Community Action Plan - CEDApeople reside in Suburban Cook County. In order to better describe and plan services for the communities of suburban Cook County, CEDA has defined its service

Prepared by the Community & Economic Development Association of Cook County, Inc.

567 W. Lake Street Chicago, Illinois 60661 (312) 782-2332 www.cedaorg.net

Submitted to The Illinois Department of Commerce & Economic Opportunity

August 2015

Community Action Plan Community and Economic Development Association of Cook County

Contents I. COMMUNITY ACTION PLAN SUMMARY ............................................................................................... 3

II. Needs Assessment ................................................................................................................................ 6

........................................................................................................................................ 7 The North Region

PRIMARY DATA NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEYS .................................................................................. 11

OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................................... 11

RESULTS............................................................................................................................................... 12

NEEDS ASSESSMENTS SURVEY RESULTS - NORTH REGION .................................................................... 12

PRIMARY DATA - COMMUNITY FORUMS AND FOCUS GROUPS ............................................................. 18

OVERVIEW ........................................................................................................................................... 18

At-Risk Youth Focus Group - Evanston ................................................................................................ 19

Evanston Community Forum .............................................................................................................. 19

NORTH REGION CONCLUSIONS .............................................................................................................. 19

...................................................................................................................................... 21 The South Region

PRIMARY DATA - SOUTH REGION NEEDS ASSESSMENTS SURVEY RESULTS ........................................... 25

PRIMARY DATA - SOUTH REGION COMMUNITY FORUMS AND FOCUS GROUPS ................................... 30

Provider Focus Group – Richton Park ................................................................................................. 30

Community Forum - Park Forest ......................................................................................................... 31

Low-Income Focus Group – Richton Park ........................................................................................... 31

SOUTH REGION CONCLUSIONS ............................................................................................................... 32

........................................................................................................................................ 33 The West Region

NEEDS ASSESSMENTS SURVEY RESULTS - WEST REGION ....................................................................... 37

PRIMARY DATA - WEST REGION COMMUNITY FORUMS AND FOCUS GROUPS ..................................... 42

Maywood Community Forum ............................................................................................................. 42

WEST REGION CONCLUSION ................................................................................................................... 43

III. Description of Service Delivery System .......................................................................................... 44

SERVICE LOCATIONS................................................................................................................................ 44

ADDRESSING TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS ............................................................................................ 44

ADDRESSING LANGUAGE BARRIERS ....................................................................................................... 45

CONTRACTED SERVICES .......................................................................................................................... 45

EFFECTIVENESS OF SERVICES .................................................................................................................. 45

MEASURING SUCCESS OF SERVICE DELIVERY ......................................................................................... 46 CEDA 2016 CAP SUMMARY Page 1

IV. Description of Linkages ................................................................................................................... 49

OUTREACH .............................................................................................................................................. 49

INFORMATION AND REFERRAL ............................................................................................................... 49

CASE MANAGEMENT AND FOLLOW-UP ................................................................................................. 49

V. Coordination ................................................................................................................................... 50

VI. Innovative Community and Neighborhood Based Initiatives ......................................................... 51

VII. Youth Programming ........................................................................................................................ 52

VIII. Outcome ......................................................................................................................................... 53

Appendices .................................................................................................................................................. 59

Appendix 1 - Needs Assessment Survey Instruments ............................................................................. 59

Appendix 2 - Needs Assessment Data Graphs ........................................................................................ 64

Appendix 3 Map of CEDA Service Locations...................................................................................... 74

Appendix 4 “Family Nutrition Sites for CEDA CSBG” .......................................................................... 75

Appendix 5- Coalitions, Collaborations, and Associations .............................................................. 76

Appendix 6 “Partner and MOU Sites for CEDA CSBG” ....................................................................... 77

Appendix 7 – LIHEAP sites ....................................................................................................................... 78

CEDA 2016 CAP SUMMARY Page 2

I. COMMUNITY ACTION PLAN SUMMARY The 2016 Community Action Plan functions as a guide for developing CSBG programs and for prioritizing other resources of the Community and Economic Development Association of Cook County, Inc. (CEDA). CEDA is a private Community Action Agency providing community and economic development programs and direct social services that address the needs of low-income residents and communities in Cook County, Illinois. It is CEDA’s mission to work in partnership with communities to empower families and individuals to achieve self-sufficiency and improve their quality of life.

The 2016 Community Action Plan was developed by assessing current community conditions and needs in order to identify trends, priorities, and gaps in service. The Program Planning and Evaluation Committee of CEDA’s tri-partite Board of Directors provided input and oversite for staff during the development of this plan. The final draft Community Action Plan was reviewed and approved by the Board’s Executive Committee and the Board as a whole.

CSBG funds awarded to CEDA are used to plan and provide a range of services to address the needs of low-income persons and ameliorate the causes and conditions of poverty in Suburban Cook County. Funds are used for activities to help families and individuals achieve self-sufficiency, find and retain meaningful employment, attain an adequate education, make better use of available income, obtain adequate housing, and achieve greater participation in community affairs.

In 2015 CEDA used CSBG funds to deliver Dental Care, Auto Repair, Vision Care, Water Bill Assistance, Family Nutrition, Nutrition Education, Financial Literacy, Scholarships, Skills Training, and Employment Services. CSBG additionally supported special initiatives to build agency capacity for coordinating community resources, creating linkages, and delivering quality services in Suburban Cook County.

The Community Action Plan is presented in seven sections. Needs Assessment Section The assessment of the community served by CEDA is presented in three sub-sections to describe each of CEDA’s North Region, South Region, and West Region in order to better analyze and describe the communities of suburban Cook County. CEDA examined and analyzed data from numerous secondary sources including US Census, Illinois Department of Employment Security, Cook County Planning Department, and Illinois Board of Education. Primary data for community assessment was collected by surveying 1,237 low-income residents and 104 stakeholders in Suburban Cook County and by holding community forums or focus groups with low-income residents and stakeholders across the service area. The appendixes to this section contain graphs designed to visually summarize much of the needs assessment data. Each regional sub-section also contains a brief conclusion with key insights drawn from the data.

Description of Service Delivery Systems CEDA delivers services in all three suburban regions through centralized management, using a combination of contracted entities and agency staff. CEDA is purposeful in locating service


offices and partner organization to make services accessible throughout its service area and to reduce transportation barriers and language barriers for residents needing assistance. CEDA uses information from client records, and client satisfaction surveys to measure effectiveness of its service delivery system. The success of services is measured and reported using ROMA national performance indicators.

Description of Linkages CEDA’s outreach is conducted at all tiers in the agency and its partner organizations. A new agency marketing team was recently created to improve CEDA’s outreach. CEDA has agency-wide and program-specific systems in place for providing Information and Referral, Case Management and Follow-up which are described in this section.

Coordination CEDA makes use of many formal and informal partnerships and networks in the community to coordinate resources. Coordination of internal resources is dependent on cross-referrals between all programs as well as strong organizational communications.

Innovative Community & Neighborhood-Based Initiatives Four pilot CSBG work programs launched in 2015, Financial Literacy, Nutrition Education, Employment Program and Skills Training Program, will be continued or incorporated into a newly defined case management work program. CEDA will be part of a collaborative effort exploring the creation of a 2-1-1 information and referral system for suburban Cook County.

Youth Programming CEDA’s Educational Talent Search provides college preparation skills and knowledge for students and families in Cook County’s most needy of school districts.

Outcome After analysis of all community data, including direct input from low-income residents, CEDA is able to articulation problem statements for the identified needs. CEDA designed programs to address community needs and fill gaps in services. CEDA will use its CSBG funds to provide these services:

Auto Repair Case Management Dental Care Employment Family Nutrition

Rental Assistance Scholarships Skills Training Vision Care


CEDA Community and Economic Development Association of Cook County

CEDA 2016 CAP

II. Needs Assessment

The Community and Economic Development Association of Cook County (CEDA) covers a large and

complex planning and service area: Suburban Cook County - all of the county other than the City of

Chicago. Through other grants arrangements, CEDA does provide certain services (LIHEAP,

Weatherization, WIC, and Housing counseling) within Chicago, however this is not within CEDA’s

planning area as a Community Action Agency.

CEDA’s 1,400 square-mile service area is home to 125 municipalities, 30 townships, more than 1000

schools, and some of the wealthiest and poorest populations in the country. More than 2.5 million

people reside in Suburban Cook County.

In order to better describe and plan services for the communities of suburban Cook County, CEDA has

defined its service as three regions: North Region, South Region, and West Region. There are socio-

economic characteristics that unite the various communities within each region that join them in more

than just geography. This document endeavors to describe those attributes in a way that will allow the

reader a clearer understanding of the complex community that is Suburban Cook County.

CEDA 2016 CAP II. NEEDS ASSESSMENT Page 6

The North Region

CEDA’s North Region is defined as 11 townships in the northern section of suburban Cook County, bordered by Lake County, Kane County and DuPage County. These townships are:

Barrington Township, Palatine Township, Wheeling Township, Northfield Township, New Trier Township, Hanover Township, Schaumburg Township. Elk Grove Township, Maine Township, Niles Township, and Evanston Township (the City of Evanston).

Approximately 1,074,000 people reside in CEDA’s North Region. It is the largest region, and the most affluent. The region contains all or part of 34 municipalities. These range from very small (500 residents) to medium sized cities (100,000 residents). Notable among these North Region municipalities is Kenilworth, the nation’s wealthiest village, whose 2,500 residents have an estimated per capita


income of almost $98,0001. But even near such wealth, approximately 8.6% of the region’s population, or some 92,000 people live at or below the federal poverty line.2

Like the rest of CEDA’s service area the population of the North Region is growing increasingly diverse. Between 2000 and present, the percentage of white residents has decreased, while the percentage of minority residents, especially Asian and Hispanic has increased measurably. This trend is expected to continue over the next few years. The African-American percentage of the region’s population has remained stable at approximately 4% over the same period. White residents still comprise nearly 70% of the North Region population.

West Region-

(*Data in charts above comes from the US 2000 Census and ACS 2013 1-year estimates.)

1 City-Data.com August 18, 2015 http://www.city-data.com/city/Kenilworth-Illinois.html 2 US Census. American Community Survey 2013 3-year estimate.

White 77%

Black 4%

Asian 10%

Hispanic 9%

North Region ethnic/racial makeup 2000 *

White 69%

Black 4%

Asian 13%

Hispanic 14%

North Region ethnic/racial makeup 2013 *

839472 783385

38434 39188 108358 151267

102330 157557

0100000200000300000400000500000600000700000800000900000

2000 2013

North Region ethnic/racial change 2000- 2013 *

White

Black

Asian

Hispanic


http://www.city-data.com/city/Kenilworth-Illinois.html

The region’s per capita income of $38,491 is 31% higher than the Illinois per capita income ($29,338). The educational attainment level in this region is also higher than the Illinois state average. The percent of adults with less than a high school diploma is 9.4% in the North Region, compared to 12.5% for Illinois. College degrees have been earned by 47.5% of all North Regional adults, compared to 31.7% of all Illinois adults. 3 Average home values in the North Region $365,7824 is more than double the Illinois state median value of $182,300. The average gross rent in the region at $1,188 is 34% above the state median.

Suburban Cook County contains 28 public high-school districts with 60 high schools. The number and percentage of low-income students, graduation rates and measures of college readiness vary significantly among regions and within regions. Higher percentages of poverty, lower graduation rates and lower rates of college readiness among high school graduates correlate with high levels of economic distress.

The North Region has 8 school districts with 22 high schools. Among the districts, the percentage of low-income students ranges from 3% to 41% with a regional rate of 20%. Graduation rates are highest in the North Region and range from 88% in Evanston HSD 202 to 97% in New Trier District 203, with a regional average of 95%. In addition, the percentage of graduates ready for college, as measured by ACT composite scores, is 76%, the highest among CEDA’s regions. District rates vary from 57% to 90%.5

3 US Census data: ACS 2013 3-year estimates. 4 Average home value and Gross rent calculation for each region was calculated by summing the median gross rent and median home value in each township as estimated in the US Census 2009-2013 American Community Survey 5-year estimates, then dividing the sum by the number of townships. 5 Source for high school district data is the 2014 District Snapshot Profiles, Illinois State Board of Education. https://illinoisreportcard.com/ CEDA 2016 CAP II. NEEDS ASSESSMENT Page 9

https://illinoisreportcard.com/

2014 SUBURBAN COOK COUNTY PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT PROFILE

North Region High School Districts Total Enrollment

# High Schools

% Low-Income Students6

Graduation Rate7

% Ready for College8

All Suburban Cook 31% 55% 51%

Evanston Dist. 202 3,122 1 41% 88% 60%

New Trier Twp Dist 203 (Winnetka) 4,206 2 3% 97% 90%

Township Dist 207 (Park Ridge) 6,394 3 29% 89% 59%

Township Dist 211 (Palatine) 12,265 5 30% 94% 62%

Township Dist 214 (Arlington Heights) 11,989 6 6% 91% 66%

Niles Twp Dist 219 (Skokie) 4,841 2 38% 93% 57%

Barrington Dist 220 (Also serves Lake Cnty) 3,069 1 20% 95% 78%

Northfield Twp Dist 225 (Glenview) 4,843 2 24% 96% 83%

North Region Totals 50,729 22 22% 93% 76%

While the whole of Cook County has seen a modest decline in the unemployment rate over the past year, Cook County has an unemployment rate 6.2% (April 2015), higher than the state average of 5.5.9. The North Region fares better, with an estimated unemployment rate of 5.15%10.

All kinds of business can be found in the North Region. Multi-story corporate centers rise over the highway interchanges in the northwest suburbs. For some county residents, their image of the north suburbs is large upscale shopping or discount malls. There is also major manufacturing. According to data from Illinois Department of Employment Security, the private industries employing the most people fall under the following North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) classifications: Health care & social assistance; Retail, trade; Manufacturing; Accommodations & food services; Administration & support services; Professional, scientific & technical services.11 The largest employers include

6 Low-income students receive or live in households that receive SNAP or TANF; are classified as homeless, migrant, runaway, Head Start of foster children; or live in a household where the household income meets the USDA) income guidelines to receive free or reduced-price meals. The % of low-income students is the count of low-income students, divided by the total fall enrollment, multiplied by 100. 7 of first-time 9th graders in fall 2010 starting cohort plus students who transfer in, minus students who transfer out, emigrate, or die during school years 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and through summer 2014. 8 Ready for college course work is the percentage of students who achieved a combined score of at least 21 on the ACT. 9 US Department of Labor; Bureau of Labor Statistics. http://www.bls.gov/home.htm 10 This estimate was calculated by averaging the unemployment rates of the 20 different local areas within the North Region as reported by Illinois Department of Employment Security: Unemployment Rates for the State, Metro Areas, Counties, and Cities. Not Seasonally Adjusted. June 2015.June 2015. 11 Where Workers Work 2015, Illinois Department of Employment Security. Data accessed online at http://www.ides.illinois.gov/Pages/Data_Statistics.aspx. CEDA 2016 CAP II. NEEDS ASSESSMENT Page 10

http://www.bls.gov/home.htm

http://www.ides.illinois.gov/Pages/Data_Statistics.aspx

hospitals and universities, Northwestern University (Evanston), Motorola (Schaumburg); United Airlines (Elk Grove Township)12

The North Region has more limited English households, and more language diversity than the rest of CEDA’s service area. According to US census data, there are an estimated 40,215 households in the region without anyone over age 14 who speaks English fluently. Of these limited English households, only 32% are Spanish-speaking. Other Indo-European languages are spoken by 43%; and 22% speak Asian and Pacific languages.13 There have long been sizable numbers of Polish and Russian immigrants in the Region. There is also a visible Korean community, but numbers are increasing recently for other nationalities including Indian and Pakistani, Vietnamese, and Chinese. Research by the Illinois Coalition for Immigration and Refugee Rights estimates that more than 60,000 undocumented immigrants may be residing in the North Region, with concentrations in Hanover, Elk Grove, and Wheeling townships.14

Despite the relative affluence of the North Region, single female households with children show an alarming 21% estimated rate of poverty compared to 8.6% for all individuals. Young single mothers fare even worse. Nearly a third of all female-headed households with children under 5 years only are estimated to be below poverty. Older adults, 65 and over in unrelated living, have a poverty rate of 17%, double the general population of the North Region.15

PRIMARY DATA NEEDS ASSESSMENT SURVEYS

OVERVIEW The importance of collecting needs assessment surveys and conducting community forums and focus groups is expressed in the newly adopted national Community Action Organizational Standards: “Individuals and families are well attuned to what they need, and when Community Action taps into that knowledge, it informs our ability to implement high-impact programs and services.” Throughout its 50 year history, CEDA has embraced the fundamental tenant of Community Action as stated in IM 138, “Community Action is rooted in the belief that people with low incomes are in the best position to express what they need to make a difference in their lives.” Because of this belief, CEDA worked diligently in 2015 to gather the insights and opinions of low-income residents throughout its services areas, with a focus on suburban Cook County with a Community Needs Assessment Survey. A separate survey of stakeholders (other community organizations, governmental agencies, business, and health and education professionals) gives added depth to CEDA’s knowledge of the community it works to serve.

