Revised City of South Bend Disparity Study Report

Home Browse Search

City of South Bend Disoarity Study 2020 The narrow tailoring prong has been met by satisfying five factors to ensure that the remedy "fits" the evidence: 1. The necessity of relief; 2. The efficacy of race -neutral remedies at overcoming identified discrimination; 3. The flexibility and duration of the relief, including the availability of waiver provisions; 4. The relationship of numerical goals to the relevant market; and 5. The impact of the relief on the rights of third parties. Classifications not based upon a suspect class (e.g., race, ethnicity, religion, national origin or gender) are subject to the lesser standard of review called "ratio- nal basis" scrutiny. Thus, preferences for persons with disabilities orveteran status may be enacted with vastly less evidence than is required for race- or gender- based measures meant to combat historic discrimination. To meet strict scrutiny, studies have been conducted to gather the statistical and anecdotal evidence necessary to support the use of race- and gender -conscious measures to combat discrimination. These are commonly referred to as "disparity studies" because they analyze any disparities between the opportunities and experiences of minority- and woman -owned firms and their actual utilization com- pared to White male -owned businesses. Quality studies also examine the ele- ments of the agency's program to determine whether it is sufficiently narrowly tailored. This Report meets these tests. B. Study Methodology and Data The methodology for this study embodies the constitutional principles of City of Richmond v.. Croson, and best practices for designing race- and gender -conscious and small business contracting programs. The CHA approach has been specifically upheld by the federal courts. It is also the approach developed by Ms. Holt for the National Academy of Sciences that is now the recommended standard for design- ing legally defensible disparity studies. We determined the City's utilization of M/WBEs and the availability of M/WBEs in its geographic and industry market area. We then compared utilization to avail- ability to calculate disparity ratios between those two measures. We further ana- lyzed disparities in the wider economy, where affirmative action is rarely practiced, to evaluate whether barriers continue to impede opportunities for minorities and women when remedial intervention is not imposed. We gathered anecdotal data on M/WBEs' experiences with obtaining City contracts and associ- ated subcontracts. We examined race- and gender-based barriers throughout the © 2020 Colette Holt & Associates, All Rights Reserved.