The grantee must ensure that no person in the United States shall, on the grounds of race, color, or national origin, be excluded from participating in, or denied the benefits of, or be subject to discrimination under any program, or activity receiving federal financial assistance. The grantee must ensure that federally supported transit services and related benefits are distributed in an equitable manner.

Areas To Be Examined

Responsibility for Title VI Coordination

Certification of nondiscrimination (Annual Certifications and Assurances)
Implementation of Title VI provisions

Approved Title VI Program
1. General reporting requirements (all grantees)
2. Program-specific reporting (areas with population 200,000 and over)
Title VI Monitoring Procedures
1. Level and quality of service (all grantees)
2. Environmental Justice Assessment (all construction projects)
3. Need for services to those with Limited English Proficiency (LEP)
Title VI Complaints
1. Complaint Procedures
2. List of Title VI complaints
3. List of Title VI lawsuits

References

FTA Circular 4702.1, "Title VI Program Guidelines for Federal Transit Administration Recipients."
Federal Register: April 15, 1997 (Volume 62, Number 72, pp. 18377-18381) “Department of Transportation (DOT) Order To Address Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations.”
Executive Order 13166: "Improving Access to Services for Persons with Limited English Proficiency."
Federal Register: December 14, 2005 ((Volume 70, Number 239, pp. 74087-74100) “DOT Policy Guidance Concerning Recipients’ Responsibilities to Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Persons.”

QUESTIONS FOR THE REVIEW

Has the grantee had, or been informed that it will have, a Title VI Compliance Review by the FTA Office of Civil Rights? If yes, when was the site visit?

Explanation

Consistent with FTA’s oversight responsibilities, FTA has a program of grantee reviews assessing compliance with the Title VI regulations. The review is comprehensive in nature, including a review of each agency’s policies, procedures, and recordkeeping. Title VI Compliance Reviews last two to three days and assess implementation of the Title VI program in the following areas: General reporting requirements: demographic and service profile maps, overlays, and charts; service standards and policies; assessment of compliance by grantees; and other areas of Title VI considerations (changes in service features, information dissemination, minority representation on decision-making bodies, and multilingual facilities).

After the review is complete, the review team conducts an exit interview presenting the findings, if any, to the grantee. A draft report documenting the deficiencies and necessary corrective actions is provided to the grantee within 30 days of the site visit. A letter and final report is issued within 60 days of the site visit. The grantee then will have 90 days to take corrective actions and provide appropriate documentation to the Civil Rights Officer (CRO).

If a Title VI Compliance Review has been conducted in the past two fiscal years or if one is scheduled for the current fiscal year (FYs 2005, 2006, and 2007), triennial reviewers should note on the worksheets when the compliance review was performed. If findings from the Title VI review are still being monitored, or if the Title VI review is pending, the triennial review will not include this area. If the Title VI review is closed, the reviewer should seek guidance on whether or not to conduct the review from the Regional Civil Rights Officer and the Office of Civil Rights.

Reason for the Question

Input to triennial review

Sources of Information

The reviewer should contact the CRO to determine if a Title VI Compliance Review of the grantee is scheduled or has been conducted during the review period. The Regional Oversight Resource Plan also may have a schedule of Title VI reviews to be held during the year.

Determination

If the Title VI area is not included in the triennial review, use the finding of Not Reviewed (NR).

Suggested Corrective Action

None.

Back to Questions

Who is responsible for the coordination of Title VI Program/ Environmental Justice Assessments? Who prepares the Title VI Program submissions and updates for FTA?

Explanation

The answers to these questions identify the individual(s) responsible for Title VI Program/ Environmental Justice Assessments and program submissions. All grantees are required to certify annually as a part of the Certifications and Assurances that they will not discriminate in service delivery and related benefits. All grantees must report on efforts taken to implement the provisions of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Proper implementation of the Title VI Program/Environmental Justice Assessments involves data collection and the assessment of equity.

Reason for the Question

General Information

Sources of Information

The Title VI Program submissions to the CRO may include the name of the person(s) responsible for coordinating and implementing the Title VI Program/ Environmental Justice Assessments. This information should be confirmed and/or updated at the site visit.