The survey instrument was drafted by staff based on the tool that CEDA's management team created in 2014. The draft was presented to the Board Program Planning and Evaluation Committee in March, 2015. Recommendations from the committee were incorporated into the final version of the

12 Chicago’s Largest Employers, Crain’s Chicago Business, January 17, 2015. Issue 2. 13 US Census data: Household language by household limited English speaking status. 2009- 2013 5-year estimates. 14Tsao, Fred. Illinois Undocumented Immigrant Population: A summary of recent research by Rob Paral and Associates .Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. (February 2014). Township level estimates found at https://a.tiles.mapbox.com/v3/robparal.map-yvlwapph/page.html?secure=1#10/41.7575/-87.4570 . 15 US Census, 2009-2013 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. CEDA 2016 CAP II. NEEDS ASSESSMENT Page 11

https://a.tiles.mapbox.com/v3/robparal.map-yvlwapph/page.html?secure=1%2310/41.7575/-87.4570

Needs Assessment Survey instrument. CEDA developed a survey instrument that captured family demographic information from respondents; asked respondents to rate the severity of 32 different issues; to identify the singly most critical of those concerns to them; and to evaluate the quality of 15 different community services as they currently exist in their community. Stakeholder surveys asked identical questions to rank the concerns as respondents understand them among their clients and constituents; identical question for rating of community services; and questions to identify the type of responding entity as well as its potential as an employer and as a partner for CEDA to provide successful services. (See Appendix 1 for copies of the survey instruments). These surveys were produced as paper documents and were also produced as online surveys linked from CEDA’s website. Online community surveys were published in English and Spanish. Paper surveys were produced in English, Spanish, Russian, and Arabic.

RESULTS Between May 15 and June 30, 2015, a total of 1,237 community survey responses and 104 stakeholder responses were collected by CEDA. Surveys were collected from CEDA clients and from the community at large during job fairs. CEDA worked with community partners such as Operation Able, Arab American Family Services, township offices, and other community partners to gather responses from their customers as well. Of the community responses, 230 came from North Region; 438 from the South; and 453 from the West Region. 103 Responses came from Chicago residents. The dozen remaining came from outside of Cook County. For the purpose of planning services for CEDA’s catchment area, only suburban Cook County responses to the Community Needs Assessment Survey are analyzed in this document.

NEEDS ASSESSMENTS SURVEY RESULTS - NORTH REGION CEDA received 230 Community Needs Assessment Survey responses from North Region residents.

Who Responded 16 In all CEDA regions, responses came predominantly from female respondents, with a 75:25 ratio female to male response rate in the North Region.

By ethnic and racial makeup, North Region respondents were 38% African American; 33% white; 5% Asian; 2% Native American or Alaskan Native; 5% multi-race; and 18% other race. Hispanic residents accounted for 23% of surveys received. These respondents reflect the diverse community of the North Region.

For almost 20% of these completing the North Region surveys, the main language spoken at home is not English. 14% use Spanish; 2% speak Russian; 1.5% use Arabic; another 1.5% use Polish; 0.7% speak Vietnamese; and 3.5% speak some other language than the nine most common presented as a choice for selection by survey respondents.

The income level of the respondents is very low, with 56% living on household incomes under $15,000 per year. Only 18% of all respondents reported annual household incomes over $30,000. Nearly half reported income from full-time employment, part-time employment, or self-employment.

16 See Appendix 2 for graphs of Needs Survey response demographics for all regions CEDA 2016 CAP II. NEEDS ASSESSMENT Page 12

14% of North Region respondent households did not finish high school or equivalency. But more than 40% reported someone in the home with a college degree or vocational certification, and 6% have a household member with a post-graduate degree.

Adults between age 30 and 50 completed 45% of the North Region surveys. Adults over age 50 accounted for 32%, with 9% completed by people over age 65. Younger adults 18 to 30 years old completed 22% of surveys. Only 1% were collected from youth under 18 years old. Just 4% of North Region survey sources were military veteran or active duty households.

Only 21% of the North Region survey respondents own their own home. The majority, 56% are renters. 5% identified as homeless, and 18% reported living with family or friends.

What Responses Tell Us NEEDS RANKING METHODOLOGY CEDA’s Needs Assessment Survey asked respondents whether they view 32 different issues as Critical Concern, Somewhat a Concern, or Not at all a Concern. The issues listed in the survey addressed a variety of life circumstance around housing, employment, finance, family, community, health, education, and transportation. To analyze the survey results, the responses were assigned numeric values: Critical Concern=2; Somewhat a Concern=1; Not at all a Concern=0. The sum of the numeric value for each issue is divided by the number of responses yielding a “Needs Ranking” value between 0.0 and 2.0 for each issue. Higher ranking indicates more respondents view this as a more critical issue for themselves, their household, or their neighborhood.


Twelve issues in the Needs Ranking earned a value of >1.00 in the analysis of North Region responses. “Increasing Income” was consistently the top ranked issue in all regions. This is understandable in that increased income would be a natural goal for people with low incomes (as indeed, it might be for anyone). Unfortunately, the survey did not allow for deeper analysis of this issue. It is not clear if the problem involves more work hours, better wages, increased retirement benefit, etc. Lacking those follow-up questions, CEDA does not have enough information to design solutions for this identified need. The remaining top concerns in the North Region were, in order:

2. Dental and/or Vision Care3. Housing / rent costs4. Help paying utility bill(s)5. Food costs6. Paying for college/higher education7. Reducing utility costs8. Finding a job9. Health insurance/ Healthcare Costs10. Transportation11. Job Training12. Access to healthy foods

1.00

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

1.50

1.60

1.70

Top ranked concerns NORTH REGION respondents


METHODOLOGY FOR MEASURING URGENT NEEDS A separate question in the survey asks respondents to identify the single most important and immediate need for their household. These “Urgent Needs” responses are analyzed by simply counting the number of each. Results contained in this document are reported by percentage: total number of incident of each response divided by the number of all non-blank responses. The Urgent Needs data give additional information when examined along with the Needs Ranking. CEDA looked at both data sets equally in defining the needs and circumstances of people with low incomes in Suburban Cook County.

The Urgent Needs identified by North Region respondents (listed here in order of frequency the need was cited) were:

1. Housing /rent costs2. Finding a job3. Transportation4. Dental and/or Vision Care5. Increasing income6. Help paying utility bill(s)7. Food costs8. Paying for college/higher education9. Job Training10. Credit card or loan debt

11. Reducing utility costs12. Homelessness13. Affordable daycare or before/after

school care14. Programs for youth/teens15. Health Insurance/ Healthcare Costs16. Children’s education/tutoring17. Neighborhood Safety and Security18. Immigration/citizenship issues19. Services for Disabled people

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16%

Housing /rent costs

Finding a job

Transportation

Dental and/or Vision Care

Increasing income

Help paying utility bill(s)

Food costs

Paying for college/higher education

Job Training

Credit card or loan debt

Top 10 Most Urgent Needs: North Region respondents


20. Mental Health Services21. Juvenile Delinquency/Crime

22. Language Barrier(s)

The issues appearing lower on this list were cited by only 1 or 2 respondents. Ten of the 32 issues in the Needs Assessment Survey were not an urgent need to any of the 230 North Region respondents.

NORTH REGION IDENTIFIED NEEDS NEEDS RANKING RESPONSES URGENT NEED RESPONSES

1. Increasing Income 1. Housing /rent costs

2. Dental and/or Vision Care 2. Finding a job

3. Housing / rent costs 3. Transportation

4. Help paying utility bill(s) 4. Dental and/or Vision Care

5. Food costs 5. Increasing income

6. Paying for college/higher education 6. Help paying utility bill(s)

7. Reducing utility costs 7. Food costs

8. Finding a job 8. Paying for college/higher education

9. Health insurance/ Healthcare Costs * 9. Job Training

10. Transportation 10. Credit card or loan debt **

11. Job Training 11. Reducing utility costs

12. Access to healthy foods * 12. Homelessness **

* High ranked need, but not identified as urgent** Urgent Need, but not among the top 12 in Ranking responses.


SEVICES SCORING METHODOLOGY In order to help CEDA decide an appropriate response to the needs identified in each region, it is imperative to have a solid understanding of the resources and efforts already being put forward by others: local government, faith-based organizations, community groups, etc. One source of current information is surveying how residents with low-incomes view the adequacy of their services in their communities. The Needs Assessment Surveys ask respondents to score 15 different services as “Excellent”, “Good”, “Fair”, or “Poor/None”. They may also respond “Don’t know” if they are not familiar with, or have never used the service. To analyze these results, a numeric value was assigned to each possible rating:

Excellent = 4 points Good = 3 points Fair = 2 point Poor/None = 0 points

The points earned for each service are totaled and divided by the number of responses. The average score was multiplied by 25 to give a maximum perfect score of 100. "Don't Knows" are not calculated into the averages so that lack of knowledge of a service would not have a negative impact on its score.

Education in the North Region earned high scores from respondents, a score of 73 out of 100. This is consistent with the reports from Illinois Board of Education regarding the performance of schools in the northern suburbs compared to the south and western suburbs of Cook County.

3035404550556065707580

Community Services Scoring North Region


Healthy foods and Grocery stores is another community resource that North Region respondents scored highly. Indeed, most north suburban neighborhoods have more grocery store access and options than their South or West region counterparts.

The poorest scoring services were all related to housing: Affordable Housing, Foreclosure Prevention, and Homeless Services. Higher housing costs in the North Region equate with a greater need, and put an additional strain on services in that region. It is not surprising that all housing services would be viewed as less adequate than other services in the North Region.

PRIMARY DATA - COMMUNITY FORUMS AND FOCUS GROUPS

OVERVIEW To improve understanding of the issues facing the communities in CEDA’s planning and service area, Community Forums discussions were held in Maywood, Evanston, and Park Forest. Additionally, a Service Providers’ focus group and a Low-Income adult focus group were conducted in the South Region, and an At-Risk Youth focus group was conducted in North Region.

In all cases, discussion was facilitated by trained staff. Groups ranged in size from 4 to 8 participants to allow for everyone to have input in the discussion. Round Table and Focus Group Facilitators were given a question guide to stimulate and focus the conversation, but were encouraged to adapt the language and sequence of the questions as appropriate to their group.

Question Guide: 1. If poverty were to disappear tomorrow, what would your community look like?

What would be different about your community if there was no poverty anywhere? 2. What do you think keeps families in poverty?

a. In what way? Why is that?…(We are interested in drilling down to root cause as far as possible)

3. What are the biggest problems that (low-income) families in your community are facedwith?

a. Follow-up: How are they coping with these problems?What adjustments and sacrifices are they making?

4. What services organization s and/or resources are available for people with low-incomes inthe community? Where do people get help? What is working well?

5. From your perspective living in this community, what kind of changes have you noticed inthe past 3 years, which effect life for people with low incomes? What emerging trends are you seeing?

6. What kind of services or help have you not been able to find? What is missing from thecommunity in the way of services and support for low-income people?

7. What can we as a community do to address the problems of poverty?What can be done locally to improve the chance for people to be financially stable?


NORTH REGION Forum and Focus Group Results

At-Risk Youth Focus Group - Evanston CEDA staff facilitated a conversation with four juvenile offenders who are enrolled in a job skills and life skills training program in Evanston. The participants were all between 16 and 21 years old. Also participating in the discussion was the social services director of the program. They identified the following challenges and problems they face in that North Region community:

• Need for affordable housing• Problems getting employment with criminal record.• Need job skills training• Community residents are not aware of many of the programs that are available.

This group of young people had recommendations for what would improve their community: o Create for more programs that combine employment with getting skills and supporto Assistance organizations should focus their aid for people who are willing to invest in change.o Improve access to information about programs and services in the communityo Remove criminal record barriers to jobs and services

Evanston Community Forum A small turnout from the community allowed for 2 groups to discuss the questions in the guide above. A trained facilitator and a recorder worked with each group. While comprised of people with different backgrounds and perspectives, both groups shared very similar observations about the community and the issues faced by low-income families. Conversation revealed the following problems that exist in this North Region community:

• Public transportation between suburbs is not fast, convenient, or reliable.• Wages are stagnant and underemployment is common.• Departure of industrial businesses on edge of the city means the loss of many well-paying

jobs.• The recreation programs for children are too costly for low-income families.• Not enough affordable housing.

The Evanston community forum group participants provided the following suggestions for services: o Greater focus on literacy for elementary-aged children.o More job skills training opportunities for adultso Mentoring of low-income families to teach self-sufficiency skills.o Improve affordable daycare and early education.

NORTH REGION CONCLUSIONS CEDA’s North Region is far less homogeneous that generally perceived. The cultural and economic diversity of the region is underappreciated by both outsiders and its own residents. A white male participant in the Evanston community forum noted that “people here live in a diverse community. But they don’t realize it. They seldom interact with, and they don’t understand, the other segments of the community.” Amidst the region’s relative affluence are financially challenged families and sub-


communities. They are often isolated from and invisible to the majority of residents and some political leaders in the region. Because of the high number of immigrants and the wide array of cultures and languages, CEDA must make extra effort in connecting with eligible residents in the North Region.

The public transportation services are poor. Although commuters going into the Loop (Central city of Chicago) can enjoy dependable commuter train service, transportation services between suburbs is deficient. Low-wage workers reported that it is very difficult to get to a job since bus service that may exist is slow and unreliable.

High housing costs in the region make it especially difficult for low-wage workers to live sustainably. From community survey respondents, the most urgent concern was Housing and/or Rent costs. They also struggle with utility and food costs. Statistics show that unemployment and underemployment are higher among minority and low-skill workers. North Region residents with low incomes express their concerns about finding a job, job training, and increasing income. Many are also struggling to find a way to pay for college or manage their debt.

