531

    140

    3.1%

    16

    0.4%

    35

    0.8%

    -

    -

    191

    4.2%

    5, 6, 9

    506.02

    Porter

    4,305

    15

    0.3%

    -

    -

    16

    0.4%

    -

    -

    31

    0.7%

    5, 6, 7, 9

    506.03

    Porter

    3,025

    13

    0.4%

    -

    -

    100

    3.3%

    -

    -

    113

    3.7%

    5, 6, 7, 9

    506.04

    Porter

    7,942

    -

    -

    47

    0.6%

    50

    0.6%

    11

    0.1%

    108

    1.4%

    5, 6, 7, 9

    507.02

    Porter

    7,285

    61

    0.8%

    38

    0.5%

    18

    0.2%

    30

    0.4%

    147

    2.0%

    5, 6, 7, 9

    507.03

    Porter

    3,203

    14

    0.4%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    14

    0.4%

    5, 6, 7, 9

    507.04

    Porter

    4,141

    6

    0.1%

    15

    0.4%

    77

    1.9%

    -

    -

    98

    2.4%

    5, 6, 7, 9

    508

    Porter

    6,278

    339

    5.4%

    42

    0.7%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    381

    6.1%

    5, 6, 7, 9

    509

    Porter

    4,565

    21

    0.5%

    -

    -

    71

    1.6%

    -

    -

    92

    2.0%

    5, 6, 7, 9

    510.02

    Porter

    7,981

    68

    0.9%

    6

    0.1%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    74

    0.9%

    5, 6, 7, 9

    510.05

    Porter

    4,300

    22

    0.5%

    9

    0.2%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    31

    0.7%

    5, 6, 9

    image

  33. | P a ge



    Geography

    Population 5 years and over

    Speak Spanish or Spanish Creole and Speak English less

    Speak Other Indo- European languages and Speak English

    Speak Asian and Pacific Island Languages and

    Speak Othe Languages and

    Speak English

    r


    less

    Speak English less that "very well": Total


    Operator Code

    Census Tract

    County

    Persons

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    510.06

    Porter

    4,015

    -

    -

    68

    1.7%

    39

    1.0%

    -

    -

    107

    2.7%

    5, 6, 9

    510.07

    Porter

    6,962

    21

    0.3%

    10

    0.1%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    31

    0.4%

    5, 6, 9

    510.08

    Porter

    2,016

    50

    2.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    50

    2.5%

    5, 6, 9

    511.01

    Porter

    5,888

    19

    0.3%

    77

    1.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    96

    1.6%

    5, 6, 9

    511.02

    Porter

    4,143

    3

    0.1%

    -

    -

    5

    0.1%

    -

    -

    8

    0.2%

    5, 6, 9


    Porter Total

    154,655

    1,782

    1.15%

    667

    0.43%

    520

    0.34%

    49

    0.03%

    3,018

    1.95%

    5, 6, 7, 9


    401

    LaPorte

    4,326

    57

    1.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    57

    1.3%

    9

    403

    LaPorte

    2,428

    9

    0.4%

    33

    1.4%

    -

    -

    29

    1.2%

    71

    2.9%

    9

    404

    LaPorte

    2,867

    8

    0.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    8

    0.3%

    9

    405

    LaPorte

    3,332

    9

    0.3%

    12

    0.4%

    35

    1.1%

    -

    -

    56

    1.7%

    9

    406

    LaPorte

    4,388

    124

    2.8%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    7

    0.2%

    131

    3.0%

    9

    407

    LaPorte

    1,558

    128

    8.2%

    9

    0.6%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    137

    8.8%

    9

    408

    LaPorte

    2,847

    14

    0.5%

    15

    0.5%

    37

    1.3%

    15

    0.5%

    81

    2.8%

    9

    409

    LaPorte

    2,444

    -

    -

    7

    0.3%

    -

    -

    7

    0.3%

    14

    0.6%

    9

    411

    LaPorte

    2,198

    16

    0.7%

    27

    1.2%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    43

    2.0%

    9

    412

    LaPorte

    1,008

    1

    0.1%

    -

    -

    6

    0.6%

    -

    -

    7

    0.7%

    9

    413

    LaPorte

    2,115

    -

    -

    -

    -

    23

    1.1%

    -

    -

    23

    1.1%

    9

    414

    LaPorte

    3,408

    43