Determination

None.

Suggested Corrective Action

None.

Back to Questions
Has the grantee’s Title VI Program been approved by FTA? If yes, when does the approval expire? If the program has expired, please provide an explanation.

Explanation

Grantees are required to maintain and provide Title VI information to FTA at least every three years or more frequently if conditions warrant. FTA has established two main categories of reporting requirements: General and Program-Specific. General reporting requirements apply to all grantees and include lists of Title VI complaints or lawsuits (if any); recent civil rights compliance reviews; and pending federal grant applications. Program-specific reporting requirements apply to grantees that operate transit service in service areas with populations of 200,000 or more. The major elements of program-specific reporting requirements include demographic and service profile maps, overlays, and charts; service standards and policies; assessment of compliance by grantees; and other areas of Title VI considerations (changes in service features, information dissemination, minority representation on decision-making bodies, and multilingual facilities).

Reason for the Question

FTA C 4702.1, III-2 & 3

Sources of Information

The CRO’s files should include a copy of the most recently submitted program. There should be correspondence indicating when it was approved by FTA and when the approval expires.

Determination

If a current Title VI Program has been submitted and approved, the grantee is not deficient. If the grantee has submitted its program to FTA and is awaiting a response, the grantee is not deficient. If the Title VI Program has expired and the grantee has not made a submission or requested and received an extension for submitting a new program or program update, the grantee is deficient.

Suggested Corrective Action

Submit the required Title VI Program to FTA.

Back to Questions
Has FTA placed any conditions on the Title VI approval? If so, what is the status of the grantee’s follow-up on corrective actions?

Explanation

In reviewing the grantee’s Title VI submission, the CRO may have issued a conditional approval and identified corrective actions or additional submittals needed to determine compliance. Conditional approval may be granted pending the submission of additional documentation by the grantee.

Reason for the Question

FTA C 4702.1, IV-2

Sources of Information

The CRO’s files should include documentation of any corrective action or additional submittal that is required of grantee. During the site visit, discuss the status of any outstanding items that require corrective action.

Determination

If the grantee has completed all corrective actions or made appropriate submittals, the grantee is not deficient. If the grantee has not completed all corrective actions, the grantee is deficient. Any overdue corrective actions should be reported to the CRO.

Suggested Corrective Action

The grantee needs to take steps to complete corrective actions and provide evidence of such to the regional office.

Back to Questions
If the grantee operates in a service area of 200,000 or more in population, what service standards and policies does the grantee have for each of the following?
1. Vehicle load factors by route or corridor
2. Vehicle assignment rosters by garage or route
3. Vehicle headways by route
4. Transit amenities by community
5. Transit access by community
If the grantee operates in a service area of 200,000 or more in population, when was the most recent compliance assessment performed by the grantee and what disparities, if any, were identified by the grantee? What action, if any, was taken to address the disparities?

Explanation

Grantees operating in a service area of 200,000 or more in population are required to establish service standards and policies for five transit service indicators (vehicle load, vehicle assignment, vehicle headway, distribution of transit amenities and transit access). Note that vehicle assignment includes several factors such as age, size, type, and fuel used in vehicle (e.g., CNG vs. diesel). Also, grantees are required to conduct periodic self-assessments to determine whether transit service and related benefits provided to minority communities and minority users is consistent with Title VI objectives in FTA C 4702.1. Grantees must compare the quality and level of service provided to minority and non-minority users to assess equity.

Reason for the Question

FTA C 4702.1, III, 3a(2)-(3)

Sources of Information

The most recent Title VI Program submittal should have the grantee's current service standards and policies. At the site visit, check how often the grantee conducts periodic assessments and review its most recent Title VI assessment.

Determination

If the grantee has written service standards and policies and has conducted periodic assessments of compliance, the grantee is not deficient. If the grantee does not have written service standards and policies that address all of these areas and/or does not conduct periodic assessments, the grantee is deficient. If the grantee's most recent assessment revealed any disparities and the grantee has not taken any action to correct the disparities, the grantee is deficient.