The North Region voices that CEDA listened to in forums and focus groups echoed a call for 1) more affordable housing options, 2) for more job training, and for 3) help with financial literacy and life skills.


The South Region

CEDA’s South Region is made up 8 townships in the Southern third of the county, bordered by Will County to the south; the eastern edge borders the state of Indiana. South Region townships are:

Bloom Township; Bremen Township; Calumet Township; Orland Township; Palos Township; Rich Township; Thornton Township; and Worth Township.

The regional population of approximately 779,800 has a highest poverty rate of CEDA three regions at 15.4%. Contained in the South Region are all or part of 49 different municipalities, among them are the counties poorest communities. The city of Harvey has 27,000 residents and a 35% poverty rate; 37% of Dixmoor’s 13,000 inhabitants live below poverty; and the tiny Ford Heights with its 2,700 citizens has become infamous for the 46% poverty rate. For decades, it has been cited as the “poorest suburb in

CEDA 2016 CAP II. NEEDS ASSESSMENT - SOUTH Page 21

America”. Although available data could not support this designation, Ford Heights certainly does have the highest poverty rate the 125 municipalities served by CEDA. Altogether an estimated 120,400 people live below the poverty line in CEDA’s South Region. 17

The South Region has the highest percentage of African American residents of the three CEDA Regions. Between 2000 and present, the number white residents and their proportion of the total population in the South Region has declined. The African American population has continued to increase in number and percentage of population during this period. In recent years, the number of Hispanic residents has grown, and it is increasing at a faster rate than other groups.

(*Data in charts above comes from the US 2000 Census and ACS 2013 1-Year Estimates.)

17 Population and poverty data from US census American Community Survey 2009-2013 3-year estimates

White 63%

Black 29%

Asian 1%

Hispanic 7%

South Region ethnic/racial makeup 2000 *

White 52%

Black 34%

Asian 2%

Hispanic 12%

South Region ethnic/racial makeup 2013 *

496188 431806

223860 278376

10915 13239 56953

101227

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

600000

2000 2013

South Region ethnic/racial change 2000-2013*

White

Black

Asian

Hispanic


The region’s per capita income of $26,488 is 10% lower than the Illinois per capita income ($29,338). The educational attainment level in this region is slightly below the Illinois state average. The percent of adults with less than a high school diploma is 12.9% in the South Region, compared to 12.5% for Illinois. College degrees have been earned by only 23.7% of South Region adults, compared to 31.7% of all Illinois adults.18 Average home value in the South Region $175,000 is 4% below the Illinois state median value of $182,300. Gross rents in the region at $960 are 6% above the state median.19

As of April 2015, despite seeing a decline in the unemployment rate from the past year, the South Region still showed an 8.420 unemployment rate, higher than the County average of 6.2, or the state average of 5.5%21. Unemployment rates are double the state rates in the southeastern portion of the region: South Holland =10.2; Calumet City = 10.4; Harvey = 12.8.

These South Suburban communities continue to suffer from long-ago economic events that continue to ripple across the state line and across five decades. Cities and villages built on the industrial manufacturing power of the Calumet Region in the have not yet been able to create new economic base since the collapse of America’s steel industry in the 1970’s. Much of CEDA’s South Region falls squarely in the “Rustbelt” with its shuttered steel-related industries, economic decline, and urban decay. New signs of economic woes have appeared in the far south reaches of the region. The closing of Lincoln Mall in Matteson in January of 2015, and the loss jobs formerly associated with the 30 stores, has been a harsh blow to surrounding communities in Rich Township. The more economically stable communities of the region are larger, newer villages to the west. Here a more affluent population (below 6% poverty) can support active retail centers. The South Region contains many employers in a wide range of business and industries. According to data from Illinois Department of Employment Security, the private industries employing the most people fall under the following North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) classifications (listed here in order of number of employees, starting with the largest): Health care & social assistance; Retail, trade; Manufacturing; Accommodations & food services; Transportation & Warehousing; Administration & support services.22

The South Region population is 97% English speaking. Fewer than 9,000 households are classified as limited English, where no one over age 14 speaks English well. Of these, 42% are Spanish speaking; 42% SPEAK ANOTHER Indo-European language, and a scattering of Asian and other languages23. This is the only CEDA service region without significant language challenges.

18 US Census data: ACS 2013 3-Year Estimates. 19 Average home value and Gross rent calculation for each region was calculated by summing the median gross rent and median home value in each township as estimated in the US Census 2009-2013 American Community Survey 5-year estimates, then dividing the sum by the number of townships. 20 This estimate was calculated by averaging the unemployment rates of the 12 different local areas within the North Region as reported by Illinois Department of Employment Security: Unemployment Rates for the State, Metro Areas, Counties, and Cities. Not Seasonally Adjusted. June 2015. 21 US Department of Labor; Bureau of Labor Statistics. http://www.bls.gov/home.htm 22 22 Where Workers Work 2015, Illinois Department of Employment Security. Data published at http://www.ides.illinois.gov/Pages/Data_Statistics.aspx 23 US Census data: ACS 2013 3-Year Estimates.


http://www.bls.gov/home.htm


CEDA’s South Region has 9 school districts and 23 high schools. The percentage of low-income students, graduation rates and measures of college readiness vary significantly. Higher percentages of poverty, lower graduation rates and lower rates of college readiness among high school graduates correlate with high levels of economic distress. In the South Region, 49% of the enrollment is low-income, the highest of CEDA’s three regions, with district rates varying from 20% to 82%. The graduation rate in the South Region is 84%, with district rates varying from 68% to 94%. However, the percentage of graduates ready for college is only 32%, with rates varying from 12% to 59%24. Higher percentages of poverty, lower graduation rates and lower rates of college readiness among high school graduates correlate with high levels of economic distress.


South Region High School Districts Total Enrollment

# High Schools

% Low-Income Students25

Graduation Rate26

% Ready for College27


Thornton Twp Dist 205 (South Holland) 4,919 3 54% 72% 12%

Bloom Twp Dist 206 (Chicago Heights) 3,303 2 82% 68% 13%

Thornton Fractional Twp Dist 215 (Calumet City) 3,441 2 74% 93% 19%

Dist 218 (Oak Lawn) 5,597 3 65% 80% 28%

Rich Twp Dist 227 (Matteson) 3,463 3 77% 82% 20%

Bremen Dist 228 (Midlothian) 5,272 4 38% 84% 29%

Oak Lawn Dist 229 1,842 1 38% 93% 36%

Cons Dist 230 (Orland Park) 7,841 3 20% 93% 59%

Evergreen Park Dist 231 852 1 28% 85% 53%

South Region Totals 39,341 23 49% 84% 32%

24 Source for high school district data is the 2014 District Snapshot Profiles, Illinois State Board of Education. https://illinoisreportcard.com/ 25 Low-income students receive or live in households that receive SNAP or TANF; are classified as homeless, migrant, runaway, Head Start of foster children; or live in a household where the household income meets the USDA) income guidelines to receive free or reduced-price meals. The % of low-income students is the count of low-income students, divided by the total fall enrollment, multiplied by 100. 26 of first-time 9th graders in fall 2010 starting cohort plus students who transfer in, minus students who transfer out, emigrate, or die during school years 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014 and through summer 2014. 27 Ready for college course work is the percentage of students who achieved a combined score of at least 21 on the ACT.



The 15.4% poverty rate of in the South Region is dwarfed by the 31% poverty rate for households with children and a single female head of household in the same region. 21.9% of those 65 and over in unrelated households live below the poverty line in the South Region. 28

PRIMARY DATA - SOUTH REGION NEEDS ASSESSMENTS SURVEY RESULTS CEDA received 438 Community Needs Assessment Survey responses from South Region residents.

Who Responded 29 South Region surveys came mostly from African American females. Responses were received 80% from female and 20% from male residents.

By ethnic and racial makeup, South Region respondents were 62% African American;26% white; 0.4% Asian; 0.6% Native American or Alaskan Native; 5% multi-race; and 6% other race. Hispanic residents accounted for only 11% of surveys received. Such results were not surprising based on the demographics of that region.

A full 92% of those completing the South Region surveys speak English at home. 5% use Spanish; 3% speak Arabic; 0.4% speak Polish; and 1.3% speak another language.

As with all the surveys CEDA collected, the income level of the respondents is very low, with 51% living on household incomes under $15,000 per year. Only 20% of all respondents reported annual household incomes over $30,000. As was the case in the North Region, nearly half of South Region respondents reported income from full-time employment, part-time employment, or self-employment.

13% of South Region respondent households lacked a high diploma school or equivalency. More than 46% reported someone in the home with a college degree or vocational certification, and 7% have a household member with a post-graduate degree.

Young adults age 18-30 responded at the same frequency as adults age 30 -50 with 31% of the responses from each of these age groups. Mature adults, age 50-64, completed 23% of the South Region and 14% came from people over age 65. As with the other regions, only 1% was collected from youth under 18 years old. 7% were military veteran or active duty households.

More than 29% of the South Region survey respondents own their own home. Renters accounted for 45% of the survey participants. 7% identified as homeless, and 18% reported living with family or friends.

What Responses Tell Us METHODOLOGY (reprinted from previous Regional section): As described above in the Overview of this section, the Needs Assessment Survey asked whether respondents view 32

28 2009-2013 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates. 29 See Appendix 2 for graphs of Needs Survey response demographics for all regions


different issues as Critical Concern, Somewhat a Concern, or Not at all a Concern. The issues cover a variety of life circumstance around housing, employment, finance, family, community, health, education, and transportation. To analyze the survey results, the responses were assigned numeric values: Critical = 2; Somewhat = 1; Not a concern = 0. The sum of the numeric value for each issue is divided by the number of responses yielding a “Needs Ranking” value between 0.0 and 2.0 for each issue. Higher ranking indicates more respondents view this as a more critical issue for themselves, their household, or their neighborhood.

Twelve issues in the earned a Needs Ranking value of >1.00 in the analysis of South Region responses. “Increasing Income” was consistently the top ranked issue in all regions. As discussed in the North Region results section above CEDA acknowledges that the survey was not sufficiently in depth to fully undersand the specific remedies that would address this concern.

The remaining top ranked South Region issues, in order of most critical to less critical, were

2. Reducing utility costs3. Help paying utility bill(s)4. Dental and/or Vision Care5. Housing / rent costs6. Food costs7. Finding a job

0.80

0.90

1.00

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

1.50

Top ranked concerns SOUTH REGION respondents


8. Health insurance/ Healthcare Costs9. Paying for college/higher education10. Access to healthy foods11. Job Training12. Neighborhood Safety and Security

METHODOLOGY FOR MEASURING URGENT NEEDS (Reprinted from previous regional section)A separate question in the survey asks respondents to identify the single most important andimmediate need for their household. These “Urgent Needs” responses are analyzed by simplycounting the number of each. Results contained in this document are reported by percentage:total number of incident of each response divided by the number of all non-blank responses.The Urgent Needs data give additional information when examined along with the NeedsRanking. CEDA looked at both data sets equally in defining the needs and circumstances ofpeople with low incomes in Suburban Cook County.

The Urgent Needs identified by South Region respondents were (listed here in order of frequency):

1. Housing /rent costs2. Finding a job3. Increasing income4. Food costs5. Dental and/or Vision Care6. Transportation

7. Paying for college/higher education8. Job Training9. Help paying utility bill(s)10. Reducing utility costs11. Homelessness12. Health Insurance/ Healthcare Costs

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18%

Housing /rent costs

Finding a job

Increasing income

Food costs


Transportation


Job Training


Reducing utility costs

Top 10 Most Urgent Needs: South Region respondents


13. Home repairs14. Credit card or loan debt15. Help with managing money16. Affordable daycare or before/after

school care17. Children’s education/tutoring18. Neighborhood Safety and Security19. Programs for youth/teens

20. Programs and services for SeniorCitizens

21. Immigration/citizenship issues22. Veterans’ Services23. Access to healthy foods24. High school drop-outs25. Parenting support and education26. Services for Disabled people

The issues appearing lower on this list were cited by only 1 or 2 respondents. Six of the 32 issues in the Needs Assessment Survey were not an urgent need to any of the 438 South Region respondents.

SOUTH REGION IDENTIFIED NEEDS NEEDS RANKING RESPONSES URGENT NEED RESPONSES

1. Increasing income 1. Housing /rent costs

2. Reducing utility costs 3. Finding a job

4. Help paying utility bill(s) 5. Increasing income

6. Dental and/or Vision Care 7. Food costs

8. Housing / rent costs 9. Dental and/or Vision Care

10. Food costs 11. Transportation**

12. Finding a job 13. Paying for college/higher education

14. Health insurance/ Healthcare Costs 15. Job Training

16. Paying for college/higher education 17. Help paying utility bill(s)

18. Access to healthy foods* 19. Reducing utility costs

20. Job Training 21. Homelessness**

22. Neighborhood Safety and Security* 23. Health Insurance/ Healthcare Costs

* High ranked need, but not identified as urgent** Urgent Need, but not high ranked


SERVICES SCORING METHODOLOGY (reprinted from previous Regional Section) In order to help CEDA decide an appropriate response to the needs identified in each region, it is imperative to have a solid understanding of the resources and efforts already being put forward by others: local government, faith-based organizations, community groups, etc. One source of current information is surveying how residents with low-incomes view the adequacy of their services in their communities. The Needs Assessment Surveys ask respondents to score 15 different services as “Excellent”, “Good”, “Fair”, or “Poor/None”. They may also respond “Don’t know” if they are not familiar with, or have never used the service. To analyze these results, a numeric value was assigned to each possible rating:


The points earned for each service are totaled and divided by the number of responses. The average score was multiplied by 25 to give a maximum perfect score of 100. "Don't Knows" are not calculated into the averages so that lack of knowledge of a service would not have a negative impact on its score.

While still the highest scored service, Education in the South Region was scored a full 12 points lower than North Region score. This again is consistent with the reports from Illinois Board of Education regarding the performance of schools in the North suburbs compared to the south and western suburbs of Cook County.

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

Community Services Scoring South Region


Healthy foods and Grocery stores was the next highest scoring service, but here again, the South Region view these services in their community marked worse than their North region counterparts, scoring the service 13 points lower.

CEDA analysts were surprised by Transportation receiving a relatively high score despite evidence, including results from focus groups, that the transportation network of the south suburbs does not meet the needs of many families with low incomes. Further micro-analysis of the responses on a community level, which is planned by CEDA, may provide additional insight.

The poorest scoring services were related to housing: Foreclosure Prevention and Homeless Services. Only slightly higher was Mental Health Services. Based on CEDA’s experience in the South Region communities, these services are indeed insufficient for the need. Affordable Housing logically scored higher in the South Region than the North for two reasons: the existence of more subsidized housing units in the southern suburbs, and markedly lower housing costs in many of the southland communities compared to the northern suburbs.

PRIMARY DATA - SOUTH REGION COMMUNITY FORUMS AND FOCUS GROUPS To improve understanding of the issues facing the communities in the South Region, a Community Forum discussion were held in Park Forest, a Service Providers’ focus group and a Low-Income adult focus group were conducted in Park Forest and an At-Risk Youth focus group was conducted in North Region.