    1.3%

    35

    1.0%

    -

    -

    7

    0.2%

    85

    2.5%

    5, 9

    415

    LaPorte

    5,060

    25

    0.5%

    15

    0.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    40

    0.8%

    5, 9

    416

    LaPorte

    5,592

    45

    0.8%

    44

    0.8%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    89

    1.6%

    9

    417

    LaPorte

    3,189

    28

    0.9%

    20

    0.6%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    48

    1.5%

    9

    418

    LaPorte

    5,841

    200

    3.4%

    37

    0.6%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    237

    4.1%

    8, 9

    419

    LaPorte

    5,591

    34

    0.6%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    34

    0.6%

    9

    420

    LaPorte

    2,225

    38

    1.7%

    33

    1.5%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    71

    3.2%

    8, 9

    421

    LaPorte

    6,200

    334

    5.4%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    334

    5.4%

    8, 9

    422

    LaPorte

    3,168

    24

    0.8%

    9

    0.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    33

    1.0%

    8, 9

    423

    LaPorte

    2,209

    68

    3.1%

    8

    0.4%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    76

    3.4%

    8, 9

    424

    LaPorte

    6,106

    275

    4.5%

    36

    0.6%

    30

    0.5%

    -

    -

    341

    5.6%

    8, 9

    image

  34. | P a ge



    Geography

    Population 5 years and over

    Speak Spanish or Spanish Creole and Speak English less

    Speak Other Indo- European languages and Speak English

    Speak Asian and Pacific Island Languages and

    Speak Othe Languages and

    Speak English

    r


    less

    Speak English less that "very well": Total


    Operator Code

    Census Tract

    County

    Persons

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    Persons

    Percent

    425

    LaPorte

    4,659

    62

    1.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    -

    62

    1.3%

    8, 9

    426

    LaPorte

    8,427

    101

    1.2%

    7

    0.1%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    108

    1.3%

    5, 9

    427

    LaPorte

    4,984

    34

    0.7%

    13

    0.3%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    47

    0.9%

    9

    428

    LaPorte

    2,799

    20

    0.7%

    12

    0.4%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    32

    1.1%

    5, 9

    429

    LaPorte

    3,378

    8

    0.2%

    5

    0.1%

    -

    -

    -

    -

    13

    0.4%

    5, 9

    430

    LaPorte

    2,342

    39

    1.7%

    23

    1.0%

    62

    2.6%

    -

    -

    124

    5.3%

    9


    LaPorte Total

    104,689

    1,744

    1.67%

    400

    0.38%

    193

    0.18%

    65

    0.06%

    2,402

    2.29%

    5, 8, 9


    NIRPC Total

    721,374

    19,184

    2.66%

    5,763

    0.80%

    1,933

    0.27%

    837

    0.12%

    27,717

    3.84%


    1, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9

    Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2008-2012 American Community Survey, Table S1601: Language Spoken at Home


    Code

    Transit Operator

    Name

    Service Area

    1

    City of East Chicago Transit

    ECT

    East Chicago, Griffith, Hammond

    3

    North Township Dial-a-Ride

    -

    East Chicago, Hammond, Highland, Munster, Whiting

    4

    South Lake County Community Services, Inc

    SLCCS

    All of Lake County except North and Calumet Townships, but including Griffith

    5

    Opportunity Enterprises, Inc

    OE

    Porter County; Lake County E of Broadway and LaPorte County W of 421 and N of 109th.

    6

    Porter County Aging and Community Services, Inc

    PCACS

    Porter County; Lake County E of 51 (all of Lake County within 1 mile of Porter County line).

    7

    City of Valparaiso

    V-Line

    City of Valparaiso

    8

    City of LaPorte

    TransPorte

    City of LaPorte

    9

    Northern Indiana Commuter Transportation District

    NICTD

    Lake, Porter, and LaPorte Counties, other parts of NE Illinois and N Indiana.

