The National Equity Atlas is a living resource, and we are thrilled to announce the addition of four new indicators to the site:

• Wages: $15/hr
• Income inequality: 95/20 ratio
• Diversity index
• Contribution to growth: Immigrants
   

Here is a breakdown of each new indicator: 

Wages: $15/hour: What share of full-time workers earn at least $15 per hour?

In an equitable economy, all workers would earn a living wage that allows them to meet their basic needs, as well as their family's. While the value of a living wage depends on family size and cost-of-living, many are advocating for $15 per hour as a new bare-bones baseline (this equals $31,200 annually for full-time work).

What it measures

This indicator measures the share of full-time workers earning at least $15 per hour. It available by race/ethnicity, gender, and educational attainment, and over time (since 1980).

Key facts

• Only 57 percent of women earn at least $15 per hour compared with 68 percent of men.
• Latinas are the least like to earn at least $15 per hour (40 percent), followed by Native American women and Latino men (46 percent).
• 50 percent of Black women at least $15 per hour, compared with 57 percent of Black men and 62 percent of White women.

 

How to find it

1. Click Indicators in the navigation bar
2. Select the Equity indicator "Wages: $15/hr" under Economic Vitality
3. Select “By gender” in the breakdowns underneath the chart
4. Here is what you will see

Credit: Share of workers earning at least $15/hour by race/ethnicity/National Equity Atlas 

Momentum is growing across the country to change these numbers and ensure that all workers can earn at least a living wage. Use this data to inform policy and organizing strategies such as raising the minimum wage or passing a living-wage ordinance. In the city of Los Angeles, for example, the two-year Raise LA campaign led to a new living wage ordinance raising the wages of hotel workers to $15.37 per hour.

Income inequality: 95/20 ratio: How unequal is your state or region?

Rising inequality is one of the defining challenges of our generation, and there is a growing consensus that inequality is not just bad for those left behind—it is bad for our economy and democracy as a whole. Recent research shows that this is true for metropolitan regions as well as nations. Harvard economist Raj Chetty and his collaborators found that regions with lower inequality and segregation provide their residents with more chances to move up the economic ladder. And Manuel Pastor and Chris Benner found that regions with less inequality are more economically resilient and experience longer periods of growth.

What it measures

This indicator measures inequality using the 95/20 ratio, which is represents the income earned by the households at the 95th percentile (just making it into the top 5 percent) divided by the income earned by the households at the 20th percentile (just falling into the bottom 20 percent). Nationwide, households at the 95th percentile earned $181,768 in 2012, and households at the 20th percentile earned $19,888, for a 95/20 ratio of 9.14. In other words, households at the 95th percentile earned more than 9 times the incomes of households at the 20th percentile.

Key facts

• Inequality has consistently grown over the past several decades: the 95/20 ratio was 6.91 in 1980 and grew to 9.14 by 2012.
• Among the largest 150 regions, Bridgeport, CT has the highest inequality on this measure (95/20 ratio of 14.08), and Ogden, UT has the lowest (5.72).
• Regions within the same state can have very different levels of inequality: Durham, NC, for example, has the 10th highest inequality (95/20 ratio of 10.29) and Charlotte, NC ranks 42nd (8.71).

 

How to find it​

1. Click Indicators in the navigation bar
2. Select the Equity indicator "Income inequality: 95/20 ratio" under Economic Vitality
3. Enter “Durham” as your region in the box near the top right corner of the page
4. Select “Ranking” in the breakdowns underneath the chart
5. Enter “Charlotte” in the Compare box under the chart
6. The chart below is what you will find

Credit: Household income, 95th and 20th percentile/National Equity Atlas 

Press for policies to reduce inequality, such as expanding the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and pursuing full employment. Washington, DC, for example, recently upgraded its local EITC by increasing its amount and extending it to workers without children and non-custodial parents.

Diversity index: How racially diverse is your community?

Diversity—in the context of inclusion—is a driver of innovation, business growth, and economic progress. Research shows that companies with more diverse workforces are more competitive, with greater market share, higher revenues, and more customers. McKinsey & Company’s recent analysis, for example, found that more diverse companies (in the top 25 percent) were 35 percent more likely than those in the bottom 25 percent to have financial returns above their industry medians.

What it measures

The diversity index measures the representation of six major racial/ethnic groups (White, Black, Latino, Asian/Pacific Islander, Native American, and Mixed/other race) in the population. The maximum diversity score (1.79) would occur if each group were evenly represented in the region.

Key facts

• Nationally, the diversity index is 1.1 now, and it was .71 in 1980.
• Hawaii (1.3) and California (1.29) are the most diverse states, and Vermont and Maine (both .3) are the least diverse.
• Vallejo (1.45) and San Francisco (1.48) are the most diverse among the largest 150 regions, and McAllen, TX (.37) and Portland, ME (.34) are the least diverse. Chicago ranks 21st (1.19).