Provider Focus Group – Richton Park The provider focus group was held in Richton Park in the South Region. Those in attendance were staff and supervisors for Rich Township General Assistance, senior Services, and Food Pantry. They identified the following as frequent needs in the population they serve:

• Families and seniors lack money for food.• Even with medical benefits, residents cannot always afford the co-pay for their

prescriptions.• Seniors and disabled residents need assistance with home repair, lawn care, snow removal

and accessibility upgrades, particularly ramps.

The social services professionals participating in the focus group also identified the following needs in the community:

• Lack of employment, especially for the 45 and over age group• Lack of emergency shelter in the community• Lack of resources for Food Pantries that are seeing greater demand• Lack of information shared across and between agencies about the services that are

provided.

From the group conversation, the following recommendations came forward:


o Reconvene a network of service providers that used to exist, but dissolve several years ago.Bring service professionals from the area together on a regular basis to share updates on theirprograms and discuss emerging issues.

o Collaboration between CEDA and Rich Township on annual collection of donations for homelessveterans.

Community Forum - Park Forest A group of 18 older adults who were present at Park Forest Senior Café was asked questions from the question guide above. Only about 6 of them actively offered their responses, but their seemed to be consensus and like-mindedness among the entire group. From this conversation, the following needs were identified in this South Region community:

• Streets need repair and better maintenance• Need for more information about programs and services in the community

They identified the lack of jobs and lack of good-paying jobs and the reason for poverty I their community.

Needs Assessment Surveys were gathered from the attendees as well. Those surveys showed the following as the top 10 concerns among the respondents:

1. Dental/vision care2. Housing/ rent costs3. Reducing utility costs4. Home repairs5. Neighborhood Safety and Security6. Transportation7. Health insurance/healthcare costs8. Increasing income9. Programs for youth/teens10. Programs and services for Senior Citizens

The participants in the Older Adult round table offer these suggestions to the identified lack of awareness their peers have regarding services available:

o Village could include service information inserts with the water bill mailings.o More flyers and printed materials from agencies

Low-Income Focus Group – Richton Park CEDA and Rich Township hosted a focus group of low-income individuals. Five General Assistance recipients participated in the discussion, along with and three township staff members. The focus group was facilitated and recorded by CEDA staff. The purpose was to better understand the challenges faced by unemployed adults in the South Region community. Despite their personal financial problems, this group seemed to be just as concerned about the overall health of their community as they were about find solutions to their needs. The conversation yielded valuable insight into the communities within Rich Township in the South Region. The following community problems were identified by the group:


• Not enough employers• Need more jobs• Lack adequate public transportation.

No buses on some of the major streetsBuses don’t run late enough in the eveningNo connections to transit system to downtown Chicago

• Lack mortgage assistance• Deteriorating housing stock

This group made several interesting suggestions of possible solutions for the problems they identified: o Make abandoned retail space available to those who want to start up new businesseso Set up better communication between villages and absentee landlordso Better code enforcement for property maintenance.o Get more people out to attend village meetings. Possibly provide transportation.

SOUTH REGION CONCLUSIONS

The South Region has communities with such enormous deficiencies that CEDA alone cannot expect to make lasting improvement. It would take a collaboration of leadership from the fractured municipalities, the county, and state to turn the ship on the shattered economic base. A great deal of community building needs to occur. Visionary leadership, financial resources, and public outcry are needed to bring schools, and other services up to standards expected in other areas of the county. Because of the enormity of the need (poverty rates over 30%, double-digit unemployment, poor performing schools) in communities of Thornton, Bloom and Rich Townships, it is hard not to become overwhelmed. CEDA must take extra caution to adequately serve people in communities in all of the South Region.

Even with more modest housing costs, the lower household incomes in the South Region leave families struggling to make ends meet. As in the high-rent North Region, Housing/Rent Costs are the most urgent concern. The cost of food and utilities weighs heavily as well. Concerns include paying for college or higher education, and getting dental or vision care.

In survey results and in the voices heard in community forums in the South Region (and are backed up by unemployment figures) 1) Jobs and 2) Job Training were recurring needs.


The West Region

The West Region of CEDA’s service area, bordered by DuPage County on the west and Will County on the south, is comprised of 11 townships lying to the west and southwest of the City of Chicago:

Berwyn; Cicero; Leyden; Lemont ; Lyons; Norwood Park; Oak Park; Proviso; River Forest; Riverside; and Stickney Townships.

CEDA 2016 CAP II. NEEDS ASSESSMENT - WEST Page 33

There are 40 different municipalities contained, in whole or in part, with the West Region. The largest of them (Cicero) boasts some 84,000 residents, while the smallest (McCook) has on 228 inhabitants 30 The entire population of the West Region is estimated at around 667,300 with a poverty rate of 13.6%. 31 Nearly 91,000 West Region residents are living at or below the federal poverty guideline.

Between 2000 and present, the number of Hispanics in the West Region increased by 43%. They now make up 29% of the population. The predominance of white residents declined slightly during that same period, While African American and Asian residents remained nearly constant in both number and percentage of the population.

(Data in charts above comes from the US 2000 Census and ACS 2013 1-year estimates.)

30 US Census. American Community Survey 2013 3-year estimate. 31 ibid

White 65%

Black 11%

Asian 2%

Hispanic 22%

West Region ethnic/racial makeup 2000 *

White 58%

Black 11%

Asian 2%

Hispanic 29%

West Region ethnic/racial makeup 2013 *

474785 446156

81018 81355

14925 17043

158810

227624

0

100000

200000

300000

400000

500000

2000 2013

West Region ethnic/racial change 2000-2013 *

White

Black

Asian

Hispanic


The West Region overall per capita income of $27,648 is 6% lower than the Illinois per capita ($29,338). Educational attainment levels in the region also lag slightly behind the state. 16% of West Region adults have less than a high school diploma, compared to 12.5% for all of Illinois. Of adults in the West Region, 30.1% have earned a Bachelors or higher degree, compared to 31.7% statewide. 32 Average home value in the West Region is $278,773, which is 53% higher than the state median home value of $182,300. West Region average gross rent of $93233 is just 3% more than the Illinois median gross rent of $890.

The West Region has 10 school districts and 15 high schools. In the West Region, 37% of the enrollment is low-income, with district rates that vary from 9% to 88%. The graduation rate is 87% in the West Region. However, district rates vary significantly, from 70% at JS Morton District 201 and 71% at Proviso Township District 209, to rates exceeding 90% in Ridgewood CHSD 232, Oak Park-River Forest District 200, Lyons Township District 204, Riverside-Brookfield District 208 and Lemont Township District 94. The percentage of high-school graduates ready for college is 40% with significant variation among school districts. Rates vary from a low of 18% in JS Morton District 201 to a high of 71% in Lyons Township. 34


West Region High School Districts Total Enrollment

# High Schools

% Low-Income Students

Graduation Rate

% Ready for College


Oak Park-River Forest Dist 200 3,255 1 21% 93% 70%

JS Morton Dist 201 (Cicero) 8,342 3 88% 70% 18%

Lyons Twp Dist 204 (LaGrange) 4,008 1 14% 92% 71%

Riverside-Brookfield SD 208 1,612 1 18% 94% 59%

Proviso Twp Dist 209 (Forest Park) 4,735 3 55% 71% 23%

Lemont Twp Dist 210 1,411 1 9% 94% 68%

Leyden Dist 212 (Northlake) 3,425 2 10% 83% 33%

Argo Dist 217 (Summit) 1,870 1 65% 86% 30%

Reavis Dist 220 (Burbank) 1,816 1 48% 82% 37%

Ridgewood Dist 232 (Norridge) 799 1 22% 91% 51%

West Region Totals 30,474 15 45% 72% 36%

32 US Census, 2009-2013 American Community Survey 5 year estimates 33 Average home value and Gross rent calculation for each region was calculated by summing the median gross rent and median home value in each township (US Census 2009-2013 ACS 5-Year Estimates) then dividing the sum by the number of townships. 34 Source for high school district data is the 2014 District Snapshot Profiles, Illinois State Board of Education. https://illinoisreportcard.com/



The unemployment rate in the West Region as a whole, estimated at 6.7 (April 2015), declined nearly a whole point since the previous year.35 This is still marked higher than the Illinois rate of 5.5. Another challenge is that the Village of Maywood still suffers with an unemployment rate of 11.1. This is the highest unemployment in the region and among the highest in all suburban Cook County.

There is a large and varied commercial and industrial landscape in the West Region. To the southwest of Chicago are many heavy industries that make use of the massive rail and water transportation infrastructure. The dense population in the suburbs near Chicago can support active retail and service establishments, whether small “mom and pop” or large chain stores. According Illinois Department of Employment Security data, the top private employers in the West Region employing the most people in the West Region are classified in the following NAICS classifications (listed here in order of number of workers starting with the largest): Healthcare & Social Assistance; Retail-Trade; Administrative & Support Services; Accommodations & Food Service; and Transportation-Warehousing. Among the giant private sector employers in or near the West Region are Jewel-Osco (Melrose Park); Advocate Health Care (Oak Brook), and UPS (Downers Grove).

There are more than 21,000 estimated households in the West Region classified as Limited English Households in which no one over age 14 speaks English well. Of those limited English households, 56%, or nearly 12,000 households, speak Spanish. 39% speak another Indo-European language. A very few use an Asian/Pacific Island language. In addition to the 227,000 Hispanics in the West region, there is a sizable and growing Arab community in the southwest suburbs. Research from the Illinois Coalition for Immigration and Refugee Rights estimates that 125,000 undocumented immigrants live in Suburban Cook County, of which 17,750 live in Cicero Township.36

The region overall poverty rate of 13.6% is lower than the Illinois rate of 14.8. But estimates for poverty levels among single female households are not as positive. In CEDA’s West Region, 29.8% of female-headed households with children are estimated in poverty. And for households with children under 5 only and a single female head, the poverty rate is over 35%. Of people over 65 and in unrelated living, 21% are below the poverty line. 37

35 This estimate was calculated by averaging the unemployment rates of the 6 different local areas within the West Region as reported by Illinois Department of Employment Security: : Unemployment Rates for the State, Metro Areas, Counties, and Cities. Not Seasonally Adjusted. June 2015.June 2015. 35 Where Workers Work 2015, Illinois Department of Employment Security. Data published at http://www.ides.illinois.gov/Pages/Data_Statistics.aspx. 36 Tsao, Fred. Illinois Undocumented Immigrant Population: A summary of recent research by Rob Paral and Associates .Illinois Coalition for Immigrant and Refugee Rights. (February 2014) 37 US Census, 2009-2013 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.



NEEDS ASSESSMENTS SURVEY RESULTS - WEST REGION CEDA received 453 Community Needs Assessment Survey responses from West Region residents.

Who Responded38

West Region surveys responses were received 80% from female and 20% from male residents.

By ethnic and racial makeup, West Region respondents were 43% African American;29% white; 2.1% Asian; 0.4% Native American or Alaskan Native; 4% multi-race; and 22% other race. Hispanic residents accounted for a full 35% of surveys received. Such results were consistent with the demographics of that region.

Less than 77% of these completing the West Region surveys speak English at home. 18% speak Spanish; 4.5% speak Arabic; and 0.2% report Vietnamese as their language at home; 0.4% speak Polish; 0.2% speak Tagalog; and 0.6% speak languages marked only as “other”.

While most CEDA surveys were completed by people with very low income levels, the West region had a slightly smaller proportion of respondents with annual household incomes under $15,000 per year. Yet this income tier still accounted for 46% of all regional responses and was the largest segment of the responses of the income tiers. 36% had household income between $15,000 and $30,000. 13% had incomes between $30,000 and $50,000. Only 6% of all respondents reported annual household incomes over $50,000. The West Region had the largest percentage with earned income, with 55% reporting income from full-time employment, part-time employment, or self-employment.

The percent of respondents whose household lacked high school diploma or equivalency is 22%. A comparatively small 30% of responding households have a member who achieved some college degree or vocational certification. And only 3% of West region respondents have a post-graduate degree holder in the household.

Adults age 31-49 submitted 33% of the West Region’s surveys; followed closely by younger adults, age 18-30, who contributed 30%. While mature adults 50 to 64 accounted for 17%, residents age 65 and over were a full 18% of all West Region survey participants, the largest showing from the age group of the three regions. Unfortunately, as with the other regions, only 1% of surveys were collected from youth under 18 years old. There were 6% military veteran or active duty households.

28% of the West Region survey participants own their own home. Renters accounted for 48% of the respondents. Only 1% identified themselves as homeless, and 23% reported living with family or friends.

What Responses Tell Us

METHODOLOGY (reprinted from previous Regional section): As described above in the Overview of this section, the Needs Assessment Survey asked whether respondents view 32

38 See Appendix 2 for graphs of Needs Survey response demographics for all regions.


different issues as Critical Concern, Somewhat a concern, or Not at all a concern. The issues cover a variety of life circumstance around housing, employment, finance, family, community, health, education, and transportation. To analyze the survey results, the responses were assigned numeric values: Critical=2; Somewhat=1; Not a concern=0. The sum of the numeric value for each issue is divided by the number of responses yielding a “Needs Ranking” value between 0.0 and 2.0 for each issue. Higher ranking indicates more respondents view this as a more critical issue for themselves, their household, or their neighborhood.

Eleven issues in the earned a Needs Ranking value of >1.00 in the analysis of West Region responses. Since this document reported on 12 top issues in the other two region, the next highest ranking issue is added here for the twelfth item for comparison. “Increasing Income” was consistently was the top ranked issue in all regions. As discussed in the North Region results section above CEDA acknowledges that the survey was not sufficiently in depth to fully undersand the specific remedies that would address this concern.

The remaining top ranked West Region issues, in order of most critical to less critical, were

2. Housing / rent costs3. Reducing utility costs4. Food costs5. Help paying utility bill(s)6. Dental and/or Vision Care

0.80

0.90

1.00

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

Top ranked concerns WEST REGION respondents


7. Health insurance/ Healthcare Costs8. Paying for college/higher education9. Finding a job10. Access to healthy foods11. Neighborhood Safety and Security12. Job Training

METHODOLOGY FOR MEASURING URGENT NEEDS (Reprinted from previous regional section) A separate question in the survey asks respondents to identify the single most important and immediate need for their household. These “Urgent Needs” responses are analyzed by simply counting the number of each. Results contained in this document are reported by percentage: total number of incident of each response divided by the number of all non-blank responses. The Urgent Needs data give additional information when examined along with the Needs Ranking. CEDA looked at both data sets equally in defining the needs and circumstances of people with low incomes in Suburban Cook County.

The Urgent Needs identified by West Region respondents were (listed here in order of frequency):

1. Housing /rent costs2. Finding a job

3. Increasing income4. Food costs

0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20%

Housing /rent costs

Finding a job

Increasing income

Food costs



Health Insurance/ Healthcare Costs

Transportation

Children’s education/tutoring

Neighborhood Safety and Security

Top 10 Most Urgent Needs: West Region respondents


5. Help paying utility bill(s)6. Reducing utility costs7. Health Insurance/ Healthcare Costs8. Transportation9. Children’s education/tutoring10. Neighborhood Safety and Security11. Paying for college/higher education12. Home repairs13. Dental and/or Vision Care14. Job Training15. Affordable daycare or

before/afterschool care16. Credit card or loan debt

17. Homelessness18. High school drop-outs19. Access to healthy foods20. Help with managing money21. Juvenile Delinquency/Crime22. Programs for youth/teens23. Immigration/citizenship issues24. Parenting support and education25. Services for Disabled people26. Mental Health Services27. Drug or Alcohol Abuse28. Incarceration /reintegration issues

The issues appearing lower on this list were cited by only 1 or 2 respondents. Only 4 of the 32 issues in the Needs Assessment Survey were not an urgent need to any of the 453 West Region respondents.

