Indicators within Transportation

• Race & Commuting Time

  What is Measured?
  Ratio between the percentages of blacks and whites whose commute to work is an hour or more.

  What’s the Backstory?
  Long commutes have been linked to compromised physical and mental health and lower life satisfaction. In the US, racial and ethnic minorities, lower-wage and lower-skill workers, and people who live in high-poverty communities typically have longer commutes.

  What Did We Find?
  Black New Yorkers were the most likely to have commutes over one hour (25.9%), followed by Asians (19.4%), Hispanics (18.5%), and whites (12.6%). The percentage for blacks increased slightly from baseline, while the percentage for whites decreased, contributing to the moderate increase in inequality between the two groups. There was also a disparity between New Yorkers with disabilities (23.6%) and those without (17.8%). When broken down by borough, Bronx residents were the most likely to have a one hour commute or longer (29.4%), compared to 24.3% of Brooklyn, 20.8% of Staten Island, 14.5% of Queens, and 5.4% of Manhattan residents.
• Disability & Subway Accessibility

  What is Measured?
  Percentage of subway stations that are not wheelchair accessible.

  What’s the Backstory?
  Reliable transportation is critical to the independence, quality of life, and livelihood of people with physical disabilities. Barriers to public transportation are far too common, and in NYC an overwhelming majority of subway stations are not wheelchair accessible.

  What Did We Find?
  As of October 5, 2018, 80.1% of subway and Staten Island Railway stations were not accessible to people in wheelchairs, the same percentage as the previous year and slightly lower than baseline (84.1%). Only 98 stations in the NYC subway system and 5 Staten Island Railroad stations were wheelchair accessible. Thirteen stations are usually accessible but were inaccessible at the time of data collection due to construction or repairs. An additional two stations are only accessible on weekdays and were counted as not accessible in this analysis.
• Disability & Taxi Accessibility

  What is Measured?
  Percentage of taxis that are not wheelchair accessible.

  What’s the Backstory?
  Access to adequate transportation has major implications for people’s quality of life. Taxis are important to the mobility of people with physical disabilities, especially where public transit systems have barriers to accessibility. In NYC, only a small percentage of taxis are wheelchair accessible.

  What Did We Find?
  The percentage of NYC taxis that are not wheelchair accessible decreased from the baseline year (78.2%, down from 91.2%), but the majority of taxis remain inaccessible. In the current year, 2,466 of 13,587 yellow taxis were wheelchair accessible, or 18.1%. The percentage of Boro taxis that are accessible increased from baseline (33.0%, up from 17.5%), as did the number of accessible Boro taxis (1,487, up from 1,240). However, the total number of Boro taxis that serve Upper Manhattan and the outer boroughs dropped substantially from 7,077 in the baseline year to 4,505 in the current year.
• Location & Bike Lanes

  What is Measured?
  Ratio between the percentages of non-Manhattan and Manhattan census tracts without bicycle lanes.

  What’s the Backstory?
  Biking is a good source of exercise and has both environmental and health benefits. Designated bike lanes on roadways can improve safety for cyclists and pedestrians. In NYC, most bicycle lanes are concentrated in higher-income areas, with the greatest concentration in Manhattan.

  What Did We Find?
  Both Manhattan and the outer boroughs saw a decrease in the percentage of census tracts without bicycle lanes, but the disparity between the two increased. In Manhattan, 6.9% of census tracts did not have bicycle lanes (down from 11.1% in the baseline year), and 41.5% of census tracts in the outer boroughs did not have bicycle lanes (down from 51.4%). When looking only at on-street bicycle lanes, which are important for safety and commuting, 87.8% of census tracts in Manhattan had on-street bicycle lanes, compared to 55.1% of census tracts outside of Manhattan.

Indicators within Parks and Recreation

• Income & Access to Parks

  What is Measured?
  Ratio between the percentages of residents in the bottom and top income groups who do not live within a 5-minute walk of a park.

