Public Notice of Rights Under Title VI 
of The Civil Rights Act of 1964

Title VI Program

​

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN (GENERAL REQUIREMENT)

A public participation plan that includes an outreach plan to engage minority and limited English proficient populations is required.  The transit system’s targeted public participation plan for minority populations may be part of efforts that extend more broadly to include other constituencies that are traditionally underserved, such as people with disabilities, low-income populations, and others.

​

Background

​

PROMOTING INCLUSIVE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. The content and considerations of Title VI, the Executive Order on LEP, and the DOT LEP Guidance shall be integrated into each Grantee’s established public participation plan or process (i.e., the document that explicitly describes the proactive strategies, procedures, and desired outcomes that underpin the Grantee’s public participation activities).  Grantees have wide latitude to determine how, when, and how often specific public participation activities should take place, and which specific measures are most appropriate. Grantees should make these determinations based on a demographic analysis of the population(s) affected, the type of plan, program, and/or service under consideration, and the resources available.

Efforts to involve minority and LEP populations in public participation activities can include both comprehensive measures, such as placing public notices at all transit stations, stops, and vehicles, as well as targeted measures to address linguistic, institutional, cultural, economic, historical, or other barriers that may prevent minority and LEP persons from effectively participating in a Transit System’s decision-making process. 

Some effective practices include:

a.   Scheduling meetings at times and locations that are convenient and accessible for minority and LEP communities.

b.   Employing different meeting sizes and formats.

c.   Coordinating with community- and faith-based organizations, educational institutions,   and other organizations to implement public engagement strategies that reach out specifically to members of affected minority and/or LEP communities.

d.   Considering radio, television, or newspaper ads on stations and in publications that serve LEP populations. Outreach to LEP populations could also include audio programming available on podcasts. 

e.   Providing opportunities for public participation through means other than written communication, such as personal interviews or use of audio or video recording devices to capture oral comments.

Grant recipients are required to comply with the public participation requirements of 49 U.S.C. Sections 5307(b) (requires programs of projects to be developed with public participation) and 5307(c)(1)(I) (requires a locally developed process to consider public comment before raising a fare or carrying out a major reduction in transportation service).

 

ATTACHMENT A

TITLE VI AND LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND RESOURCES

 

Developing an LEP Plan

 

Transit Systems have considerable flexibility in developing a Language Assistance Plan, or LEP Plan. An LEP Plan shall, at a minimum:

(a)    Include the results of the Four Factor Analysis, including a description of the LEP population(s) served;

(b)   Describe how the Transit System provides language assistance services by language;

(c)    Describe how the Transit System provides notice to LEP persons about the availability of language assistance;

(d)   Describe how the Transit System monitors, evaluates and updates the language access plan; and

(e)    Describe how the Transit System trains employees to provide timely and reasonable language assistance to LEP populations.  

After completing the Four Factor Analysis, a Transit System may determine that an effective LEP Plan for its community includes the translation of vital documents into the language of each frequently encountered LEP group eligible to be served and/or likely to be affected by the Transit System’s programs and services. Vital written documents include, but are not limited to, consent and complaint forms; intake and application forms with the potential for important consequences; written notices of rights; notices of denials, losses, or decreases in benefits or services; and notices advising LEP individuals of free language assistance services.  Examples of vital documents include an ADA complementary paratransit eligibility application, a Title VI complaint form, notice of a person’s rights under Title VI, and other documents that provide access to essential services. Failure to translate these vital documents could result in a Transit System denying an eligible LEP person access to services and discrimination on the basis of national origin.

​

Four Factor Analysis

 

In order to ensure meaningful access to programs and activities, recipients shall use the information obtained in the Four Factor Analysis to determine the specific language services that are appropriate to provide.  A careful analysis can help a recipient determine if it communicates effectively with LEP persons and will inform language access planning. The Four Factor Analysis is an individualized assessment that balances the following four factors:

(1)  The number or proportion of LEP persons eligible to be served or likely to be encountered by the program or recipient.  This population will be program-specific. In addition to the number or proportion of LEP persons served, the recipient’s analysis should, at a minimum, identify:

(a)    How LEP persons interact with the recipient’s agency;

(b)   Identification of LEP communities, and assessing the number or proportion of LEP persons from each language group to determine the appropriate language services for each language group;

(c)    The literacy skills of LEP populations in their native languages, in order to determine whether translation of documents will be an effective practice; and

(d)   Whether LEP persons are underserved by the recipient due to language barriers.

(2)  The frequency with which LEP persons come into contact with the program. Recipients should survey key program areas and assess major points of contact with the public, such as:

(a)    Use of bus and rail service;

(b)   Purchase of passes and tickets through vending machines, outlets, websites, and over the phone;

(c)    Participation in public meetings;

(d)   Customer service interactions;

(e)    Ridership surveys; and

(f)    Operator surveys.