WEST REGION IDENTIFIED NEEDSNEEDS RANKING RESPONSES URGENT NEED RESPONSES

1. Increasing income 1. Housing /rent costs

2. Housing / rent costs 2. Finding a job

3. Reducing utility costs 3. Increasing income

4. Food costs 4. Food costs

5. Help paying utility bill(s) 5. Help paying utility bill(s)

6. Dental and/or Vision Care * 6. Reducing utility costs

7. Health insurance/ Healthcare Costs 7. Health Insurance/ Healthcare Costs

8. Paying for college/higher education 8. Transportation**

9. Finding a job 9. Children’s education/tutoring **

10. Access to healthy foods * 10. Neighborhood Safety and Security

11. Neighborhood Safety and Security 11. Paying for college/higher education

12. Job Training * 12. Home repairs **

* High ranked need, but not identified as urgent** Urgent Need, but not high ranked


SERVICES SCORING METHODOLOGY (reprinted from previous Regional Section) In order to help CEDA decide an appropriate response to the needs identified in each region, it is imperative to have a solid understanding of the resources and efforts already being put forward by others: local government, faith-based organizations, community groups, etc. One source of current information is surveying how residents with low-incomes view the adequacy of their services in their communities. The Needs Assessment Surveys ask respondents to score 15 different services as “Excellent”, “Good”, “Fair”, or “Poor/None”. They may also respond “Don’t know” if they are not familiar with, or have never used the service. To analyze these results, a numeric value was assigned to each possible rating:


The points earned for each service are totaled and divided by the number of responses. The average score was multiplied by 25 to give a maximum perfect score of 100 "Don't Knows" are not calculated into the averages so that lack of knowledge of a service would not have a negative impact on its score.

As was the case in all regions, Education was the highest scored service in the view of West Region respondents. While awarding more favorable average score than South Region survey participants gave

30

35

40

45

50

55

60

65

70

Community Services Scoring West Region


their schools, West Region scored the quality of education in their communities 12% lower than North Region respondents. Based on the High School performance data from Illinois Board of Education cited in this document, the lower score would appear to be justified.

Healthy foods and Grocery stores was the next highest scoring service, but here again, the West Region view these services in their community marked worse than their North region counterparts, scoring the service 11% lower.

Similar to the North Region results, the three poorest scoring services were all related to housing: Foreclosure Prevention, Affordable Housing, and Homeless Services. Although housing data indicates a higher affordability of housing in the West Region than the North, the responses from the hundreds of residents who CEDA surveyed would show that there is much unmet need for help with housing in West Region communities.

PRIMARY DATA - WEST REGION COMMUNITY FORUMS AND FOCUS GROUPS To improve understanding of the issues facing the communities in CEDA’s West Region, Community Forums discussions were held in Maywood.

Maywood Community Forum Between 30 and 40 community residents and leaders attended CEDA’s community forum in Maywood. Attendees were divided into four groups, each with a facilitator and recorder. Each group was engaged in a discussion of the topics in the question guide above. These discussions provided CEDA with greater insight to the issues of Maywood and its neighboring communities in the West Region. CEDA was pleased to work with Vision of Restoration in organizing the event. It was a valuable addition to have two members of the city council and the newly appointed Maywood Chief of Police participate in the discussion groups. From the Maywood focus groups came the following identified needs or concerns in the community:

• Illegal drugs are prevalent, especially among teens and youth• The community recently lost its local newspaper. Participants generally viewed this as a major

blow to community cohesion.• City infrastructures need improvement.• Quality of the schools needs improvement.• There are not enough (or enough access to) good-paying jobs.• Youth in the African-American community are plagued by a sense of hopelessness that spawns

criminal activity and violence.• Lack of activities and structured programs for young people.• Lack of grocery stores and food resources• Needs for housing and rental assistance and other emergency relief services.• Lack of affordable, accessible mental health resources.• Need for a recreation or a community center for youth programs.• Lack of employment opportunities for older adults.


Finally, the Maywood participants provided suggestions and solutions for the issues they had discussed: o Teach economic and social responsibility (in school or community setting)o Parenting classeso Teen pregnancy preventiono More partnerships and collaborations.o Improved communication (something to replace the newspaper)o Online social services directory

o Create an appo Programs to help youth build self-esteem

WEST REGION CONCLUSION

The West region as a whole is a diverse region. But its diversity is made up of pockets of concentrated ethnic and national groups. Cicero is more than 90% Hispanic population. A few miles away Maywood and Bellwood are more than 75% African American. Bridgeview has a sizable Arab-American population; Harwood Heights is 30% Polish. And River Forest is a pocket of super affluence surrounded by working class villages. This type of population distribution would likely foster more stability within each community when compared to a more fractional or changing community makeup, but it challenges organizations like CEDA and their staff. Even though they may be geographically close, these concentrated communities have priorities and needs that can be very different from their neighbor.

From the responses from West Region community members, basic financial concerns arise that mirror those in the other regions. Housing/Rent Costs was the most urgent need here and across all regions. As elsewhere, utility costs and food costs are worries. Finding a Job is just as critical to West Region respondents as it is to those in the other regions.

CEDA’s community forum in the West Region (Maywood) focused around neighborhood safety, youth crime, and activities for youth to a degree that no other community echoed. The regional survey results do not reflect that same focus on youth issues.

From the voices CEDA listened to at the community forum, there came calls for 1) increased networking of service organizations; 2) providing financial literacy and life skills instruction, especially for teens.


III. Description of Service Delivery System

A single, central management and governance structure oversees the planning and delivery of CEDA services across all three Regions of suburban Cook County. This management structure likewise oversees those services that CEDA carries out for residents of the City of Chicago (LIHEAP, Weatherization, and WIC). CEDA utilizes a combination of contracted organizations and agency-staffed sites to deliver services in its three regions. Services in Chicago locations are similarly delivered by combination of contracted service providers and agency-staffed sites.

SERVICE LOCATIONS

Each of the three Regions has at least one agency-operated site where multiple services are available, provided by agency staff. These “One-Stop” sites allow customers and stakeholders a central point of access and information for all agency services. The “One-Stops” are also hub offices for mobile staff who operate in sites throughout their region.

Some CEDA programs work with mobile staff. CEDA maintains agreements with other organizations that provide free office space for CEDA personnel to visit on a scheduled rotation. This service model enables CEDA to leverage local resources and maximize personnel resources to make services accessible across a large geographic area. (See site map, Appendix 3)

Another CEDA department, Women, Infant, and Children Nutrition program (WIC), rents office locations for staff to meet and serve customers. CEDA operates WIC service sites, called clinics, in four of the six CEDA “One-Stops”. Additionally, it rents clinic space in five Chicago neighborhoods39, and at ten additional suburban municipalities40. In addition to CEDA, the Cook County Health Department provides WIC services in CEDA’s planning and service area of suburban Cook County.

Customers from anywhere in the CEDA service area, as well as from outside of it, can access information regarding all CEDA services by dialing an 800 number that connects them to CEDA’s call center. Designed primarily for the LIHEAP program customers, the call center is staffed by 10 to 20 workers. They have training and technologies to connect callers to the information they are seeking, put them in contact with CEDA programs, or refer them to external resources they may require. CEDA’s website lists all services provided by CEDA and gives visitors eligibility qualifications and specific instructions on how and where to access to service.

ADDRESSING TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS

Transportation can be a problem for people with low incomes. Therefore, CEDA makes every effort to locate its offices and its partner-provided sites on bus routes, or as near to one as possible. Having multiple offices, satellite offices, and partner sites also reduces transportation barriers for customers.

39 CEDA’s Chicago WIC clinics are located in Albany Park, Austin, Diversey, Howard, and Irving Park. 40 Suburban stand-alone WIC clinics (not co-located with other CEDA services) are in Blue Island, Chicago Heights, Des Plaines, Maywood, Morton Grove, Mount Prospect, Oak Lawn, Oak Park, Rolling Meadows, and Skokie

CEDA 2016 CAP III. SERVICE DELIVERY SYSTEM Page 44

They should be able to access CEDA services in their town or one nearby. When transportation barriers persist, especially in the case of frail or disabled customers, certain CEDA programs can use their mobile staff to bring services to the customer. Staff will arrange to meet in a public place near the customer’s home, in a library or the lobby of a senior residential building. Other CEDA services may be accessed by telephone (as with Housing Counseling services) or by proxy (as LIHEAP).

ADDRESSING LANGUAGE BARRIERS

Cook County’s diverse population can pose challenges to service providers due to the many languages spoken by limited-English residents. Spanish is by far the most common non-English language in Cook County and CEDA has many staff members, fluent in both English and Spanish, to assist customers. CEDA also has workers who speak Arabic, Polish, Farsi, and some other languages.

When bilingual staff are not available for a specific language need (such as serving the sizable Russian population in the north suburbs) CEDA often turns to partner organizations who can loan their bilingual staff to assist CEDA personnel while interviewing customers. Staff from Palatine Senior Citizen Council, Palatine Township, Harper College ESL, and Metropolitan Asian Family Services have provided such assistance. CEDA has contracts with several ethnic-centered organizations (Hanul Family Alliance, Chinese Mutual Aid Association, Korean American Community Services, Indo-American Center, Puerto Ricans Unidos En Accion, Romanian American Community Services, Assyrian National Council of Illinois, South-East Asia Center, Polish American Association, and others) to provide services such as energy assistance intake.

CONTRACTED SERVICES

Much of CEDA’s service delivery is done by contracted providers. Contracts are issued by competitive bid. Contracted services include LIHEAP intake, Weatherization intake, the air sealing, insulating, and HVAC work for Weatherization. CEDA contracts out its Family Nutrition program under CSBG. Like many other community action agencies, there is an identified need for food assistance among CEDA’s target population. But CEDA does not operate any food pantries. Instead CEDA contracts with Greater Chicago Food Depository who, working with an existing network of pantries, has the infrastructure and experience to deliver the service far more effectively than CEDA could do on its own. (See Appendix 4 for list of sites.) Similarly, CEDA contracts out its CSBG-funded Employment Program. Contracts are issues to professional organizations that are experienced providing employment services, have trained job developers and job counselors already on staff, and can serve CEDA customers across the service area. Contracted providers also perform the dental and vision care and the auto repairs for customers of CEDA’s CSBG programs. These programs provide customers with a voucher to the contracted provider they select, and the provider agrees to accept the voucher for reimbursement by CEDA.

EFFECTIVENESS OF SERVICES

CEDA has found its service delivery system to be highly effective. Evaluating the effectiveness of its service delivery system based on ability to make services accessible to all eligible residents, CEDA regularly analyzes customer data to determine if there is adequate penetration of CEDA services in all


areas of Cook County. CEDA compares the percentage of its customers coming from different sections or municipalities in the county and evaluates where this is proportional to the eligible population. CEDA looks at demographic data from US Census data to find communities of high or emerging need based on poverty levels or other recent trends. If high variances are discovered, CEDA will adapt its service delivery model accordingly. For example, if it is discovered that a township whose population accounts for 8% of the low-income population of suburban Cook County is represented with only 2% of CEDA’s customers, CEDA will seek out additional partner organizations in that township to host a mobile staff site and will increase outreach efforts to improve awareness and access to CEDA services for the residents of that township.

MEASURING SUCCESS OF SERVICE DELIVERY

CEDA provides many services to address the causes and conditions of poverty in Suburban Cook County, as well as some in the City of Chicago. The success of CEDA services is measured using ROMA outcomes. Each and every service, whether or not it is funded through CSBG, is associated with one or more of the ROMA Six National Goals. For all agency activity, outcomes are analyzed and measured using the National Performance Indicators, which go well beyond simple contract compliance in evaluating and demonstrating the real success of CEDA services. For CEDA, success is not merely providing relief assistance, but it is making a lasting change for the better in the lives or our customers.

CEDA Service National Goal National Performance Indicator

LIHEAP/ Utility Assistance

GOAL 1: Low-income people become more self-sufficient.

1.2 The number of low-income participants for whom barriers to initial or continuous employment are reduced or eliminated: L. Obtained LIHEAP energy assistance.

Weatherization GOAL 1: Low-income people become more self-sufficient.

1.2 The number of low-income participants for whom barriers to initial or continuous employment are reduced or eliminated: K. Obtained Weatherization assistance

WIC GOAL 6: Low-income people, especially vulnerable populations, achieve their potential by strengthening family and other supportive environments.

6.3.A.2 Infant and child health and physical development are improved as a result of adequate nutrition.

Housing: *Counseling,*Transitionalhousing, *Rental support


1.2 The number of low-income participants for whom barriers to initial or continuous employment are reduced or eliminated: H. Obtained and/or maintained safe and affordable housing.

Dental Care

GOAL 6: Low-income people, especially vulnerable populations, achieve their potential by strengthening family and other supportive environments.

6.2.F The number of low-income individuals who sought emergency assistance and for whom assistance was provided: Emergency Medical Care (Dental)


Vision Care


6.2.F The number of low-income individuals who sought emergency assistance and for whom assistance was provided: Emergency Medical Care (Vision)

Auto Repair GOAL 1: Low-income people become more self-sufficient.

1.2.F Barriers to initial or continuous employment are reduced or eliminated: Obtained access to reliable transportation.

Water Bill Assistance

GOAL 6: Low-income people, especially vulnerable populations, achieve their potential by strengthening family and other supportive environments

6.2.M The number of low-income individuals who sought emergency assistance and for whom assistance was provided: Emergency Utility Assistance

Financial Literacy GOAL 1: Low-income people become more self-sufficient

1.3.B.1. Number and percent of participants demonstrating ability to complete and maintain a budget for over 90 days

Nutrition Education


6.3.K Parents and other adults learn and exhibit improved family functioning skills.

Family Nutrition

GOAL 6: Low-income people, especially vulnerable populations, achieve their potential by strengthening family and other supportive environments

6.5.A Food Boxes

Scholarship GOAL 1: Low-income people become more self-sufficient

1.2M Barriers to initial or continuous employment are reduced or eliminated: Made progress towards post-secondary degree or certificate.

Employment Program


1.1A Barriers to initial or continuous employment are reduced or eliminated: Unemployed and obtained a job. 1.2A Obtained skills/competencies required for employment

Educational Talent Search


6.3.I. Youth increase academic, athletic, or social skills for school success

Skill Training GOAL 1: Low-income people become more self-sufficient.

1.2A Barriers to initial or continuous employment are reduced or eliminated: Obtained skills/competencies required for employment


CEDA also uses Customer Satisfaction Survey to evaluate its service delivery. Individual CEDA programs survey their clientele on different schedules and through different mechanisms. In 2015, an agency-wide customer satisfaction study was conducted. Data from these sources is used by management to adjustments in the service delivery as needed to improve both effectiveness and outcomes.


IV. Description of Linkages

OUTREACH As described in the above Description of Service Delivery System, CEDA maintains offices across Suburban Cook County, and sends staff to work out of partner locations in many communities, thereby increasing its outreach and presence throughout the catchment area. CEDA’s website is a key tool for informing our client community of our services. The site is regularly updated with current programs and services sites.

Agency outreach is conducted by several personnel within the organization. CSBG Regional Managers are charged with conducting regular outreach to clients and partner networks in their region. They maintain documentation of these outreach efforts, whether it is a presentation at a senior residential facility, distributing materials at health fairs or network meetings, or face-to-face conversations with local officials. Although their messaging may focus on CSBG-funded programs and services, the CSBG Regional Managers work to ensure community awareness of all CEDA programs.