  What’s the Backstory?
  Access to parks and their services has economic, health, environmental, and social benefits. People who have park access exercise more, which affects physical and mental health. In the US, people with lower income have less access to parks.

  What Did We Find?
  Individuals in both the top and bottom income groups were more likely to report lack of access to parks in the current year, but the income-based disparity saw a large improvement from baseline. While likely reflecting some change in perceived access to parks, this change may also have been due, in part, to differences in the number of respondents in each income group between the 2015 and 2018 ISLG public surveys. Among people with an annual income below $30,000, 26.7% reported that they did not live within a 5-minute walk of a park (up from 19.4% at baseline), compared to 26.2% of those with an annual income above $150,000 (up from 16.2%). There were also disparities by borough, with 43.6% of Staten Island residents reporting lack of park access, compared to 28.3% of Queens, 22.5% of Brooklyn, 19.5% of Bronx, and 11.3% of Manhattan residents.
• Disability & Playground Accessibility

  What is Measured?
  Percentage of playgrounds not accessible to children with physical disabilities.

  What’s the Backstory?
  Play is critical to a child’s social, emotional, cognitive, and physical development, and playgrounds provide affordable, meaningful opportunities for physical and social activity. Many playgrounds have limited accessibility and often isolate children who have a disability.

  What Did We Find?
  In the current year, 86 out of 1,253 playgrounds citywide (6.9%) were not accessible to children with disabilities, while 1,167 were fully or partially accessible (93.1%), a large improvement from the baseline year when 35.8% of playgrounds were not accessible. Playground accessibility also improved in all five boroughs. In the current year, 10.5% of Bronx playgrounds, 7.0% of Staten Island playgrounds, 6.5% of Queens playgrounds, 6.1% of Brooklyn playgrounds, and 4.9% of Manhattan playgrounds were not accessible. The increased level of accessibility is due, in part, to recent efforts by the Department of Parks and Recreation (Parks) to inspect playgrounds and update the accessibility data available on the Parks website.
• Disability & Recreation Center Accessibility

  What is Measured?
  Percentage of City recreation centers not accessible to individuals with physical disabilities.

  What’s the Backstory?
  Recreation benefits individuals and communities, resulting in better health and stronger neighborhoods and providing a free or low-cost way to take part in games, sports, and other activities. People with disabilities may be excluded from the benefits some recreation centers provide due to inaccessibility.

  What Did We Find?
  Recreation centers include NYC Parks’ standard recreation centers, as well as field houses, which offer more limited facilities and programming, and community centers, which are operated by community-based organizations through an agreement with NYC Parks. Citywide, 12 out of 50 City recreation centers (24.0%) were not accessible to individuals with a physical disability, while 38 recreation centers (76.0%) were fully accessible. Both the total number of recreation centers and the number that are inaccessible increased from the baseline year, when 10 out of 49 City recreation centers (20.4%) were not accessible. In the current year, four out of 10 facilities in the Bronx, one out of seven in Brooklyn, one out of 15 in Manhattan, three out of 11 in Queens, and three out of seven in Staten Island were inaccessible.
• Location & Access to Senior Centers

  What is Measured?
  Ratio between the numbers of senior centers per 100,000 people aged 75 and older outside and within Manhattan.

  What’s the Backstory?
  Senior centers play an important role in the lives of many older adults, particularly those with lower incomes and fewer independent resources. Senior centers provide services, activities, and sometimes meals, and proximity to one is associated with ease of access and frequency of participation.

  What Did We Find?
  The number of senior centers per 100,000 people aged 75 and older decreased from baseline both in Manhattan (52.599, down from 59.185), and outside Manhattan (46.756, down from 49.593), but the disparity between the two improved slightly. Among the outer boroughs, the Bronx had the highest rate of senior centers (61.357), followed by Brooklyn (52.855), Staten Island (36.202), and Queens (35.269). The average daily attendance rate for senior centers (including social clubs) was highest in Manhattan (122 participants), followed by Queens (117), Staten Island (96), Brooklyn (93), and the Bronx (80).