    Code #2 was previously used for the now-defunct Northwest Indiana Regional Bus Authority



    image

  35. | P a ge

    image

    Attachment #4: Minority and Low Income Population Distribution Map


    image

  36. | P a ge

    Attachment #5: Minority and Low Income Population Distribution Chart

    Minority and Low Income Populations by Census Tract

    Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 Decennial Census, Table DP1: Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics; HUD Low-Income Housing Tax Credits Qualified Census Tracts


    Cell shading shows minority populations of <1x

    1-1.5x

    1.5-2x

    2-2.5x

    >2.5x

    ...the regional average (34.43%)

    Low income tracts have a…

    thick border


    image

    Geography Population Race Ethnicity Total Minority



    Tract


    County


    Total


    White


    Black

    American

    Indian / Alaska Native


    Asian

    Native

    Hawai'in / Pacific Islander


    Other Race


    Two or More Races


    White, Hispanic (any race)


    non- Hispanic


    No.


    %


    Transit Low* Service Income

    101

    Lake

    4,312

    1,333

    2,795

    8

    28

    1

    30

    117

    160

    1,258

    3,054

    70.8%

    9

    102.01

    Lake

    5,696

    728

    4,671

    27

    23

    0

    99

    148

    281

    635

    5,061

    88.9%

    9 Yes

    102.03

    Lake

    2,462

    55

    2,355

    8

    1

    0

    14

    29

    46

    39

    2,423

    98.4%

    9 Yes

    102.05

    Lake

    1,546

    90

    1,359

    1

    3

    0

    59

    34

    139

    42

    1,504

    97.3%

    9 Yes

    103.02

    Lake

    3,472

    79

    3,252

    1

    5

    0

    68

    67

    131

    43

    3,429

    98.8%

    9 Yes

    103.04

    Lake

    3,149

    278

    2,610

    6

    10

    2

    166

    77

    432

    97

    3,052

    96.9%

    9 Yes

    104

    Lake

    3,274

    26

    3,160

    10

    0

    0

    22

    56

    95

    18

    3,256

    99.5%

    9 Yes

    105

    Lake

    957

    35

    884

    10

    2

    0

    15

    11

    46

    25

    932

    97.4%

    9 Yes

    106

    Lake

    1,386

    38

    1,288

    14

    0

    0

    19

    27

    51

    29

    1,357

    97.9%

    9 Yes

    109

    Lake

    977

    18

    924

    1

    0

    0

    12

    22

    32

    11

    966

    98.9%

    9 Yes

    110

    Lake

    1,687

    22

    1,609

    2

    2

    0

    6

    46

    32

    11

    1,676

    99.3%

    9 Yes

    111

    Lake

    4,597

    30

    4,467

    13

    0

    0

    12

    75

    61

    27

    4,570

    99.4%

    9 Yes

    112

    Lake

    4,402

    91

    4,234

    6

    4

    0

    19

    48

    81

    71

    4,331

    98.4%

    9

    113

    Lake

    1,869

    58

    1,785

    7

    1

    0

    4

    14

    26

    51

    1,818

    97.3%

    9 Yes

    114

    Lake

    1,271

    8

    1,232

    7

    0

    0

    2

    22

    15

    7

    1,264

    99.4%

    9 Yes

    115

    Lake

    2,693

    293

    2,220

    7

    2

    0

    88

    83

    213

    225

    2,468

    91.6%

    4, 9 Yes

    116

    Lake

    2,321

    33

    2,256

    3

    0

    0

    10

    19

    50

    18

    2,303

    99.2%

    9 Yes

    117

    Lake

    826

    21

    776

    4

    0

    0

    9

    16

    29

    16

    810

    98.1%

    9 Yes

    118

    Lake

    1,484

    14

    1,452

    2

    0

    0

    0

    16

    3

    14

    1,470

    99.1%

    9

    119

    Lake

    2,069

    34

    1,992

    4

    2

    0

    5

    32

    38

    34

    2,035

    98.4%

    9 Yes

    120

    Lake

    1,049

    13

    1,000

    2

    3

    0

    14

    17

    34

    10

    1,039

    99.0%

    9 Yes

    121

    Lake

    940

    14

    899

    4

    0

    0

    3

    20

    16

    13

    927

    98.6%

    9 Yes

  37. | P a ge

    image

    Geography Population Race Ethnicity Total Minority


    American

    Native

    Indian /

    Hawai'in /

    Two or

    White,

    Alaska

    Pacific

    Other

    More

    Hispanic

    non-

    Transit Low*

    Tract

    County

    Total

    White

    Black

    Native

    Asian

    Islander

    Race

    Races

    (any race)

    Hispanic

    No.