In order to improve its outreach, CEDA recently created a marketing department staffed with outreach workers who spend most of their time visiting in the community. There is one staff person assigned to each of the three Regions, each also covering the Chicago communities in their sector. The marketing team members are out in the community informing the public and policy makers of CEDA’s programs and activities. They are recruiting customers for CEDA services and have assisted with gathering surveys and conducting focus groups for the Community Assessment.

INFORMATION AND REFERRAL The CEDA Call Center is able to perform information and referral functions for residents who dial in to CEDA’s 800 number. In addition to making internal referrals to any CEDA program, staff is provided with lists of external organizations for commonly sought services. Call Center staff can perform internet searches from their work station to help callers locate resources for other needs and answers to other questions. The Call Center is staffed Monday through Friday from8:30 to 5:00 with between 10 and 20 personnel

The front line staff in all of CEDA’s programs is equipped and expected to provide information and referral to any other CEDA program as well as referrals to many external resources, especially those related to the service offered in their department. That is, CEDA housing staff can provide information and referrals for almost any type of housing issue; Energy intake staff can answer questions and direct customers to other energy resources in the communities they work in; etc.

CASE MANAGEMENT AND FOLLOW-UP CEDA provides intensive short-term case management for all participants enrolling in its core CSBG programs. If a resident is seeking dental or vision care, water bill assistance, or auto repairs they must meet with their case worker every 2 weeks for 90 days. The case management process guides customers to identify their goals, set action plans, and access the resources needed to reach their goals

CEDA 2016 CAP IV. LINKAGES Page 49

with help and direction from CEDA staff. There is thorough follow-up conducted on the services received. All results and outcomes are carefully documented. CEDA’s Housing program also conducts case management with their participants, providing referrals and support for many life situations beyond housing. CEDA WIC operates a Family Case Management Program that helps income eligible clients with a pregnant woman, infant, or young child to obtain the health care services and other assistance they may need to have a healthy pregnancy and to promote the child's healthy development. The goals of the Family Case Management Program are to: Provide access to primary health care; Identify and resolve service barriers; Provide health education to all eligible clients; Reduce infant mortality and morbidity; Reduce very low and low birth rates. The PIPP (Percentage of Income Payment) Program involved the most case management of CEDA’s energy programs, requiring staff to follow-up with customers to be sure they remain current with the utility payment responsibilities.

Follow-up is conducted for other CSBG programs. The Scholarship program coordinator contacts all past awardees at the end of the term to ascertain their progress on their education goals. This renews CEDA’s relationship with the scholarship recipient and allows the agency to gauge the program’s outcomes. Employment program participants receive follow-up and case management during the job preparedness and placement process. Once a program participant has been placed in employment, there is additional follow-up after 30, 60, and 90 days to ascertain if participant has retained the job and if any additional supports are needed to improve their chance at long-term success.

V. Coordination In order to be efficient and effective in delivering meaningful and quality services for Cook County residents with low incomes, CEDA must coordinate its resources with multiple agencies, organizations, and networks which work to meet the needs of the same target population. CEDA’s hybrid service deliver model of agency-staffed services combined with contractor-provided serves requires careful coordination at many levels. Many CEDA personnel at various tiers within the organization have a role in these coordination efforts.

Coordination of resources requires 1) knowledge of existing services; 2) knowledge of trends and changes in the service landscape; 3) ongoing communication between providers; and 4) the willingness and ability to adapt and respond based on current circumstances.

One of the first steps in coordination of resources is for CEDA planning leadership to be knowledgeable of the service landscape in which CEDA operates. That organizational knowledge is gleaned from board members, executive staff, program managers, frontline personnel41. Most managers and directors in CEDA represent their program and the agency on at least one network or association. The given network or association may have a local focus, a regional or statewide focus, a national, or even an international reach. Appropriate coordination of resources at all of these geographic levels is necessary for an organization of CEDA’s size and scope. (See Appendix 5: “Coalitions, Collaborations, and Associations”)

41 Note: frontline workers repeatedly state that it is the customers who provide the most current information about available services.

CEDA 2016 CAP V. COORDINATION Page 50

Critical to building organizational knowledge is the sharing of information through strong up-and-down communication channels across the agency. A regular schedule of structured meetings facilitates this valuable communication. Department staff meetings share information up and down between frontline staff and program managers; manager staff meetings and leadership team meetings share information up and down between program managers and executive staff; board and board committee meetings share information up and down between executive leadership and board members.

CEDA’s Needs Assessment Survey instrument helps the organization deepen its knowledge of the service landscape in which it functions. The survey responses provide a consumer scorecard of many community services. Data from the survey can help identify which services in a particular sector and particular region or community are considered by residents to be sufficient, and which are viewed as insufficient to meet local need. This information helps CEDA decide where and how to focus its resources.

One example of CEDA’s coordination of resources is its CSBG regional service delivery model. CEDA has Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) or partnership agreements with 28 different entities in suburban Cook County which provide free work space, share information and outreach, and make and accept referrals between their services and CEDA services. Each of these host sites is selected not only to provide appropriate geographic distribution for CEDA services, but also because of the shared clientele. All of the entities that host CEDA CSBG mobile staff, either through formal MOU, or a documented partnership agreement, have long-established services and relationship in the low-income community of suburban Cook County. (See Appendix 5 “Partner and MOU Sites for CEDA CSBG”)

Another example of CEDA’s coordination of resources is the Request for Proposal (RFP) contracting process CEDA utilizes in selecting energy intake sites. Here again, applicants are prioritized for their geographic range, so that resources are distributed across the service area, and for the other services which the contracting organization provides. One of the elements of the federal LIHEAP design is that LIHEAP should serve as the gateway for a broad spectrum of family support: food, employment, counseling, senior services, youth services, housing and housing counseling. These services might be coming from CEDA or from external partners. By awarding contracts based on agency capacity and ability to link customers to other services, CEDA leverages and maximizes local resources to give customers a better result. (See Appendix 6 “LIHEAP Intake Sites”)

VI. Innovative Community and Neighborhood Based Initiatives

During 2015, CEDA launched four pilot programs: Employment Services, Skills Training, Nutrition Education, and Financial Literacy. These programs were innovative in their ability to leverage community resources. CEDA was able to provide these new services merely by coordinating existing community services and getting partner organizations to target some of their efforts to specifically serve CEDA’s program participants, at no cost to the client or the agency. CEDA established a cooperative

CEDA 2016 CAP VI. INNOVATIVE INITIATIVES Page 51

agreement with University of Illinois Extension for Nutrition Education. It established a cooperative agreement with Ladder Up for Financial Literacy training. Rather than just refer clients out, CEDA brought the services in directly for enrolled CEDA customers.

Preliminary information about these innovative programs indicates that the Financial Literacy and Nutrition Education programs are meeting the purpose of Community Services Block Grant: providing skills and knowledge that will improve the ability to become financially stable for families using CEDA CSBG case management services. Pre and post test results of workshop attendees indicate that participants increased their knowledge and skills in both the Financial Literacy and the Nutritional Education programs. Because of the early success, CEDA will institutionalize these innovative services in 2016 by making them an integral part of all CSBG case management. CEDA does not yet have enough data on results from Employment Service or Skills Training to allow for meaningful evaluation of those programs. Both programs will be continued as outcomes measured and evaluated.

Based on issues and suggestions from community members at the 2015 forums and focus groups, CEDA management team will be exploring ways to create, support, and strengthen community provider networks across suburban Cook County. Repeated community feedback regarding lack of information on services (from all agencies, not just from CEDA) indicates that focused efforts around networking and information sharing will benefit the entire county. CEDA has begun early phase conversations with CookCounty government and United Way about creating a 2-1-1 Call Center for all of suburban Cook County. CEDA is very excited about the enormous potential benefit of having a comprehensive social services referral resource available to all county residents by just dialing 3 digits from any telephone. Such an initiative takes considerable coordination and is not likely accomplished in a year or two, but CEDA is looking forward to being part of the coalition to work on a 2-1-1 initiative.

VII. Youth Programming

CEDA’s community assessments, presented in Section II of this document, contain some alarming indicators about educational outcomes of high school age youth in some areas of suburban Cook County. High school dropout rates are a significant barrier to self-sufficiency and correlate significantly with unemployment rates and earnings. A sizable percentage of those who are graduating from some suburban high schools are not college-ready.

CEDA’s Educational Talent Search program serves school districts in Thornton Township, which has among the lowest graduation rates and percentage of graduates ready for college in Suburban Cook County. The Talent Search program targets low-income and first-generation college-bound students. Educational Talent Search provides academic advising, career exploration, development of test taking and study skills, ACT preparation, and other services that help promote high school graduation and assist in college enrollment. A major component of the program is campus tours of area and regional

CEDA 2016 CAP VIII. YOUTH PROGRAMMING Page 52

colleges. This provides youth the opportunity to experience various educational institutions in person, to ask questions and learn the steps needed for college acceptance and enrollment. Program staff assists youth and their families with completing financial aid and scholarship paperwork as well as school applications.

This is the only US Department of Education TRIO program operated by CEDA. TRIO programs elsewhere in the county are administered by other entities.The socio-economic challenges faced by students of CEDA' target schools and families of the target communities make CEDA’s Educational Talent Search especially valuable as a resource for life-changing impact for its student enrollees.

VIII. OutcomeEach of the three CEDA regions has its singularities described in this document. But across all of the regions, CEDA found that people with low incomes who live in these regions have many common needs. CEDA believes that the most efficient way to attack these needs is with CSBG work programs that are available countywide.

CASE MANAGEMENT

People with low incomes face multiple inter-related barriers and often lack knowledge about services that may be available to support and assist their efforts toward economic stability. In fact, the public’s lack of awareness of services and programs was the single need commonly identified by focus groups in all regions. Services have little chance of making a significant impact on a household’s economic stability, unless participants are engaged over time, and work with staff that can provide referrals and guidance for a full spectrum of needs.

For this reason, CEDA plans to offer short-term case management for residents with low incomes. Case management will be required of anyone requesting direct client services from CEDA. Customers will engage with staff for at least 90 days, setting goals and action plans, following the referrals provided by staff and reporting their progress. It will be a requirement for all enrollees to receive financial literacy and budgeting education. Everyone will be referred to nutrition education workshops provided by University of Illinois Extension.

FAMILY NUTRITION

People with low incomes are challenged by high food costs. Food Costs was high-ranked concern and an urgent need in the top lists from all three regions. Low-income people do not have access to healthy food because of lack of supermarkets in their communities and because they lack the funds to make purchases. As revealed in one of the focus groups, low-income and elderly must sometimes choose between food and other necessities like medications.

For this reason, CEDA plans to contract with Greater Chicago Food Depository to provide fresh produce, distributed to low-income residents through suburban Cook County food pantries.

SCHOLARSHIPS

CEDA 2016 CAP OUTCOME Page 53

While research data clearly demonstrates that a college degree equates with higher income and greater asset accumulation, people with low incomes are challenged when it comes to paying for higher education. The cost of tuition and fees are rising beyond the reach of many families. Residents of suburban cook county consistently report concerns about paying for college. This need appears among the highest concerns list and the most urgent needs lists from all three regions.

For this reason, CEDA plans to provide scholarships for residents with low incomes for post-secondary education at an accredited institution of higher education.

RENTAL ASSISTANCE

Housing/Rent Costs was among the top concerns of people with low incomes in Cook County and by far the most urgent need cited by survey respondents in all regions. People with low incomes generally have a high rent burden, with rent being a greater percentage of their income. Any disruption in household cash flow can lead to a housing crisis or even homelessness. Suburban Cook County has insufficient affordable housing opportunities. This is evidenced by the fact that more than 1,100 families submitted requests for 80 available slots in CEDA’s subsidized rental program when the waiting list was opened ust briefly.

For this reason, CEDA plans to provide one-time financial assistance to help with rent payments for households with low income who face emergency situations resulting in a hardship which could lead to displacement or homelessness.

DENTAL CARE

Despite the improvements in Medicaid coverage for people with low incomes in the past two years under the Affordable Care Act, dental care and be expensive and out of reach for many, especially Medicare participant needing dentures. Dental and/or Vision Care is an identified critical concern in all regions, and urgent need for a significant percentage of people with low incomes. Among all people over 65 who participated in the CEDA needs assessment survey, Dental and/or Vision Care was the most urgent need. Lack of adequate dental care can lead to other debilitating health problems threatening independent living and economic security.

For this reason, CEDA plans to provide dental care services to suburban Cook County residents with low incomes who lack other resources to meet their dental needs, when such assistance removes a barrier to economic stability or maintaining independent living.

VISION CARE

Despite the improvements in medical coverage for people with low incomes in the past two years, there are still insufficient resources to deal with vision care emergencies for people with low incomes. Without necessary corrective lenses, a person may be unable to perform job duties, conduct a job search, or fulfill school responsibilities. The result can be setbacks in efforts to attain economic security or maintain independent living. Dental and/or Vision Care is an identified critical concern in all regions, and urgent need for a significant percentage of respondents.

For this reason, CEDA plans to provide vision care including prescription eyeglasses for residents with low incomes, when such assistance removes a barrier to economic stability or maintaining independent living.


AUTO REPAIR

Many areas of Cook County, especially those furthest from the central city, lack adequate public transit. Residents must rely on personal vehicles for medical visits, or getting to and from school or work. 62% of CEDA’s survey participants identified Transportation as a concern and it was one of the most cited urgent needs in all three regions. Transportation problems were cited by focus groups on both ends of the county. People with low incomes cannot always afford the get their car fixed. Just buying one or two new tires or getting a basic brake job can be beyond their means. The lack of reliable transportation not only causes household stress, it can have other consequences, including the loss of a job. Such a result could throw a household into a more desperate situation and make economic stability impossible.

For this reason, CEDA plans to provide auto repair services for residents with low incomes, when such assistance removes a barrier to economic stability or maintaining independent living.

EMPLOYMENT

Despite a slowly improving jobs landscape, unemployment remains high in cook county most fragile communities. 72% of working age respondents to CEDA’s needs assessment survey said that finding a job was a concern. Finding a job was the second most cited urgent need for all respondents. Several cities in South and West suburban cook county still have double-digit unemployment. Where jobs exist, people with low incomes often lack the connections or skills to learn of opportunities and to secure employment. Assistance is needed for these workers to find and retain jobs.

For this reason, CEDA plans to provide job readiness training, job placement and supports for residents with low incomes. Using a competitive bid process, CEDA will contract a qualified employment service entity to deliver these services.

SKILLS TRAINING

Unemployed and underemployed people frequently lack the skills that employers are seeking. Additional training in a trade for job skills can be costly. Because of cost, people with low incomes or no incomes due to joblessness are unable to get the training that could benefit them so greatly. Job training was identified as a concern for 64%, and a critical concern to 40%, of CEDA survey respondents.

For this reason, CEDA plans to provide financial assistance for low-income individuals to enroll in short term Skills Trade certification program in high demand fields with the end goal of attaining employment.