Indicators within Essential Needs and Services

• Race & Hot/Cold Running Water

  What is Measured?
  Ratio between the percentages of Hispanic and Asian households that do not have hot and cold running water at home.

  What’s the Backstory?
  A lack of safe drinking water and water for washing are two primary features of substandard housing, and can contribute to the spread of infectious disease. Water supply type has also been connected to mortality from heart disease. In the US, blacks and Hispanics are more likely to live in poor-quality housing.

  What Did We Find?
  In the current year, Hispanics remained the racial and ethnic group most likely to not have hot and cold running water (0.372%), followed by Blacks (0.327%). Asians (0.122%) and whites (0.170%) were the two groups least likely to lack this essential service. The percentages were similar to the baseline year for Hispanics and blacks (0.378% and 0.322%, respectively), while the percentages for Asians and whites decreased from baseline (0.250% and 0.323%, respectively). There were also income-based disparities in the current year: individuals living at or below the poverty level were more likely to not have hot and cold running water (0.512%) than those living above the poverty level (0.197%).
• Race & Internet Access

  What is Measured?
  Ratio between the percentages of blacks and Asians who do not have high-speed Internet at home.

  What’s the Backstory?
  Internet access not only provides information but contributes to employment opportunities, education, social interaction, and personal development. In the US, blacks and Hispanics, and people residing in low-income households are less likely to have high-speed Internet than whites or those with higher incomes.

  What Did We Find?
  While the percentage of people without high-speed Internet at home decreased from baseline for both blacks (from 21.2% to 13.5%) and Asians (from 11.3% to 4.1%), the disparity between the two groups increased. The percentage of whites without access also decreased from baseline (from 16.3% to 7.1%), but the percentage of Hispanics increased and was the highest of all racial and ethnic groups in the current year (19.3%, up from 18.5%). Access also varied by income: 18.3% of those making less than $30,000 did not have high-speed Internet, compared to 2.3% of those making more than $150,000.
• Immigration Status & Stove/Range

  What is Measured?
  Ratio between the percentages of foreign-born and US-born households that do not have a stove or range at home.

  What’s the Backstory?
  The ability to cook at home allows individuals and families greater control over their diet and helps them to manage their food budgets. Households without a stove or range have fewer options for home cooking, which may reduce options for healthy eating and time spent with family.

  What Did We Find?
  Immigrant households (0.671%) were more likely than those of US-born New Yorkers (0.443%) not to have a stove or range. In the current year, both groups saw decreases from baseline when 0.721% of foreign-born households and 0.509% of US-born households did not have a stove or range at home. Among immigrant households, lack of access was higher among non-citizens (0.794%) than among naturalized citizens (0.577%). When broken down by race and ethnicity, Asian households were much more likely to lack a stove or range (0.979%), compared to black households (0.573%), Hispanic households (0.442%), and white households (0.407%).
• Location & EMS Response Times

  What is Measured?
  Ratio between the average EMS incident response times to life-threatening medical emergencies outside and within Manhattan.

  What’s the Backstory?
  Emergency Medical Service (EMS) teams respond to many different kinds of emergencies, including those that are life-threatening such as cardiac arrest, choking, and difficulty breathing. Short response times to these emergencies are essential for residents’ safety and can help save lives.

  What Did We Find?
  EMS incident response times in the outer boroughs decreased from baseline (from 418.424 seconds to 405.898) but increased in Manhattan (from 386.053 to 399.118). In the current year, Staten Island had the shortest average response time (379.787 seconds), followed by Manhattan, the Bronx (405.568), Queens (407.826), and Brooklyn (408.970). The disparity between Manhattan and the outer boroughs has decreased, and the average response time citywide has gone down from 410.490 seconds at baseline to 404.211 in the current year.

Indicators within Arts and Culture

• Income & Funding for the Arts

  What is Measured?
  Ratio between the percentages of organizations receiving City funding for the arts that are located in the bottom and top income areas.