    %

    Service Income

    122

    Lake

    1,459

    8

    1,438

    0

    0

    0

    2

    11 6 5 1,454 99.7% 9 Yes

    123

    Lake

    3,038

    203

    2,702

    2

    2

    1

    71

    57 179 135 2,903 95.6% 4, 9 Yes



    128

    Lake

    2,326

    91

    2,101

    11

    201

    Lake

    4,750

    3,768

    192

    15

    0

    64

    56

    163

    30

    2,296

    98.7%

    9 Yes

    7

    638

    97

    1,788

    2,703

    2,047

    43.1%

    1, 3, 9

    0

    296

    40

    849

    1,567

    946

    37.6%

    1, 3, 9

    124

    Lake

    4,804

    235

    4,355

    15

    21

    1

    69

    108

    209

    168

    4,636

    96.5%

    9 Yes

    125

    Lake

    5,155

    376

    4,513

    14

    10

    0

    126

    116

    314

    289

    4,866

    94.4%

    9 Yes

    126 Lake 2,707 193 2,388 4 1 0

    56

    65

    130

    154

    2,553

    94.3%

    9 Yes

    127 Lake 3,515 253 3,097 11 15 0

    58

    81

    190

    196

    3,319

    94.4%

    9 Yes

    3

    33

    203

    Lake

    6,601

    4,690

    464

    42

    27

    0

    1,188

    190

    3,198

    2,875

    3,726

    56.4%

    1, 3, 9

    Yes

    204

    Lake

    5,554

    3,375

    669

    35

    12

    0

    1,233

    230

    3,566

    1,300

    4,254

    76.6%

    1, 3, 9

    Yes

    202 Lake 2,513 2,083 67 15 12

    2,138

    844

    3,140

    78.8%

    1, 3, 9

    Yes

    411

    634

    1,621

    71.9%

    1, 3, 9

    Yes

    1,470

    1,225

    3,958

    76.4%

    1, 3, 9

    Yes

    704

    365

    4,090

    91.8%

    1, 3, 9

    Yes

    205

    Lake

    3,984

    1,952

    960

    206

    Lake

    2,255

    849

    1,209

    207

    Lake

    5,183

    1,875

    2,401

    208

    Lake

    4,455

    660

    3,371

    7

    2

    850

    6

    0

    134

    28 185

    7 50

    26 20 3 669 189

    209

    Lake

    4,375

    2,475

    999

    10

    409

    0

    346

    136

    886

    2,018

    2,357

    53.9%

    1, 3, 9

    210

    Lake

    5,183

    3,519

    665

    36

    30

    1

    774

    158

    1,851

    2,605

    2,578

    49.7%

    1, 3, 9

    211

    Lake

    3,016

    2,266

    267

    11

    11

    1

    368

    92

    972

    1,726

    1,290

    42.8%

    1, 3, 9

    213

    Lake

    3,630

    2,279

    883

    14

    26

    1

    333

    94

    870

    1,836

    1,794

    49.4%

    1, 3, 9

    214

    Lake

    5,175

    2,688

    1,251

    43

    14

    3

    941 235 2,033 1,808 3,367 65.1% 1, 3, 9

    215

    Lake

    2,285

    1,559

    381

    14

    26

    1

    257 47 549 1,313 972 42.5% 1, 3

    9 4 0 316 95


    Yes

    216

    Lake

    2,996

    2,083

    392

    17

    10

    0

    372

    122

    999

    1,568

    1,428

    47.7%

    1, 3, 9

    217

    Lake

    4,913

    3,144

    987

    24

    27

    5

    573

    153

    1,491

    2,361

    2,552

    51.9%

    1, 3, 9

    218

    Lake

    3,696

    2,202

    994

    9

    25

    0

    295

    171

    831

    1,771

    1,925

    52.1%

    1, 3, 9

    Yes

    219

    Lake

    5,184

    3,572

    723

    28

    51

    0

    621

    189

    1,712

    2,637

    2,547

    49.1%