Suggested Corrective Action

The grantee needs to develop written service standards and policies and/or conduct periodic Title VI assessments and submit evidence of such to the CRO. Direct the grantee to correct any disparities and submit evidence of such to the regional office.

Back to Questions
Has the grantee developed and implemented procedures to monitor its level and quality of transit service to determine compliance with Title VI?

Explanation

All grantees that provide public transit services are required to develop and implement procedures to monitor the level and quality of transit service to determine compliance with Title VI. These comparisons of the level and quality of transit service provided to the minority community, against overall system averages, will measure the actual realization of established service policies and standards. Areas of concern in some communities are the perceived lack of an equitable distribution of funding for bus service vs. light rail and rapid transit, the location of alternative fuel facilities, and the distribution of alternative fueled vehicles.

Reason for the Question

FTA C 4702.1, IV-2c

Sources of Information

Check monitoring procedures and the most recent analysis of the level and quality of transit service. Note that this analysis should be oriented to Title VI compliance issues and not just a routine service standards monitoring report.

Determination

If the grantee monitors the level and quality of transit service to determine compliance with Title VI, the grantee is not deficient. If the grantee does not monitor transit service to determine compliance with Title VI, the grantee is deficient.

Suggested Corrective Action

The grantee needs to monitor the level and/or quality of transit service to determine compliance with Title VI and submit evidence to the CRO.

Back to Questions
Has the grantee significantly reduced transit service or increased fares? If yes, did the grantee examine the impact of the service reductions or fare increases on minority communities and ridership?

Explanation

Economic conditions sometimes require a transit system to reduce transit services or increase fares. Grantees need to examine the proposed service reductions or fare increases to determine if they might cause any adverse impacts on minority communities compared to the general ridership population.

Reason for the Question

FTA C 4702.1, III-3a(3)

Sources of Information

The grantee will have identified any major service changes or fare increases in the Public Comment on Fare and Service Changes section. Material related to this service change needs to be reviewed to determine how the grantee assessed the impact on the minority community.

Determination

If the grantee analyzed the service reductions or fare increases in terms of the impact on minority communities, the grantee is not deficient. If the grantee did not conduct such an analysis, the grantee is deficient.

Suggested Corrective Action

The grantee needs to conduct an assessment of the service reduction or fare increase and adopt procedures for future major service reductions. The results of these activities need to be submitted to FTA.

Back to Questions
Has the grantee assessed and addressed the ability of persons with limited English proficiency (LEP) to use transit services? If so, did the assessment identify a significant LEP population? If yes, has the grantee provided translation services, notified the LEP population of the availability of these services, conducted staff training on language access, and developed procedures for monitoring their language services?

Explanation

On December 14, 2005, the U.S. Department of Transportation issued guidance to all recipients on special language services to limited English proficient (LEP) persons (Federal Register Volume 70, Number 239, pages 74087-74100). This guidance is in compliance with Executive Order 13166 and Department of Justice (DOJ) LEP Guidance (“Enforcement of Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 – National Origin Discrimination Against Persons with Limited English Proficiency”). Title VI and its regulations require grantees to take reasonable steps to ensure “meaningful” access to transit services and programs. It is essential that transportation providers become informed about their diverse clientele from a linguistic, cultural, and social perspective. When necessary, the FTA will determine if a grantee has taken reasonable steps to eliminate barriers to meaningful communication with LEP individuals and to provide necessary services equivalent to those provided to people who are fully English proficient. In making this determination, FTA will examine a number of factors including:
- The number and proportion of LEP persons served or encountered in the eligible service population
- The frequency with which LEP individuals come into contact with the program, activity, or service
- The nature and importance of the program, activity, or service provided by the program
- The resources available to the recipient and costs.
The DOT LEP guidance also states that grantees should develop an implementation plan to address the identified needs of the LEP populations it serves. This plan should consist of 1) identifying the LEP individuals who need language assistance 2) providing language assistance measures 3) training staff 4) providing notice to LEP persons of services available, and 5) monitoring and updating the LEP plan.