  What’s the Backstory?
  Access to the arts improves people’s quality of life, fosters children’s development, and benefits communities in numerous ways. Racial and ethnic minorities report that at times they don’t attend cultural events and establishments because they cannot get there easily, yet funding tends to be concentrated in wealthy areas.

  What Did We Find?
  The NYC Department of Cultural Affairs awarded $36,761,433 to 879 arts organizations in the current year. Among organizations with physical mailing addresses (e.g., no PO boxes) located in census tracts with available income data, 71 (8.4%) were located in the bottom 20% median income census tracts, while 471 (55.8%) were located in the top 20%. These results show slight improvement from baseline, when 7.3% of funded organizations were in the bottom 20% census tracts and 55.2% were in the top 20%. In the current year, the majority of funded organizations were located in Manhattan (62.8%), followed distantly by Brooklyn (23.2%), Queens (7.7%), the Bronx (4.1%), and Staten Island (2.2%).
• Location & Senior Access to the Arts

  What is Measured?
  Ratio between the numbers of artist placements per 100,000 people 75 and older outside and within Manhattan.

  What’s the Backstory?
  Mental and physical activity and socialization are key to adults maintaining cognitive functioning as they age. For older adults, participating in arts activities can provide opportunities for all three, and having a dedicated artist-in-residence can increase the likelihood of participation in the arts.

  What Did We Find?
  The Department for the Aging has a program to place artists in senior centers throughout NYC, currently called SU-CASA (which evolved from Seniors Partnering with Artists Citywide). From baseline, the number of artist placements in Manhattan rose from 14 to 35, while outside Manhattan it rose from 36 to 152. Accordingly, the placement rate per 100,000 people 75 and older within Manhattan rose from 13.364 in the baseline year to 29.221 in the current year, while the placement rate outside Manhattan rose from 9.446 to 36.076, a higher rate than within Manhattan. Among non-Manhattan boroughs, the placement rate was 32.911 in Staten Island, 33.986 in Queens, 37.385 in Brooklyn, and 38.818 in the Bronx.
• Location & Public Library Availability

  What is Measured?
  Ratio between the percentages of New York Public Library and non-NYPL branches open six days a week.

  What’s the Backstory?
  Most people in the US say they or someone in their household has used a public library not only for books and DVDs, but to use the Internet, computers, and printers. Public funding for libraries is necessary to sustain or increase operating hours, which in turn support increases in visitation and circulation.

  What Did We Find?
  Currently, all branches of the NYPL, the Brooklyn Public Library (BPL), and the Queens Borough Public Library (QPL) are open at least six days a week. In the baseline year, 100% of NYPL branches were open at least six days a week, while 65% of BPL branches and 33% of QPL branches were open at least six days a week. Some disparities remain, however: in the current year, the average weekly scheduled open hours were highest for NYPL branches (50.0), followed by BPL branches (49.3) and QPL branches (46.0). Very few libraries are open seven days a week: 8% of NYPL branches, 8% of BPL branches, 3% of QPL branches, and 25% of NYPL research libraries are open daily.
• Parental Education & Children’s Arts Participation

  What is Measured?
  Ratio between the percentages of children whose parents have the least and most education who do not participate in arts activities.

  What’s the Backstory?
  Arts programs and education can enhance children’s academic, intellectual, social, behavioral, and emotional development. In the US, higher educational attainment may lead to more participation in the arts, and children whose parents had arts education are more likely to participate in arts activities.

  What Did We Find?
  The percentage of parents with less than a high school diploma who report that their children do not participate in arts activities in or out of school decreased from baseline (from 41.9% to 36.7%), but remained higher than the percentage of parents with a professional or graduate degree (25.4%, relatively unchanged from baseline). These findings are likely related to income-based disparities in the current year: 30.9% of parents making less than $30,000 reported a lack of arts activities for their children, compared to 13.0% of those making more than $150,000. There were also disparities by immigrant status: non-participation rates were higher for children of foreign-born parents (31.3%) compared to US-born parents (18.8%).