TOP IDENTIFIED NEEDS FROM SURVEYSNORTH SOUTH WEST

NEEDS RANKING RESPONSES

URGENT NEED RESPONSES





1. Increasing income 1. Housing /rent costs 1. Increasing income 1. Housing /rent costs 1. Increasing income 1. Housing /rent costs

2. Dental and/or VisionCare 2. Finding a job 2. Reducing utility costs 2. Finding a job 2. Housing / rent costs 2. Finding a job

3. Housing / rent costs 3. Transportation 3. Help paying utility bill(s) 3. Increasing income 3. Reducing utility costs 3. Increasing income

4. Help paying utilitybill(s)

4. Dental and/orVision Care

4. Dental and/or VisionCare 4. Food costs 4. Food costs 4. Food costs

5. Food costs 5. Increasing income 5. Housing / rent costs 5. Dental and/or VisionCare



6. Paying forcollege/highereducation

6. Help paying utilitybill(s) 6. Food costs 6. Transportation 6. Dental and/or Vision

Care 6. Reducing utility costs

7. Reducing utility costs 7. Food costs 7. Finding a job7. Paying for

college/highereducation

7. Health insurance/Healthcare Costs

7. Health Insurance/Healthcare Costs

8. Finding a job8. Paying for

college/highereducation

8. Health insurance/Healthcare Costs 8. Job Training


8. Transportation

9. Health insurance/Healthcare Costs 9. Job Training


9. Help paying utilitybill(s) 9. Finding a job 9. Children’s

education/tutoring

10. Transportation 10. Credit card orloan debt 10. Access to healthy foods 10. Reducing utility costs 10. Access to healthy

foods10. Neighborhood Safety

and Security

In addition to CSBG-funded programs, other CEDA services address needs identified above. The energy programs as assist with “reducing utility costs”. The weatherization program will assist with the identified concern “reducing utility costs”. WIC benefits help low income families managing “food costs” CEDA’s Housing Department services can assist with controlling “housing/rental costs”


Appendix

2016 CEDA CSBG OUTCOME MEASURES PROBLEM STATEMENT Needs of Low-Income Residents in Suburban Cook County Program & Services Addressing Needs Goal ROMA Outcome Measure of

the Program(s) PROBLEM STATEMENT 1: Low- income families and individuals frequently need guidance, motivation, instruction, and support to make progress toward economic stability.

Case Management

Goal 1: Low-income people become more self-sufficient And Goal 6: Low-income people, especially vulnerable populations, achieve their potential by strengthening family and other supportive environments.

6.3.K Parents and other adults learn and exhibit improved family functioning skills.

PROBLEM STATEMENT 2: Low- income individuals living in suburban Cook County communities do not have the resources necessary to obtain fresh produce on a regular basis.

Family Nutrition Program

Goal 6: Low-income people, especially vulnerable populations, achieve their potential by strengthening family and other supportive environments.

6.5A Pounds of Food

PROBLEM STATEMENT 3: As the requirement of a college education for most living-wage jobs is growing, college tuition costs are increasing. Low-income individuals lack access and financial support to pursue post-secondary education.

Scholarship Program Goal 1: Low-income people become more self-sufficient.

1.2M Barriers to initial or continuous employment are reduced or eliminated: Made progress towards post-secondary degree or certificate.

PROBLEM STATEMENT 4: Families lack financial assistance when faced with emergency situations resulting in a hardship which could lead to displacement or homelessness.

Rental Assistance Goal 1: Low-income people become more self-sufficient.

1.2H Obtained and/or maintained safe and affordable housing.

PROBLEM STATEMENT 5: Low-income individuals do not have adequate financial resources to address unforeseen expenses around dental care creating a hardship which could threaten their household stability.

Dental Care

Goal 6: Low-income people, especially vulnerable populations achieve their potential by strengthening family and other supportive environments

6.2F The number of low-income individuals who sought emergency assistance and for whom assistance was provided: Emergency Medical care (Dental)


Appendix

PROBLEM STATEMENT Needs of Low-Income Residents in Suburban Cook County Program & Services Addressing Needs Goal ROMA Outcome Measure of

the Program(s) PROBLEM STATEMENT 6: Low-income individuals do not have adequate financial resources to address unforeseen expenses around vision care creating a hardship which could threaten their household stability.

Vision Care

Goal 6: Low-income people, especially vulnerable populations achieve their potential by strengthening family and other supportive environments

6.2F The number of low-income individuals who sought emergency assistance and for whom assistance was provided: Emergency Medical care (Vision)

PROBLEM STATEMENT 7: Low-income individuals do not have adequate financial resources to address unforeseen expenses around auto repair creating a hardship which could threaten their household stability.

Auto Repair

Goal 1: Low-income people become more self sufficient and Goal 6: Low-income people, especially vulnerable populations achieve their potential by strengthening family and other supportive environments

1.2F Barriers to initial or continuous employment are reduced or eliminated: Obtained access to reliable transportation. 6.1 The number of vulnerable individuals receiving services from Community Action who maintain an independent living situation as a result of those services.

PROBLEM STATEMENT 8: Unemployment rates in suburban Cook County continue to be high, especially for low skilled workers.

Employment Program Goal 1: Low-income people become more self-sufficient.

1.1A Unemployed and obtained a job. 1.2A Barriers to initial or continuous employment are reduced or eliminated: Obtained skills/competencies required for employment.

PROBLEM STATEMENT 9: Low income individuals are faced with lack of skills training which will allow the opportunity to obtain employment or become self-employed in a skills trade industry.

Skills Trade Goal 1: Low-income people become more self-sufficient.

1.2A Barriers to initial or continuous employment are reduced or eliminated: Obtained skills/competencies required for employment.


2015 Community Survey

2015 Community Needs Survey

1. What is your town/city and zip code

2. Total Household Size:# Children (0-17) # Adults (18–64) Older Adults (65+)

3. Please indicate your gender. Male Female

4. Housing: (Please select one below) I own my own home I rent my home I am homeless I live with my friend(s)

I live with my child, parent, or other family.

5. What is your age group? Please select one below. Under 18 18-30 31-49 50-64 65+

6. Please select the option that best describes your race. African-American/Black Asian Native American or Alaska Native Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander

White Multi-race Other:

7. Are you Hispanic? Yes No

8. How much income does your Household have in a year? Less than $15,000 $15,001 to $30,000 $30,001 to $50,000 $50,001 to $75,000 More than $75,000

9. In your home, what language is spoken most? (Check one box please) English Spanish Arabic Chinese Vietnamese Polish Tagalog

Russian German Other:

10. Are you or a household member currently in the Armed Forces or a Military Veteran? Yes No

11. Please check all sources of income in your household.

Full-Time Employment General Assistance Self-Employment Part-Time Employment TANF

Unemployment Social Security Disability /Workers Comp. Other Pensions Child Support Other

12. Please select indicate the highest level of education completed in your household. (Please check one box)

0 - 8th grade 9th – 12th grade, no diploma High school diploma/GED Certified Vocation

Associate’s Degree Bachelor’s Degree Post-Graduate Degree

13. Please indicate any agency that provided services for you or a household member in the past 12 months. (check any thatapply)

CEDA Township Office IL Department of Human Services (SNAP/TANF/ MEDICAID)

Salvation Army Catholic Charities

Other: (list all)

Thank you for your time and participation in this survey!

APPENDIX 1 - SURVEY TOOLS

Page 59


14. Based on the current needs of your household and your community, please rate each of the issues below by marking ONEof the boxes on each line.

(Check one rating per line) A Critical concern

Somewhat a concern

Not at all a concern

Transportation

Food costs

Access to healthy foods

Housing /rent costs

Homelessness

Home repairs


Increasing income

Help with managing money



Parenting support and education


High school drop-outs

Affordable daycare or before/after school care





Programs for youth/teens

Juvenile Delinquency/Crime

Drug or Alcohol Abuse

Domestic Violence

Programs and services for Senior Citizens

Services for Disabled people

Veterans’ Services

Mental Health Services

Language Barrier(s)

Immigration/citizenship issues

Incarceration /reintegration issues

Finding a job

Job Training

Other:

15. Which ONE item of the list above is MOST important need right now?

___________________________________________________________________

Thank you for your time and participation in this survey! Page 60


16. Thinking about the resources and programs that already exist, how would you rate the following services in yourcommunity? (Please Check one per line)

Excellent Good Fair Poor/none Don’t Know

Jobs Training and Employment

Quality Education

Affordable Housing

Foreclosure Prevention

Healthy Food/ Grocery Stores

Financial Education & Services

Medical & Dental Care

Programs /Activities for Youth

Child Care

Transportation



Homeless Services

Immigration and Citizenship

Alcohol & Drug Treatment

Please share any comments or suggestions:


2015 Stakeholder Survey

2015 Community Survey - Stakeholders The Community and Economic Development Association of Cook County, Inc. (CEDA) is conducting a community needs assessment which is a combination of information gathering, community engagement and focused action with the goal of community improvement. Obtaining feedback from partners, stakeholders, and business owners is vital to the process. We would appreciate your taking the time to complete the following survey. Your responses are voluntary and will be confidential. All responses will be compiled together, analyzed, and shared with the community. Thank you in advance.

1. Township, municipality or village location of your business: and zip code:

2. Which of the following best describes the organizationyou represent?

3. Do you invest in the community where your organizationresides in the following ways? (Check as many as apply)

Elected Office Sponsor community events

Social Service Provider Sponsor community groups

Educational Institution Sponsor local schools

Healthcare Provider Charitable contributions to community organizations

For Profit Business Donations of goods and services for any of the above

Landlord/Property Management Would like to, but have not done so yet

Recreation/Community Program Have not done so

Government Agency Other:

4. How long has your organization been in the community? Please select one below.Under 1 year 1 – 5 years 6 – 10 years 11 – 20 years 21+

5. Do you recruit employees from the community in which your business resides? Yes No Don’t know

If yes, approximately how many of your employees reside in the community?

6. Does your organization currently refer customers to CEDA? Yes No Don’t know

7. Based on the current needs of your household and your community, please rate each of the issues below bymarking one of the boxes on each line.

(Check one rating per line) A Critical concern

Somewhat a concern

Not at all a concern

Transportation

Food costs


Housing /rent costs

Homelessness

Home repairs


Increasing income







2015 Stakeholder Survey

High school drop-outs

Affordable daycare or before/after school care








Domestic Violence





Language Barrier(s)



Finding a job

Job Training

Other:

8. Which ONE item of the list above is MOST important need right now? ___________________________________________

9. Thinking about the resources and programs that already exist, how would you rate the following services in yourcommunity? (Please Check one per line)

Excellent Good Fair Poor/None Don’t Know Jobs Training and Employment

Quality Education

Affordable Housing

Foreclosure Prevention

Healthy Food/ Grocery Stores

Financial Education & Services

Medical & Dental Care

Programs /Activities for Youth

Child Care

Transportation



Homeless Services

Immigration and Citizenship

Alcohol & Drug Treatment


Appendix

Appendix 2 Needs Assessment Data Graphs

Female, 75%

Female, 80%

Female, 80%

Male, 25%

Male, 20%

Male, 20%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

NORTH SOUTH WEST

Gender of Respondents

33% 26%

29%

38%

62%

43%

5% 0.4% 2% 2% 1% 0.4%

5% 5% 4%

18%

6%

22%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

NORTH SOUTH WEST

Race of Respondents

WhiteAfrican-American/BlackAsianNative American or Alaska NativeMultiracialOther

23% HISPANIC 11% HISPANIC 35% HISPANIC

CEDA 2016 CAP Appendix 2 Page 64


Appendix

1% 1% 1%

22%

30% 30%

45%

31% 33%

23% 23% 17%

9% 14%

18%

0%5%

10%15%20%25%30%35%40%45%50%

NORTH SOUTH WEST

Age of Respondents

Under 18 18-30 31-49 50-64 65 or older

59% 51%

45%

23% 29%

36%

10% 10% 13% 4% 6% 3% 4% 4% 3%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

NORTH SOUTH WEST

Houseshold Income of respondents

<$15,000 $15,000-30,000 $30,000-50,000 $50,000-$75,000 >$75,000


Appendix

NORTH SOUTH WESTOwn 21% 29% 28%Rent 56% 45% 48%Live w/ family 14% 17% 21%Live w/ friends 4% 2% 2%Homeless 5% 7% 1%

Own

Own Own

Rent

Rent Rent

Live w/ family Live w/ family

Live w/ family

Live w/ friends Live w/ friends

Live w/ friends Homeless

Homeless

Homeless 0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Housing status of Respondents


Appendix

Single 19%

2 members

16%

3 members

11%

4 members

19%

5 or more 35%

Household Size -NORTH

4% 1% 7% 10% 12%

15%

46% 42%

48%

8% 10%

6% 10% 14%

14% 17% 15% 7% 6% 7% 3%

NORTH SOUTH WEST

Household Education Attainment Level

Post-Graduate Degree

Bachelor’s Degree

Associate’s Degree

Certified Vocation

High school diploma/GED

9th – 12th grade, no diploma

0 - 8th grade

Single 20%

2 20%

3 16%

4 15%

5 or more 29%

Household Size - SOUTH

Single 15%

2 19%

3 14%

4 20%

5 or more 32%

Household Size - WEST


Appendix


English77%

Spanish14%

Arabic1%

Vietnamese1%

Polish1%

Russian2%

Other4%

Language used at home ‐ NORTH Resonpondents

English90%

Spanish5%

Arabic3%

Polish0.4%

Other1%

Language used at home ‐ SOUTH Resonpondents

English76%

Spanish18%

Arabic5%

Vietnamese0.2%

Polish0.4%

Tagalog0.2% Other

0.6%

Language used at home ‐WEST Resonpondents

Appendix


0.35 0.55 0.75 0.95 1.15 1.35 1.55 1.75

Increasing income


Housing / rent costs



Food costs


Finding a job

Health insurance/ Healthcare Costs


Job Training


Transportation

Affordable daycare or before/after school…





Home repairs


Children's education/tutoring


Homelessness



Drug of Alcohol Abuse

Veterans' Services

High school drop‐outs

Domestic Violence

Language Barrier(s)

Incarceration/re‐integration issues


Needs ranking ‐ comparison of Regional responses

SOUTH

WEST

NORTH

Appendix


0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16% 18% 20%

Housing /rent costs

Finding a job

Increasing income

Food costs


Transportation



Job Training




Homelessness



Home repairs

Affordable daycare or before/after school…




High school drop‐outs










Language Barrier(s)

Domestic Violence

The Most Urgent Needs‐Regional Comparison

South %

West %

North %

Appendix

30.0

35.0

40.0

45.0

50.0

55.0

60.0

65.0

70.0

75.0

80.0

Community Services Scores - comparison by region

NORTH SOUTH WEST


Appendix

Results of sub-sectors

0.90 1.00 1.10 1.20 1.30 1.40 1.50 1.60 1.70 1.80

Top 10 ranked concerns HISPANIC respondents

Top Concerns of respondents Under 18 years of age


Appendix

3

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

1.50

Top 10 Concerns of Household with children

0.70

0.80

0.90

1.00

1.10

1.20

1.30

1.40

1.50

1.60

Top 10 Concerns of respondents over 65


Appendix

Appendix 3 Map of CEDA Service Locations


Appendix

Appendix 4 “Family Nutrition Sites for CEDA CSBG”

Fresh Produce Distribution and Nutrition Education Sites SITE NAME STREET CITY & STATE Alicia's House 17 Paulsen Chicago Heights