A significant LEP population is a) one where the proportion of persons in the grantee’s service area who reported to the 2000 Census that they speak English less than very well exceeds the statewide proportion of such persons and/or b) the grantee’s outreach to community organizations serving LEP persons in their service area determines that there exists a sizable LEP population residing in the service area.

Reason for the Question

FTA C 4702.1, III-3a(4)(c)
Executive Order 13166
Federal Register: December 14, 2005 Volume 70, Number 239, pages 74087-74100)

Sources of Information

The grantee should provide any assessment that has been conducted along with samples of timetables, maps, or other public information in a language other than English.

Determination

If the grantee has conducted an LEP assessment that did not identify a significant LEP population, the grantee is not deficient. If the grantee conducted an assessment that identified a significant LEP population and also provided translation services, notified the LEP population of the availability of these services, conducted staff training, and developed procedures for monitoring their language services, the grantee is not deficient.

If the grantee did not conduct an LEP assessment, the grantee is deficient. If the grantee conducted an assessment that identified a significant LEP population and did not subsequently provide translation services, notify the LEP population of the availability of these services, conduct staff training, or develop procedures for monitoring their language services, the grantee is deficient.

Suggested Corrective Action

Grantees who have not conducted an assessment of the LEP population must conduct an assessment. Grantees who have conducted an assessment that identified a significant LEP population but who have not either provided translation services, informed the LEP population of the availability of those services, conducted staff training, or developed plans for monitoring their language services must perform these activities.

Back to Questions
Did the grantee conduct an environmental justice assessment/ fixed-facility impact analysis during the past three years? If so, please have the analysis available and show how effects on minority communities were addressed.

Explanation

For new construction and major rehabilitation or renovation projects, grant applicants shall submit an environmental justice analysis to assess the effects of these projects on minority and low-income communities. The environmental justice analysis should identify and address, as appropriate, disproportionately high and adverse human health or environmental impacts, including interrelated social and economic effects, of the applicants’ project on minority populations and low-income populations. A major renovation or rehabilitation project is one that significantly changes the use, design, scale, or footprint of a facility.

The environmental justice analysis shall include:
1. An identification of the low-income and minority communities within the study area affected by the project, and a discussion of the method used to identify this population (e.g., analysis of census data, minority business directories, direct observation, a public involvements process, etc).
2. For each of the identified low income or minority communities, a discussion of the adverse impacts of the project, both during and after its construction, such as:
  - Adverse effects on community cohesion or economic vitality by dividing or fracturing the community
  - The isolation, exclusion, or separation of the community from the broader community
  - Destruction or disruption of the availability of public and private facilities and services
  - A change in employment opportunities
  - Increased traffic in a residential area or decreased parking availability in a commercial area
  - Air pollution, noise, vibration, change in storm water levels or flows, disturbance of contaminated soil or groundwater
  - Disruption or destruction of man-made or natural resources such as parks, or Native American traditional cultural places
  - Destruction or diminution of aesthetic or historic value, and
  - The cumulative effects of the above on the community.
3. For each of the identified low income or minority communities, a discussion of all positive impacts such as an improvement in transit service, mobility, or accessibility.
4. A description of all mitigation and environmental enhancement actions incorporated into the project to address the adverse impacts, including, but not limited to any special features of the relocation program that go beyond the requirements of the Uniform Relocation Act, to address adverse community impacts such as separation or cohesion issues and the replacement of the community resource destroyed by the project.
5. A discussion of the remaining impacts, if any, and why further mitigation is not proposed.
6. A comparison of mitigation and environmental enhancement actions implemented in conjunction with of the project and affecting predominantly low-income and minority neighborhoods with mitigation implemented in conjunction with similar construction, renovation, or rehabilitation projects located in predominantly non-minority or non-low-income neighborhoods, or with segments of a corridor project that transverse non-minority and non-low-income neighborhoods.
Reason for the Question

FTA C 4702.1, III.2f
23 CFR 771.117
U.S. DOT Order 5610.2

Sources of Information

If the FTA has funded any construction projects in the past three years, ask the grantee for copies of environmental justice assessments/fixed-facility impact analyses used to monitor Title VI compliance. These assessments should be included in the application for a documented categorical exclusion, Environmental Assessment, or Environmental Impact Statement submitted by the grantee to FTA.