 

(3)  The nature and importance of the program, activity, or service provided by the program to people’s lives. Generally speaking, the more important the program, the more frequent the contact and the likelihood that language services will be needed.   The provision of public transportation is a vital service, especially for people without access to personal vehicles. An MPO’s regional planning activities will impact every person in a region. Development of a coordinated plan to meet the specific transportation needs of seniors and people with disabilities will often also meet the needs of LEP persons. A person who is LEP may have a disability that prevents the person from using fixed route service, thus making the person eligible for ADA complementary paratransit.  Transit providers, States, and MPOs must assess their programs, activities and services to ensure they are providing meaningful access to LEP persons. Facilitated meetings with LEP persons are one method to inform the recipient on what the local LEP population considers to be an essential service, as well as the most effective means to provide language assistance.

(4)  The resources available to the recipient for LEP outreach, as well as the costs associated with that outreach. Resource and cost issues can often be reduced by technological advances, reasonable business practices, and the sharing of language assistance materials and services among and between recipients, advocacy groups, LEP populations and Federal agencies. Large entities and those entities serving a significant number of LEP persons should ensure that their resource limitations are well substantiated before using this factor as a reason to limit language assistance.

​

Resources

 

The following resources should help recipients integrate the guidance and procedures of this circular into their planning and operations. Recipients seeking additional resources that may have been published subsequent to the date of this circular may inquire with their local FTA Regional Office or FTA’s Office of Civil Rights. Technical assistance resources will be published on the FTA Office of Civil Rights website, http://www.fta.dot.gov/civil_rights.html, on an ongoing basis.

 

1.   Relevant Websites. Recipients and subrecipients are encouraged to review information on the following websites:

a.       FTA’s Title VI Website.  www.fta.dot.gov/civilrights/civil_rights_5088.html. This website provides an overview of FTA’s Title VI activities, including links to recent compliance reviews of recipients, related websites, policy guidance and procedures, and instructions on how to file a Title VI complaint.

b.      Federal Interagency Working Group on Limited English Proficiency. www.lep.gov promotes a cooperative understanding of the importance of language access to Federal programs and Federally-assisted programs. The site acts as a clearinghouse, providing and linking to information, tools, and technical assistance regarding limited English proficiency and language services for Federal agencies, recipients of Federal funds, users of Federal programs and Federally-assisted programs, and other stakeholders.

c.       U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division. http://www.justice.gov/crt/ The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice, established in 1957, is the program institution within the Federal government responsible for coordinating the implementation and enforcement of Federal statutes prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, and other protected classes.

d.      Community Impact Assessment Website. http://www.ciatrans.net. The Community Impact Assessment (CIA) website seeks to inform transportation officials and the general public about the potential impacts of proposed transportation actions on communities and their subpopulations.

e.       United We Ride. www.unitedweride.gov. United We Ride is an interagency Federal national initiative that supports States and their localities in developing coordinated human service delivery systems originating from the Office of Program Management or the Federal Transit Administration. In addition to State coordination grants, United We Ride provides State and local agencies a transportation-coordination and planning self-assessment tool, help along the way, technical assistance, and other resources to help their communities succeed.

2.   Technical Assistance Products. Recipients and subrecipients are encouraged to review information on the following technical assistance products. Interested parties can access these products through the relevant website or by contacting FTA’s Office of Civil Rights.

a.       “How to Engage Low-Literacy and Limited English Proficient Populations in Transportation Decision-making.” http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep/lowlim/. This report documents “best practices” in identifying and engaging low-literacy and limited-English-proficiency populations in transportation decision-making. These “best practices” were collected during telephone interviews with individuals in 30 States.

b.      “Disaster Response and Recovery Resource for Transit Agencies” http://transit-safety.volpe.dot.gov/Publications/order/singledoc.asp?docid=437. This resource provides local transit agencies and transportation providers with useful information and best practices in emergency preparedness and disaster response and recovery, including information on how to respond to the needs of low-income persons, limited English proficient persons, persons with disabilities, and older adults.   

Exhibit A – Safe Harbor Provision

The U.S. DOT has adopted the Department of Justice’s (DOJ’s) Safe Harbor Provision, which outlines circumstances that can provide a “safe harbor” for recipients regarding translation of written materials for LEP populations. The Safe Harbor Provision stipulates that, if a recipient provides written translation of vital documents for each eligible LEP language group that constitutes five percent (5%) or 1,000 persons, whichever is less, of the total population of persons eligible to be served or likely to be affected or encountered, then such action will be considered strong evidence of compliance with the recipient’s written translation obligations. Translation of non-vital documents, if needed, can be provided orally. If there are fewer than 50 persons in a language group that reaches the five percent (5%) trigger, the recipient is not required to translate vital written materials but should provide written notice in the primary language of the LEP language group of the right to receive competent oral interpretation of those written materials, free of cost.

These safe harbor provisions apply to the translation of written documents only. They do not affect the requirement to provide meaningful access to LEP individuals through competent oral interpreters where oral language services are needed and are reasonable. A recipient may determine, based on the Four Factor Analysis, that even though a language group meets the threshold specified by the Safe Harbor Provision, written translation may not be an effective means to provide language assistance measures. For example, a recipient may determine that a large number of persons in that language group have low literacy skills in their native language and therefore require oral interpretation. In such cases, background documentation regarding the determination shall be provided to FTA in the Title VI Program.