Critical Issues in Serving the Needs of Critical Issues in Serving the Needs of Limited English Proficiency (LEP) Limited English Proficiency (LEP)

Communities Communities

Rongfang (Rachel) Liu, PhD, AICP, PERongfang (Rachel) Liu, PhD, AICP, PENew Jersey Institute of TechnologyNew Jersey Institute of Technology

FEDERAL INTERAGENCY CONFERENCEON LIMITED ENGLISH PROFICIENCY

September 3, 2008September 3, 2008

IntroductionIntroduction

• Research Background• LEP Definition Affecting Funding Allocations • Mobility Information Needs of LEP Population• Incorporating LEP in Emergency Evacuation Plan• Summary

Research BackgroundResearch Background• Mobility Information Need Study for New

Jersey Transit• Chicago Transit Authority Limited English

Proficiency Study • Emergency Response Planning• Immigration and Refugee Related Issues

Sampling ApproachesSampling Approaches

• NJ Transit Study• Research Objectives• Research Design• Data Sources• Survey and Analysis Results• Contrast and Comparison w/Other Fields• Lessons Learnt

Definition of LEP by DOTDefinition of LEP by DOT

LEP persons are those individuals with a primary or home language other than English who must, due to limited fluency in English, communicate in that primary or home language if they are to have an equal opportunity to participate in or benefit from any aids or services provided by the transportation agency.

Research ObjectivesResearch Objectives

• Understand demographics of LEP travelers• Assess mobility information needs • Further NJDOT’s compliance w/Title VI • Provide NJ Transit w/a Best Practice Manual• Collect information on cost & schedule of

recommended practices

Research DesignResearch Design1. Literature Review2. Identify LEP Data Sources3. Classify LEP Populations in New Jersey 4. Generate Input from LEP Travelers in New Jersey5. Survey Peer Transportation Agencies6. Survey Internationally Oriented Activity Centers7. Survey Selected International Entities8. Develop a Non-verbal Communication Approach9. Synthesizing Verbal and Nonverbal Approaches10. Draft Final Report 11. Quarterly Progress Report, Final Report, and

Presentation to RSIP.

LEP Population Classification LEP Population Classification by Census 2000by Census 2000

ATLANTICATLANTICATLANTICATLANTICATLANTICATLANTICATLANTICATLANTICATLANTIC

BERGENBERGENBERGENBERGENBERGENBERGENBERGENBERGENBERGEN

BURLINGTONBURLINGTONBURLINGTONBURLINGTONBURLINGTONBURLINGTONBURLINGTONBURLINGTONBURLINGTONCAMDENCAMDENCAMDENCAMDENCAMDENCAMDENCAMDENCAMDENCAMDEN

CAPE MAYCAPE MAYCAPE MAYCAPE MAYCAPE MAYCAPE MAYCAPE MAYCAPE MAYCAPE MAY

CUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDCUMBERLAND

ESSEXESSEXESSEXESSEXESSEXESSEXESSEXESSEXESSEX

GLOUCESTERGLOUCESTERGLOUCESTERGLOUCESTERGLOUCESTERGLOUCESTERGLOUCESTERGLOUCESTERGLOUCESTER

HUDSONHUDSONHUDSONHUDSONHUDSONHUDSONHUDSONHUDSONHUDSON

HUNTERDONHUNTERDONHUNTERDONHUNTERDONHUNTERDONHUNTERDONHUNTERDONHUNTERDONHUNTERDON

MERCERMERCERMERCERMERCERMERCERMERCERMERCERMERCERMERCER

MIDDLESEXMIDDLESEXMIDDLESEXMIDDLESEXMIDDLESEXMIDDLESEXMIDDLESEXMIDDLESEXMIDDLESEX

MONMOUTHMONMOUTHMONMOUTHMONMOUTHMONMOUTHMONMOUTHMONMOUTHMONMOUTHMONMOUTH

MORRISMORRISMORRISMORRISMORRISMORRISMORRISMORRISMORRIS

OCEANOCEANOCEANOCEANOCEANOCEANOCEANOCEANOCEAN

PASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAIC

SALEMSALEMSALEMSALEMSALEMSALEMSALEMSALEMSALEM

SOMERSETSOMERSETSOMERSETSOMERSETSOMERSETSOMERSETSOMERSETSOMERSETSOMERSET

SUSSEXSUSSEXSUSSEXSUSSEXSUSSEXSUSSEXSUSSEXSUSSEXSUSSEX

UNIONUNIONUNIONUNIONUNIONUNIONUNIONUNIONUNION

WARRENWARRENWARRENWARRENWARRENWARRENWARRENWARRENWARREN

LEP POPULATIONLanguage Group by County, 2000

72,000

SpanishOther Indo-EuropeanAsian & Pacific IslandOther Languages

10,22510,22510,22510,22510,22510,22510,22510,22510,225

48,90048,90048,90048,90048,90048,90048,90048,90048,900

5,7935,7935,7935,7935,7935,7935,7935,7935,79314,82114,82114,82114,82114,82114,82114,82114,82114,821