Christ UMC 3730 W. 119th Street Alsip

Ford Heights Community Service Organization 943 E. Lincoln Highway Ford Heights

Lighthouse Church of All Nations 4501 W. 127th Alsip

L.B.D Enterprises 16710 Richmond Hazel Crest

Abounding Life Church of God in Christ 14626 Mozart Avenue Posen

New Zion Booc Joseph Storehouse 14200 Chicago Road Dolton

Mosque Foundation Food Pantry 7210 W. 90th Place Bridgeview

Operation Blessing of Southwest Chicagoland 4901 W. 128th Place Alsip

Thornton Township 15340 Page Avenue Harvey

Restoration Ministries 253 E. 159th Street Harvey

Vision of Restoration 1405 Madison Ave Maywood

St. Clement's Pantry 15245 South Loomis Ave Harvey

Temple of Praise Binding and Loosing Ministries 1647 Cottage Grove Ford Heights

Valley Kingdom 1102 E. 154th Street South Holland

The Salvation Army: Blue Island 2900 W. Burr Oak Blue Island

Respond Now 21701 Torrence Avenue Sauk Village

Palatine Township Food Pantry 721 S. Quentin Road Palatine

Respond Now 1439 Emerald Ave Chicago Heights

Willow Creek 67 E. Algonquin Road South Barrington

Together We Cope 17010 Oak Park Avenue Tinley Park

Ebenezer Christian Ref 1300 Harvey Ave Berwyn

United Methodist of Worth 7100 W. 112th Street Worth

Church of the Holy Spirit 1449 W. Bode Road Schaumburg

St. Francis Xavier 124 N. Spring Avenue LaGrange

Orland Township Food Pantry 14807 Ravinia Orland Park

Our Lady of Mt. Carmel 1119 N. 23rd Avenue Melrose Park


Appendix

Appendix 5 Coalitions, Collaborations, and Associations

CEDA personnel represent the agency on these Coalitions, Collaborations, and Associations

1. ABC Energy Coalition

2. All Our Kids (AOK) Cicero

3. Alliance to End Homelessness in suburban Cook County

4. Alternative Education Resource Organization (AERO)

5. Chicago Area Fair Housing Alliance

6. Chicago CRA Coalition

7. Chicago Rehab Network

8. Cicero Youth Task Force

9. Housing Action Illinois

10. Illinois Association of Community Action Agencies

11. Illinois Hunger Coalition – Northern Community Quality Council (CQC)

12. Illinois Hunger Coalition – South Suburban Community Quality Council (CQC)

13. Illinois Hunger Coalition – West Suburban Community Quality Council (CQC)

14. Illinois Policy Advisory Council

15. Illinois Welcoming Center Partners

16. Illinois WorkNet Center Partners – Arlington Heights

17. Illinois WorkNet Center Partners – Burbank

18. Illinois WorkNet Center Partners – Evanston

19. Illinois WorkNet Center Partners – Chicago Heights

20. National Community Action Foundation

21. National Community Action Partnership

22. National Community Reinvestment Coalition

23. National Council of La Raza (NCLR)

24. National WIC Association

25. Neighbor Works America

26. Niles Township Interagency network

27. Solutions for Care Partners

28. St. Francis hospital Social Services Committee

29. West Suburban Community Alliance

30. Youth Service Board Local Area Network (LAN)


Appendix

Appendix 6 “Partner and MOU Sites for CEDA CSBG”

PARTNER & MOU SITES FOR CEDA CSBG REGION SITE STREET CITY & STATE North HANOVER TOWNSHIP 7431 Astor Avenue Hanover Park, IL 60133 North IDES –ARLINGTON HGHTS 723 W. Algonquin Road Arlington Heights, IL North NEW TRIER TOWNSHIP 739 Elm Street Winnetka, Illinois 60093 North NILES FAMILY SERVICES 999 Civic Center Drive Niles, IL 60714 North NILES TOWNSHIP 5255 Main Street Skokie, IL 60077 North NORTHWEST COMPASS 1300 West Northwest Hwy Mount Prospect, IL 60056 North PALATINE OPPORTUNITY CENTER 1585 North Rand Road Palatine, IL 60074 North SCHAUMBURG TOWNSHIP One Illinois Boulevard Hoffman Estates, IL 60169 North NORTHFIELD TOWNSHIP 2550 Waukegan Road Glenview, IL 60025 South BLOOM TOWNSHIP 425 South Halsted Chicago Heights, IL 60411 South BREMEN TOWNSHIP 16361 Kedzie Markham, IL 60428 South BREMEN TOWNSHIP- Oak Forest 15350 Oak Park Ave. Oak Forest, IL 60452 South IDES-Harvey 16845 S. Halsted 60426 Harvey, IL 60426 South ORLAND TOWNSHIP 14807 S. Ravinia Ave. Orland Park, IL 60462 South RESTORATION MINISTRIES 253 E. 159th Street Harvey, IL 60426

South RICH TOWNSHIP 22013 Governors Highway Richton Park, IL 60471 South THORNTON TOWNSHIP 333 E. 162nd Street, South Holland, IL 60473

South THORNTON TOWNSHIP SENIOR, YOUTH & FAMILY

14323 S. Halsted St Riverdale, IL 60827

West ARAB AMERICAN FAMILY SERVICES 9044 S. Octavia Avenue Bridgeview, IL 60455

West BROOKFIELD VILLAGE 8820 Brookfield Ave Brookfield IL 60513

West EMPLOYMENT & EMPLOYER SERVICES, INC.

1701 S. 1st Ave. Maywood, IL 60153

West IDES – BURBANK 5608 W 75th Pl Burbank, IL 60459

West LEMONT TOWNSHIP 1115 Warner Avenue Lemont, IL 60439

West LEYDEN TOWNSHIP 2501 N. Mannheim Rd. Franklin Park, IL. 60131

West LYONS TOWNSHIP 100 S Brainard Ave La Grange, IL, 60525

West OUR LADY OF CARMEL “CASA ESPERANZA”

1115 N. 23rd Ave. Melrose Park, IL. 60160

West VISION OF RESTORATION 1221 W. Madison Street Maywood, IL 60153

West TRITON COLLEGE 2000 5th Ave River Grove, IL 60171


SITE NAME ADDRESS CITY ST ZIP

Action Coalition of Englewood Inc. 6455 S. Peoria St Chicago IL 60621

Aging Care Connections 111 W. Harris Ave LaGrange IL 60525

Amor de Dios United Methodist Church 2356 S. Sawyer Ave Chicago IL 60623

Arab American Family Services 9044 S. Octavia Ave Bridgeview IL 60455

Assembly of Faith Outreach Center 1222 W. 108th St. Chicago IL 60643

Assyrian National Council of Illinois 2450 W. Peterson Ave Chicago IL 60659

Avec Restoration Center 4743 West 138th Street, 2W Crestwood IL 60445

Awe Charity Foundation 9242 N. Waukegan Rd. Morton Grove IL 60053

Bethlehem Star M.B. Church 9231 S. Cottage Grove Ave Chicago IL 60619

Brighton Park Neighborhood Council 4477 S. Archer Ave Chicago IL 60632

Brock Social Services Organization 615 E. 103rd St Chicago IL 60628

Cabrini Rowhouse TMC 530 W. Locust St. Chicago IL 60610

Cambodian Association of Illinois 2831 W. Lawrence Ave Chicago IL 60625

Center for Seniors 5320 N. Kedzie Ave Chicago IL 60625

Center for Seniors (Satellite) 5844 Lincoln Ave Morton Grove IL 60053

Center for Seniors (Satellite) 611 Remington Schaumburg IL 60173

Central United Community Church 8244 S. Cottage Grove Ave Chicago IL 60619

Centro Communitario Juan Diego 8812 S. Commercial Ave Chicago IL 60617

Centro Romero 6216 N. Clark St. Chicago IL 60660

Chetwyn Rodgers Drive Development Center 25 N. Cicero Ave Chicago IL 60644

Organization 12338 S. Halsted St Calumet Park IL 60827

Chinese American Service League 2141 S. Tan Court Chicago IL 60616

Chinese Mutual Aid Association 1016 W. Argyle St Chicago IL 60640

Christ Cathedral MB Church 449 W. 111th St Chicago IL 60628

Christ United Faith Ministry 11906 S. Michigan Ave. Chicago IL 60628

Church of the Living God 2159 E. 95th St. Chicago IL 60617

Community Care Outreach 77 W. Sibley Blvd South Holland IL 60473

Community Care Outreach 1819 W. 87th St Chicago IL 60620

European American Association 2827 W. Division St Chicago IL 60622

Evening Star M.B.C. 4235 S Cottage Grove Ave Chicago IL 60653

Eyes on Austin 5519 W. North Ave Chicago IL 60639

Corporation 437 E. 71st St Chicago IL 60619

Federacion De Cludes Micoacanos 1638 S. Blue Island Chicago IL 60608

Fernwood United Methodist Church 10105 S. Wallace St. Chicago IL 60628

Corporation 1515 E. 71st St. Chicago IL 60619

Corporation 5531 S. King Drive Chicago IL 60637

Hanover Township 7431 Astor Ave Hanover Park IL 60133

Hanover Township ‐ Satellite 250 South Rt 59 Bartlett IL 60103

Hanover Township Senior Services 240 S. Illinois Rt 59 Bartlett IL 60103

Hanul Family Alliance 5008 N. Kedzie Ave Chicago IL 60625

Hanul Family Alliance Suburban Office 1166 S. Elmhurst Rd. Mt. Prospect IL 60056

Healing Temple Church 4941 W. Chicago Ave Chicago IL 60651

Hegewisch Community Committee 13100 S Manistee Ave Chicago IL 60633

Heritage International 5308 W. North Ave Chicago IL 60639

Hope Organization II 6921 S. Halsted St. Chicago IL 60621

Howard Area Community Center 7648 N. Paulina St Chicago IL 60626

Indo‐American Center 6328 N. California Ave. Chicago IL 60659

Jane Addams Resource Corp 4432 N Ravenswood Ave. Chicago IL 60640

Korean American Community Services 4300 N. California Ave Chicago IL 60618

Korean American Community Services 664 N. Milwaukee Ave #213 Prospect Heights IL 60070

Appendix 6 LIHEAP 2015 Contracted Site List 6.24.15.xlsx Page 1 of 3

Appendix 7 “LIHEAP/ Weatherization Intake Sites”


LIHEAP / WEATHERIZATION INTAKE SITES


Labor Coalition for People's Action 37 S. Ashland Ave Chicago IL 60607

Latino Organization of the Southwest 4051 W. 63rd St. Chicago IL 60629

Le Penseur Youth & Family Services 8550 S. Manistee Ave. Chicago IL 60617

Leyden Family Services 10001 W. Grand Ave Franklin Park IL 60131

Maine Township 1700 Ballard Rd Park Ridge IL 60068

Marillac Social Center 212 S. Francisco Ave Chicago IL 60612

Metro Chicago Methodist Church 6310 N. Lincoln Ave #23 Chicago IL 60659

Metropolitan Asian Family Services 7541 N. Western Ave Chicago IL 60645

Mt. Carmel M.B. Church 2978 S. Wabash Ave Chicago IL 60616

Muslim Women Resource Center 6445 N. Western Ave. Suite 301 Chicago IL 60645

New Eclipse Community Alliance 715 W. 51st Street Chicago IL 60609

New Life Ministries 634 N. Austin Oak Park IL 60302

North Lawndale Employment Network 3726 W. Flournoy Chicago IL 60624

North Shore Senior Center 840 Dodge Avenue Evanston IL 60202

North Shore Senior Center 161 Northfield Rd Northfield IL 60093

Northfield Township 100 Glenview IL 60025

Northwest Austin Council 5730 W. Division St Chicago IL 60651

Northwest Compass 1300 W. Northwest Hwy Mt. Prospect IL 60056

Oak Park Senior Services 130 S. Oak Park Ave Oak Park IL 60302

Operation Brotherhood 3745 W. Ogden Ave Chicago IL 60623

Our Lady of Guadalupe 2955 W. 25th St. Chicago IL 60623

Palatine Township 721 S. Quentin Rd Palatine IL 60067

Palatine Township Senior Citizens Council 505 S. Quentin Rd Palatine IL 60067

People's Church 3570 W. Fifth Ave Chicago IL 60624

PLOWS Agency on Aging 7808 College Dr 5‐east Palos Heights IL 60463

Polish American Association 3834 N. Cicero Ave Chicago IL 60641

Polish Highlanders 6245 S. Archer Ave Chicago IL 60638

Polish Highlanders 5309 W. 95th St. Oak Lawn IL 60453

(PLCCA) 411 Madison St, PO Box 950 Maywood IL 60153

Puerto Rican Cultural Center 2640 W. Division St. Chicago IL 60622

Puerto Ricans Unidos En Accion 2606 W. Division St Chicago IL 60622

Romanian American Community Center 3643 W. Irving Park Rd Chicago IL 60618

San Lucas United Church of Christ 2914 W. North Ave Chicago IL 60647

SANAD 3302 W. 63rd St Chicago IL 60629

Schaumburg Township One Illinois Blvd Hoffman Estates IL 60169

Search Outreach Program 614 E. 75th St Chicago IL 60619

Senior Assistance Center 7774 W. Irving Park Rd Norridge IL 60706

Solutions for Care 7222 W. Cermak Rd. Suite 200 North Riverside IL 60546

South Austin Coalition Community Council 5071 W. Congress Pkwy Chicago IL 60644

South‐East Asia Center 5120 N. Broadway St. Chicago IL 60640

Southland Hispanic Leadership Counci 21110 S. Western Avenue Olympia Fields IL 60461

Spanish Action Committee of Chicago 2452 W. Division St Chicago IL 60622

Spanish Coalition for Housing 1922 N Pulaski Chicago IL 60639

Spanish Coalition for Housing ‐ Satellite 1915 S. Blue Island Ave Chicago IL 60608

Spanish Coalition for Housing‐ Satellite 9010 S. Commercial Chicago IL 60617

St. Vincent De Paul Center 2145 N. Halsted St. Chicago IL 60614

Stickney Township 6721 W. 40th St Stickney IL 60402

Stickney Township 7745 S. Leamington Burbank IL 60459

Strategic Human Services 1211 S. Western Ave, Suite 203 Chicago IL 60608

Center 4934 N. Pulaski Rd Chicago IL 60630



LIHEAP / WEATHERIZATION INTAKE SITES


The Link and Option Center 15652 Homan Ave. Markham IL 60428

The New Love and Faith Church 611 N. Waller Ave. Chicago IL 60644

Total Resource Comm. Organization / Triedstone 1415 W. 104th St Chicago IL 60643

Trinity Resurrection United Church 9046 S. Mackinaw Ave Chicago IL 60617

Universal Prayer Tower 840 S. 17th Ave Maywood IL 60153

Universal Prayer Tower 123 N. Hoyne Chicago IL 60612

Universal Prayer Tower 4540 W. Washington Blvd Chicago IL 60624

Universal Prayer Tower‐ Satellite 1336 E. 76th St Chicago IL 60619

Universal Prayer Tower/Pleasant Green M.B.C. 7545 S. Vincennes Ave Chicago IL 60620

Wheeling Township 1616 N. Arlington Heights Rd. Heights IL 60004

Women in Partnership 1830 W. 95th St. Chciago IL 60643

Woodlawn East Community and Neighbor (WECAN) 6450 S. Stony Island Ave Chicago IL 60637

Workers Education 3339 S. Halsted St. Chicago IL 60608



Documents

Community Action Plan - CEDApeople reside in Suburban Cook County. In order to better describe and plan services for the communities of suburban Cook County, CEDA has defined its service