 

How to find it

1. Click Indicators in the navigation bar
2. Select the indicator "Diversity index" under Demographics
3. Enter “Chicago” as your region in the box near the top right corner of the page
4. Select “Ranking” as your breakdown under the chart
5. Select “Region” as your geography under the chart
6. Here is what you will find

Use this data for policy change

Use this data to develop and advocate for policies that ensure all of the diverse groups in your community can access the resources and opportunities they need to reach their full potential. Due in large part to the advocacy of the Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights, Illinois has passed policies, like the Office of New Americans and the Illinois DREAM Act, that have made it one of the most welcoming states for immigrants.

Contribution to growth: Immigrants

Immigration is a significant driver of population growth nationwide, and in many distressed communities, new immigrants are fueling neighborhood revitalization and business growth. Policies that increase access to education, services, and living-wage jobs for immigrants, and remove barriers to their full and equal participation, will help immigrants and their entire communities thrive.

What it measures

This indicator measures the net change in population by nativity, broken down for six major racial/ethnic groups. It also measures the share of the net change in population attributable to immigrants (restricted to range between 0 and 100 percent).

Key facts

• Nationally, the U.S.-born population grew by 19 million between 2000 and 2012, and the immigrant population grew 8.7 million, contributing 31 percent of total population growth.
• There are three states where immigrants contributed all of the net population growth between 2000 and 2012: Michigan, Rhode Island, and New York.
• Immigrants contributed all of the net population growth between 2000 and 2012 in 16 of the largest 150 regions, including Dayton, New Orleans, and Detroit.​

 

How to find it

1. Click Indicators in the navigation bar
2. Select the indicator "Contribution to growth: Immigrants" under Demographics
3. Enter “Rhode Island” as your state in the box near the top right corner of the page
4. You will see the below chart

Credit: Change in population by nativity/National Equity Atlas 

Use these facts to advance policies to promote immigrant inclusion ranging from facilitating citizenship to improving language access and extending voting rights to residents who are aspiring citizens. New Haven, for example, launched the Elm City Resident’s Card in 2007 and became the first city to issue a municipal ID card as a strategy to protect and integrate its growing immigrant population into the community.

Better policies and more equitable outcomes result when data informs policymaking. In New York City, advocates used data to highlight urgent transit needs and built out the transit system to meet these needs. Maps and charts compiled into a Transportation Equity Atlas provided power visuals of the racial and economic inequities in the city’s transit system. Advocates could then point out where transit routes could be placed to better serve low-income communities and communities of color. This data gave policy makers the information they needed to make the transit system more equitable.

The Pratt Center for Community Development has been working on transportation equity since 2007. New York City has a widely developed public transportation system and the Pratt Center wanted to see how well it was serving all New Yorkers. To do so, the Center developed a Transportation Equity Atlas with maps illustrating where people lived and worked to understand commuting patters of 289,000 residents in 13 predominately low- and moderate income communities in Manhattan, Queens, Brooklyn, and the Bronx, as well as nearly 300,000 workers at major job centers.

Through this analysis, the researchers found substantial disparities in transportation access between higher-income, professional workers and low-wage manual and service workers. The Atlas showed that over 750,000 New Yorkers traveled more than 60 minutes each way to work and two-thirds of these commuters were from households that earn less than $35,000 per year. Workers or color were also more likely to have longer commute times.

The Pratt Center and its partners in the coalition Communities United for Transportation Equity (COMMUTE) began to explore whether Bus Rapid Transit could improve transit options and reduce commuting times for underserved communities. Together, they created a vision for a citywide Bus Rapid Transit Network that would collect fares before riders boarded, have dedicated street lanes, and receive priority at traffic signals to allow the buses to quickly connect underserved neighborhoods and workplaces.

The data on the racial and economic inequities of transportation access helped bring the coalition together to focus on transportation equity. As Joan Byron, Pratt Center’s Director of Policy said, “Data helped move people and make the case for Bus Rapid Transit. The basic thing data did was raise up transportation and transit access as an equity issue.” This was a new and uniting issue for many advocates according to Byron. “Social, economic, and environmental justice advocates work on a vast array of issues and there wasn’t a sense of ownership of transportation as a social justice issue. The disparity in commute times across race and issue showed how commuting time was, in fact, a racial and social justice issue.”

The coalition’s vision became a reality when the city’s transit departments launched the Select Bus Service (SBS) program that incorporated key Bus Rapid Transit features in 2008. The Phase 2 study from the transit agencies adopted the Pratt Center transit equity approach and looked at underserved areas and difficult connections to identify priority transit corridors. As the map below shows, seven SBS routes have been implemented providing substantial reductions in travel times and improved reliability to low-wage residents and communities.

The data in the Transportation Equity Atlas combined with the data presented in the Bus Rapid Transit vision has helped decision makers and advocates work together to improve transit access for workers across the five boroughs. They are now working toward an even more expensive Bus Rapid Transit system.

Byron said, “As they (the transit agencies) have moved forward on the Bus Rapid Transit routes, they have engaged in a real process with stakeholders down the corridor. The agencies have really learned to work with communities.”  The result is a transit system that is more accessible and responsive to all New Yorkers, regardless of race or income.