976976976976976976976976976

6,5846,5846,5846,5846,5846,5846,5846,5846,584

50,85950,85950,85950,85950,85950,85950,85950,85950,859

1,9751,9751,9751,9751,9751,9751,9751,9751,975

87,76387,76387,76387,76387,76387,76387,76387,76387,763

990990990990990990990990990

12,68712,68712,68712,68712,68712,68712,68712,68712,687

41,87641,87641,87641,87641,87641,87641,87641,87641,876

14,11314,11314,11314,11314,11314,11314,11314,11314,113

14,06014,06014,06014,06014,06014,06014,06014,06014,060

7,6867,6867,6867,6867,6867,6867,6867,6867,686

51,76951,76951,76951,76951,76951,76951,76951,76951,769

800800800800800800800800800

10,74710,74710,74710,74710,74710,74710,74710,74710,747

1,1111,1111,1111,1111,1111,1111,1111,1111,111

41,73241,73241,73241,73241,73241,73241,73241,73241,732

1,1571,1571,1571,1571,1571,1571,1571,1571,157

ATLANTICATLANTICATLANTICATLANTICATLANTICATLANTICATLANTICATLANTICATLANTIC

BERGENBERGENBERGENBERGENBERGENBERGENBERGENBERGENBERGEN

BURLINGTONBURLINGTONBURLINGTONBURLINGTONBURLINGTONBURLINGTONBURLINGTONBURLINGTONBURLINGTONCAMDENCAMDENCAMDENCAMDENCAMDENCAMDENCAMDENCAMDENCAMDEN

CAPE MAYCAPE MAYCAPE MAYCAPE MAYCAPE MAYCAPE MAYCAPE MAYCAPE MAYCAPE MAY

CUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDCUMBERLANDCUMBERLAND

ESSEXESSEXESSEXESSEXESSEXESSEXESSEXESSEXESSEX

GLOUCESTERGLOUCESTERGLOUCESTERGLOUCESTERGLOUCESTERGLOUCESTERGLOUCESTERGLOUCESTERGLOUCESTER

HUDSONHUDSONHUDSONHUDSONHUDSONHUDSONHUDSONHUDSONHUDSON

HUNTERDONHUNTERDONHUNTERDONHUNTERDONHUNTERDONHUNTERDONHUNTERDONHUNTERDONHUNTERDON

MERCERMERCERMERCERMERCERMERCERMERCERMERCERMERCERMERCER

MIDDLESEXMIDDLESEXMIDDLESEXMIDDLESEXMIDDLESEXMIDDLESEXMIDDLESEXMIDDLESEXMIDDLESEX

MONMOUTHMONMOUTHMONMOUTHMONMOUTHMONMOUTHMONMOUTHMONMOUTHMONMOUTHMONMOUTH

MORRISMORRISMORRISMORRISMORRISMORRISMORRISMORRISMORRIS

OCEANOCEANOCEANOCEANOCEANOCEANOCEANOCEANOCEAN

PASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAIC

SALEMSALEMSALEMSALEMSALEMSALEMSALEMSALEMSALEM

SOMERSETSOMERSETSOMERSETSOMERSETSOMERSETSOMERSETSOMERSETSOMERSETSOMERSET

SUSSEXSUSSEXSUSSEXSUSSEXSUSSEXSUSSEXSUSSEXSUSSEXSUSSEX

UNIONUNIONUNIONUNIONUNIONUNIONUNIONUNIONUNION

WARRENWARRENWARRENWARRENWARRENWARRENWARRENWARRENWARREN

TOTAL LEP POPULATIONBy County, 2000

40,000 or More10,000 to 40,000Less Than 10,000

LEP and Language Groups LEP and Language Groups by Municipalityby Municipality

28,37528,37528,37528,37528,37528,37528,37528,37528,375

66,05566,05566,05566,05566,05566,05566,05566,05566,055

36,21636,21636,21636,21636,21636,21636,21636,21636,216

54,84554,84554,84554,84554,84554,84554,84554,84554,845

71,34471,34471,34471,34471,34471,34471,34471,34471,344 57,04857,04857,04857,04857,04857,04857,04857,04857,048