Determination

If the grantee has conducted an environmental justice assessment of its construction projects, the grantee is not deficient.

If the project is a categorical exclusion or the grantee conducts environmental justice assessments/fixed-facility impact analyses for construction projects, the grantee is not deficient. All categorical exclusions must comply with 23 CFR §771.117.
- Categorical exclusions (CEs) are actions which meet the definition contained in 40 CFR 1508.4, and, based on past experience with similar actions, do not involve significant environmental impacts. They are actions which: do not induce significant impacts to planned growth or land use for the area; do not require the relocation of significant numbers of people; do not have a significant impact on any natural, cultural, recreational, historic or other resource; do not involve significant air, noise, or water quality impacts; do not have significant impacts on travel patterns; or do not otherwise, either individually or cumulatively, have any significant environmental impacts.
  
  If a construction project falls under category b (below) the transit provider should submit an FFIA as part of the documentation to receive a CE or after the CE has been granted.
- Any action which normally would be classified as a CE but could involve unusual circumstances will require the Administration, in cooperation with the applicant, to conduct appropriate environmental studies to determine if the CE classification is proper. Such unusual circumstances include:
  1. Significant environmental impacts;
  2. Substantial controversy on environmental grounds;
  3. Significant impact on properties protected by section 4(f) of the DOT Act or section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; or
  4. Inconsistencies with any Federal, State, or local law, requirement or administrative determination relating to the environmental aspects of the action.
  If a construction project falls into category c (below) the transit provider does not need to conduct a FFIA.
- The following actions meet the criteria for CEs in the CEQ regulation (section 1508.4) and §771.117(a) of this regulation and normally do not require any further NEPA approvals by the Administration:
  1. Activities which do not involve or lead directly to construction, such as planning and technical studies; grants for training and research programs; research activities as defined in 23 U.S.C. 307; approval of a unified work program and any findings required in the planning process pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 134; approval of statewide programs under 23 CFR Part 630; approval of project concepts under 23 CFR Part 476; engineering to define the elements of a proposed action or alternatives so that social, economic, and environmental effects can be assessed; and Federal-aid system revisions which establish classes of highways on the Federal-aid highway system.
  2. Approval of utility installations along or across a transportation facility.
  3. Construction of bicycle and pedestrian lanes, paths, and facilities.
  4. Activities included in the State's highway safety plan under 23 U.S.C. 402.
  5. Transfer of Federal lands pursuant to 23 U.S.C. 317 when the subsequent action is not an FHWA action.
  6. The installation of noise barriers or alterations to existing publicly owned buildings to provide for noise reduction.
  7. Landscaping.
  8. Installation of fencing, signs, pavement markings, small passenger shelters, traffic signals, and railroad warning devices where no substantial land acquisition or traffic disruption will occur.
  9. Emergency repairs under 23 U.S.C. 125.
  10. Acquisition of scenic easements.
  11. Determination of payback under 23 CFR Part 480 for property previously acquired with Federal-aid participation.
  12. Improvements to existing rest areas and truck weigh stations.
  13. Ridesharing activities.
  14. Bus and rail car rehabilitation.
  15. Alterations to facilities or vehicles in order to make them accessible for elderly and handicapped persons.
  16. Program administration, technical assistance activities, and operating assistance to transit authorities to continue existing service or increase service to meet routine changes in demand.
  17. The purchase of vehicles by the applicant where the use of these vehicles can be accommodated by existing facilities or by new facilities which themselves are within a CE.
  18. Track and railbed maintenance and improvements when carried out within the existing right-of-way.
  19. Purchase and installation of operating or maintenance equipment to be located within the transit facility and with no significant impacts off the site.
  20. Promulgation of rules, regulations, and directives.
  If a construction project falls under category d (below) the transit provider should submit an FFIA as part of the documentation to receive a CE or after the CE has been granted.
- Additional actions which meet the criteria for a CE in the CEQ regulations (40 CFR 1508.4) and paragraph (a) of this section may be designated as CEs only after Administration approval. The applicant shall submit documentation which demonstrates that the specific conditions or criteria for these CEs are satisfied and that significant environmental effects will not result. Examples of such actions include but are not limited to:
  1. Modernization of a highway by resurfacing, restoration, rehabilitation, reconstruction, adding shoulders, or adding auxiliary lanes (e.g., parking, weaving, turning, climbing).
  2. Highway safety or traffic operations improvement projects including the installation of ramp metering control devices and lighting.
  3. Bridge rehabilitation, reconstruction or replacement or the construction of grade separation to replace existing at-grade railroad crossings.
  4. Transportation corridor fringe parking facilities.
  5. Construction of new truck weigh stations or rest areas.
  6. Approvals for disposal of excess right-of-way or for joint or limited use of right-of-way, where the proposed use does not have significant adverse impacts.
  7. Approvals for changes in access control.
  8. Construction of new bus storage and maintenance facilities in areas used predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and located on or near a street with adequate capacity to handle anticipated bus and support vehicle traffic.
  9. Rehabilitation or reconstruction of existing rail and bus buildings and ancillary facilities where only minor amounts of additional land are required and there is not a substantial increase in the number of users.
  10. Construction of bus transfer facilities (an open area consisting of passenger shelters, boarding areas, kiosks and related street improvements) when located in a commercial area or other high activity center in which there is adequate street capacity for projected bus traffic.
  11. Construction of rail storage and maintenance facilities in areas used predominantly for industrial or transportation purposes where such construction is not inconsistent with existing zoning and where there is no significant noise impact on the surrounding community.
  12. Acquisition of land for hardship or protective purposes; advance land acquisition loans under section 3(b) of the UMT Act³. Hardship and protective buying will be permitted only for a particular parcel or a limited number of parcels. These types of land acquisition quality for a CE only where the acquisition will not limit the evaluation of alternatives, including shifts in alignment for planned construction projects, which may be required in the NEPA process. No project development on such land may proceed until the NEPA process has been completed.
    
