The standard approach for scoring Indicators is to calculate the ratio between the outcomes for the least and most advantaged racial/ethnic groups. This ratio is then converted to an Equity Score using a standard algorithm developed by CUNY ISLG. Scores are on a scale from 1 to 100, with 1 representing the highest possible inequity and 100 representing highest possible equity.

The purpose of Oakland’s Equity Indicators Report is to develop a baseline quantitative framework that can be used by City staff and community members alike to better understand the impacts of race, measure inequities, and track changes in the disparities for different groups over time. This framework can then be used to guide and inform policies that address these disparities.

Public health relates to many of the other Themes in the Equity Indicators framework. Public health outcomes are tied to housing quality, environment, and neighborhood. Social determinants of health include poverty, employment, and educational attainment. The public health field has historically been dedicated to understanding and addressing racial and ethnic disparities in health outcomes, but the complexity of these issues contributes to the persistence of inequity.

In Oakland and across the Bay Area, there are wide disparities in economic outcomes for different groups. Structural barriers in society result in some residents having more access than others to economic opportunities that build wealth and financial stability. This Theme not only includes the standard measures of economic well-being (e.g., unemployment, poverty) but it also evaluates racial and ethnic disparities in the quality of jobs, business development, and elements of financial health.

Education has long been an area of well-known disparities in outcomes across racial and ethnic groups, both in Oakland and throughout the country. Yet, education is also perhaps the single most powerful tool to rectify disparities in other Themes, such as Economy. This Theme includes measures that span from traditional measures of student attendance and achievement to measures of teachers, recognizing that teachers play a critical role in a child’s education.

Public Safety is a critical area of concern for any city. Though national conversations have recently brought a lot of attention to racial and ethnic disparities in public safety, this is a long-standing problem area that can have severe negative impacts on communities of color.

For a city to thrive, it is essential that neighborhoods are safe and accessible, and that residents have the opportunity to access city services and hold the city government accountable. Oakland residents face disparities based on where they live in the city, with majority non-White neighborhoods faring worse than majority White neighborhoods. Neighborhood differences rooted in historical segregation result in disparate outcomes for people of color, especially African American and Latino residents.

The Financial Health Topic includes three Indicators that consider economic security and stability through measures of banking, income, and poverty. The first Indicator measures disparities in the rate of access to healthy financial institutions in White and non-White zip codes. The second Indicator measures racial and ethnic disparities in median household income, while the third Indicator focuses on poverty.

The Oakland Equity Indicators framework is structured at four levels: Citywide, Theme, Topic, and Indicator. The Citywide framework consists of six Themes that cover broad areas of people’s lives: 1-Economy, 2-Education, 3-Public Health, 4-Housing, 5-Public Safety, and 6-Neighborhood and Civic Life. These Themes are not exhaustive, but were chosen based on areas of inequity in Oakland.

The Law Enforcement Topic includes three Indicators that measure disparities in police response times, stops, and use of force. The first Indicator measures disparities in police response times between Area 5 and Areas 1/3. This is a placeholder for this year that we plan to replace with an analysis of response times by police beat which can be more closely related to the racial and ethnic demographics of each beat. The second Indicator measures disparities in discretionary stops between African Americans and Asians. The third Indicator measures disparities in use of force between African Americans and Whites.