Provisional guidance on an alternative method of identifying overburdened communities unshaded on the OBC Map (for FY25 reporting)

Purpose: This guidance is intended to provide HEAL covered agencies with tools to help determine if an investment was made in an overburdened community (OBC) that is not shaded on the OBC Map in the Office of Financial Management (OFM) implementation guide. The goal is to improve agency reporting on environmental justice obligations of agencies relating to budgets and funding (RCW 70A.02.080), and the expenditures that provide a direct benefit to overburdened communities. This guidance is provisional and is provided as an option for agencies to consider incorporating into their reporting process.

This document does not replace the guidance for using the OBC Map. The provisional guidance presented below is in accord with OFM’s uniform approach for identifying overburdened communities and vulnerable populations to direct and track investments, including the exception noted on page 5 of that document.

Site- and project-specific analysis should guide the use and interpretation of this document. It is important to recognize in some instances expenditures occurring in a census tract identified as overburdened through this or other methods may not benefit vulnerable populations (VPs) within that census tract. Additionally, some projects may necessitate consideration of population characteristics and environmental and health harms at spatial scales smaller or larger than census tracts. Therefore, all agencies are strongly encouraged to consider site- and project-specific analyses, given the large diversity of environmental and health realities within any given census tract, regardless of its determination through this informal guidance.

How to document determinations: If an agency determines that an expenditure benefited an OBC that is not shaded on the current OBC map, it should provide a written narrative that will be made available on the public OFM Budgets & Funding dashboard. The narrative should describe how the determination was made, including what data were used and which VPs characteristics were considered.

Guidance

Definition of overburdened communities (OBC) according to the HEAL Act: RCW 70A.02.010

(11) “Overburdened community” means a geographic area where vulnerable populations face combined, multiple environmental harms and health impacts, and includes, but is not limited to, highly impacted communities as defined in RCW 19.405.020.

Step 1: Population characteristics analysis: Evaluate whether there are vulnerable populations present in the area where the investment was made. *Please note: Some VPs may not be identified through the indicators listed below, including populations of unhoused people and workers exposed to environmental harms. You may also wish to consider the presence of VPs at scales other than the census tract level, as appropriate to the project or expenditure.

How to do this:

• Look at the Environmental Health Disparities Map’s “Socioeconomic Factors” cumulative rank for the census tract. If the cumulative rank is a 9 or 10, move to Step 2 (below)
• Look at the Environmental Health Disparities Map’s measure-level ranks for the census tract for
  • “People of Color (Race/Ethnicity),”
  • “Population Living in Poverty <= 185% of Federal Poverty Level (%),” and/or
  • “Primary Language other than English”
  • If the census tract ranks 9 or 10 for one or more of these three indicators, then move to Step 2 (below).

Step 2: Environmental Harms/Hazards analysis: Evaluate whether there are combined, multiple environmental and health harms, hazards, or risks in that census tract. This analysis should be based on reasonable judgments and understandings of how environmental and health issues intersect, and also based on what “combined, multiple environmental harms and health impacts” are identified and most relevant for the associated expenditure. It should not be based on cherry-picking data to find something that fits.

Based on an analysis of relevant and appropriate data sources, the agency may make a determination as to whether the investment is in an OBC that was otherwise not shaded on the OBC map. Please note that an area that does not qualify as an OBC may still have VPs present.

You can evaluate environmental harms and hazards through the following data sources:

• Environmental and health data available through the EHD map / Washington Tracking Network (WTN).
• Existing relationships and previous long-term engagement with the community, which inform an understanding of the environmental and health impacts experienced by those who live or work there. These data may be qualitative and come from community members, local governments, or community-based organizations and may include site-specific knowledge. In some cases, it may also be based on Traditional Ecological Knowledge (TEK) held by members of an Indigenous community or Tribe, or on previous citizen science or collaborative projects.
• Local and county level public health data, or other community-specific data sources.
• Additional data specific to the action or the community (some may be more updated than the EHD map):
  • Water Quality Atlas: Shows a variety of water quality features, including polluted waterways
    • Directions:
      1. Depending on the project area, filter by city, county, legislative district, Water Resource Inventory Area (WRIA), or specific location
      2. Filter by water quality standards: Category 5, 4a, and 4b
      3. Look at how much of the contaminated waterway overlaps with the project area
    • Caveats: Line/polygon is a waterway, which may overlap with multiple census tracts and/or be a very small part of a tract.
  • Nitrate Project: Shows nitrate-contaminated groundwater sources ▪ Caveats: Does not mesh well with other datasets (not interactive)
  • Washington Shellfish Safety Map and/or Washington Commercial Growing Areas Map: Show prohibited areas closed to recreational and commercial shellfish harvesting
    • Caveats:
      • The people who benefit from and may rely on shellfish in these areas may not live in the areas immediately adjacent to them. (This may especially be the case for Tribal citizens and traditional fishing grounds not located on Tribal lands.) This poses challenges and potentially misleading results in identifying overburdened communities based only on geographical proximity to contaminated shellfish sites.
      • Commercial shellfish sites may be run by different kinds of operators. The map does not tell us about how communities themselves might be harmed by these closures.
      • There are some concerns about the representation of the beach closure data as lines rather than polygons.
  • Climate Projections: WTN hosts data on precipitation change, temperature, wildfire risk, flood zones, etc. The Climate Projections ~2050 map layer in the EHD map includes values and ranks for some climate indicators.
    • Directions:
      • In EHD map, click the Climate Projections ~2050 layer.
      • Click on a census tract. This will open a pop-up window.
      • If the census tract has an Information By Location (IBL) rank of 9 or 10 for two or more of the indicators included in the pop-up, then it may be disproportionately impacted by climate change.
    • Caveats:
      • No composite indicator of climate risk or climate injustice.
      • Does not encompass the full range of climate impacts and projections.
  • What’s in My Neighborhood? Shows toxic cleanup sites (cleaned up, active, awaiting cleanup, etc.). Can be filtered by contaminant type, cleanup status, and location.
    • Directions:
      • For highly localized projects: Enter an address and establish a radius (e.g., one mile, two miles) around the site to view cleanup sites in that radius.
      • For more dispersed project areas: Create a filter by city or county and identify sites in that area.
      • In all cases: May wish to filter by cleanup status and by types of chemicals.
    • Caveats:
      • Hazardous waste sites are not vetted or updated in this tool.
      • Facility presence does not necessarily indicate high or low levels of exposure.

Step 3: Communicate the determination: Present the agency’s determination in a short, narrative format that is plain talked and accessible to members of the public. This narrative explanation of the decision-making process gives the public information about how agencies are making determinations beyond the OBC map and promotes transparency. Narrative determinations will be available via the Budgets & Funding Dashboard.