    Protective acquisition is done to prevent imminent development of a parcel which is needed for a proposed transportation corridor or site. Documentation must clearly demonstrate that development of the land would preclude future transportation use and that such development is imminent. Advance acquisition is not permitted for the sole purpose of reducing the cost of property for a proposed project.
- Where a pattern emerges of granting CE status for a particular type of action, the Administration will initiate rulemaking proposing to add this type of action to the list of categorical exclusions in paragraph (c) or (d) of this section, as appropriate.
[52 FR 32660, Aug. 28, 1987; 53 FR 11066, Apr. 5, 1988]

If the grantee did not conduct an assessment/analysis for a construction project, the grantee is deficient.

Suggested Corrective Action

The grantee needs to conduct an assessment/analysis of the construction project and submit its findings to the regional office.

Back to Questions
Has the grantee received any Title VI complaints in the past three years? Does the grantee maintain a log of such complaints? How are such complaints identified and resolved?

Explanation

Any person who believes that he or she has been subjected to discrimination has the right to file complaints alleging discrimination. The grantee is required to maintain a list of active Title VI lawsuits or complaints.

Reason for the Question

FTA C 4702.1, III-2, VII

Sources of Information

Information regarding complaints may be obtained from headquarters or the CRO, or the grantee. A listing of all complaints filed with the grantee during the past three years and disposition of such complaints should be made available at the site visit. Individual complaint files can be reviewed. Discussions with responsible officials and employees may be necessary.

Determination

If the grantee has documentation indicating that any complaints received are being addressed, the grantee is not deficient. If no complaints have been received but the grantee provides a satisfactory explanation of how complaints would be processed, the grantee is not deficient. (There is no specific requirement that there be a written complaint handling process.) If complaints indicate that the grantee is violating Title VI Program regulations or if the complaints do not receive a response, the grantee is deficient.

Suggested Corrective Action

Direct the grantee to develop and implement procedures for handling Title VI complaints and provide evidence of such to the CRO.

Back to Questions

Report a problem on this page