    1, 3, 9

    220

    Lake

    5,082

    2,945

    1,349

    28

    54

    0

    519

    187

    1,245

    2,378

    2,704

    53.2%

    1, 3, 9

    301

    Lake

    1,456

    24

    1,365

    1

    0

    0

    13

    53 97 3 1,453 99.8% 1, 3, 9 Yes

    302

    Lake

    1,436

    325

    852

    2

    2

    0

    204

    51 554 29 1,407 98.0% 1, 3, 9 Yes

    image

  38. | P a ge

    image

    American

    Native

    Indian /

    Hawai'in /

    Two or

    White,

    Alaska

    Pacific

    Other

    More

    Hispanic

    non-

    Transit

    Low*

    Tract

    County

    Total

    White

    Black

    Native

    Asian

    Islander

    Race

    Races

    (any race)

    Hispanic

    No.

    %

    Service

    Income

    303

    Lake

    2,577

    230

    2,102

    17

    0

    0

    168 60 441 73 2,504 97.2% 1, 3, 9 Yes

    Geography Population Race Ethnicity Total Minority


    304

    Lake

    3,505

    1,813

    791

    17

    2

    4

    761

    117

    2,475

    279

    3,226

    92.0%

    1, 3, 9

    Yes

    305

    Lake

    4,201

    2,046

    1,093

    52

    5

    0

    902

    103

    2,777

    364

    3,837

    91.3%

    1, 3, 9

    306

    Lake

    5,052

    2,738

    1,020

    35

    7

    4

    1,108

    140

    3,252

    802

    4,250

    84.1%

    1, 3, 9

    Yes

    307

    Lake

    2,064

    534

    1,079

    19

    1

    0

    369 62 864 154 1,910 92.5% 1, 3, 9

    308

    Lake

    4,272

    1,513

    1,573

    35

    9

    3

    1,023 116 2,581 209 4,063 95.1% 1, 3, 9

    309

    Lake

    3,575

    1,097

    1,690

    8

    1

    0

    700

    79

    1,722

    310

    Lake

    1,560

    210

    1,171

    1

    7

    1

    123

    47

    342

    190 3,385 94.7% 1, 3, 9 Yes

    37 1,523 97.6% 1, 3, 9 Yes


    401 Lake 1,474 1,148 74 6 12 0 185 49

    558

    824

    650

    44.1%

    3, 9

    402

    Lake

    3,523

    2,663

    100

    31

    22

    0

    598

    109

    1,478

    1,909

    1,614

    45.8%

    3, 9

    403

    Lake

    7,895

    6,705

    373

    25

    294

    0

    315

    183

    922

    6,176

    1,719

    21.8%

    3, 9

    404.01

    Lake

    5,208

    4,688

    142

    3

    140

    1

    176

    58

    546

    4,334

    874

    16.8%

    3, 9

    404.02

    Lake

    4,533

    3,530

    195

    12

    646

    1

    59

    90

    329

    3,291

    1,242

    27.4%

    3, 9

    404.03

    Lake

    5,967

    5,285

    111

    7

    297

    1

    182

    84

    613

    4,888

    1,079

    18.1%

    3, 9

    405.01 Lake 3,623 2,841 430 1 125

    0

    126

    100

    497

    2,507

    1,116

    30.8%

    3, 9

    405.02 Lake 3,519 3,057 211 4 97

    0

    86

    64

    385

    2,789

    730

    20.7%

    3, 9

    406 Lake 3,759 3,379 94 13 49

    0

    151

    73

    534

    3,040

    719

    19.1%

    3, 9

    407

    Lake

    5,031

    4,511

    161

    7

    37

    0

    207

    108

    631

    4,140

    891

    17.7%

    3, 9

    408.01

    Lake

    3,888

    3,578

    68

    10

    28

    0

    141

    63

    498

    3,264

    624

    16.0%

    3, 9

    408.02

    Lake

    3,907

    3,661

    33

    14

    44

    1