31,06931,06931,06931,06931,06931,06931,06931,06931,069

33,20133,20133,20133,20133,20133,20133,20133,20133,201

50,20950,20950,20950,20950,20950,20950,20950,20950,209

PERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOY

PASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAIC

PATERSONPATERSONPATERSONPATERSONPATERSONPATERSONPATERSONPATERSONPATERSON

NORTH BERGENNORTH BERGENNORTH BERGENNORTH BERGENNORTH BERGENNORTH BERGENNORTH BERGENNORTH BERGENNORTH BERGEN

ELIZABETHELIZABETHELIZABETHELIZABETHELIZABETHELIZABETHELIZABETHELIZABETHELIZABETH

JERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYNEWARKNEWARKNEWARKNEWARKNEWARKNEWARKNEWARKNEWARKNEWARK

WEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORK

UNION CITYUNION CITYUNION CITYUNION CITYUNION CITYUNION CITYUNION CITYUNION CITYUNION CITY

ALL SPANISH SPEAKERSBy Muncipality, 2000

25,000 or More5,000 to 25,000

1 to 5,000None

23,38623,38623,38623,38623,38623,38623,38623,38623,386

6,3556,3556,3556,3556,3556,3556,3556,3556,355

10,43110,43110,43110,43110,43110,43110,43110,43110,431

5,4265,4265,4265,4265,4265,4265,4265,4265,426

17,07817,07817,07817,07817,07817,07817,07817,07817,078

10,05210,05210,05210,05210,05210,05210,05210,05210,052

15,43415,43415,43415,43415,43415,43415,43415,43415,434

33,80833,80833,80833,80833,80833,80833,80833,80833,80822,47522,47522,47522,47522,47522,47522,47522,47522,475

21,91621,91621,91621,91621,91621,91621,91621,91621,916

8,1478,1478,1478,1478,1478,1478,1478,1478,147

23,64423,64423,64423,64423,64423,64423,64423,64423,644

PASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAICPASSAIC

CLIFTONCLIFTONCLIFTONCLIFTONCLIFTONCLIFTONCLIFTONCLIFTONCLIFTON

PATERSONPATERSONPATERSONPATERSONPATERSONPATERSONPATERSONPATERSONPATERSON

PERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOYPERTH AMBOY

PLAINFIELDPLAINFIELDPLAINFIELDPLAINFIELDPLAINFIELDPLAINFIELDPLAINFIELDPLAINFIELDPLAINFIELD

NORTH BERGENNORTH BERGENNORTH BERGENNORTH BERGENNORTH BERGENNORTH BERGENNORTH BERGENNORTH BERGENNORTH BERGEN

WEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORKWEST NEW YORK

JERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYJERSEY CITYNEWARKNEWARKNEWARKNEWARKNEWARKNEWARKNEWARKNEWARKNEWARK

ELIZABETHELIZABETHELIZABETHELIZABETHELIZABETHELIZABETHELIZABETHELIZABETHELIZABETH

UNION CITYUNION CITYUNION CITYUNION CITYUNION CITYUNION CITYUNION CITYUNION CITYUNION CITY

NEW BRUNSWICKNEW BRUNSWICKNEW BRUNSWICKNEW BRUNSWICKNEW BRUNSWICKNEW BRUNSWICKNEW BRUNSWICKNEW BRUNSWICKNEW BRUNSWICK

TOTAL LEP POPULATIONBy Muncipality, 2000

5,000 or More1,000 to 5,000Less Than 1,000

LEP Population Around Transit FacilitiesLEP Population Around Transit Facilities

TOTAL LEP POPULATIONBy Block Group, 2000

400 to 2,537200 to 400

75 to 20025 to 75

0 to 25

TOTAL LEP POPULATIONBy Block Group, 2000

400 to 2,537200 to 40075 to 20025 to 75

0 to 25

Top NonTop Non--English Language English Language Spoken at home in NJSpoken at home in NJ

Languages 5 years and over Percentage Rank

Spanish or Spanish Creole 967,741 12.32% 1

Italian 116,365 1.48% 2

Chinese 84,345 1.07% 3

Polish 74,663 0.95% 4

Portuguese or Portuguese Creole 72,870 0.93% 5

Tagalog 66,851 0.85% 6

Korean 55,340 0.70% 7

Gujarathi 47,324 0.60% 8

French (incl. Patois, Cajun) 47,225 0.60% 9

Arabic 47,052 0.60% 10

German 41,025 0.52% 11

Russian 38,566 0.49% 12

Survey of LEP CommunitiesSurvey of LEP Communities

• Evaluation Criterion• Design Survey Questionnaire• Identify Survey Candidates

– Language Groups– Geographic Locations– ESL Establishment– Civil Organizations

• Establish Focus Groups

Harrison High SchoolHarrison High SchoolHarrison High SchoolHarrison High SchoolHarrison High SchoolHarrison High SchoolHarrison High SchoolHarrison High SchoolHarrison High School

Essex County CollegeEssex County CollegeEssex County CollegeEssex County CollegeEssex County CollegeEssex County CollegeEssex County CollegeEssex County CollegeEssex County College

NJITNJITNJITNJITNJITNJITNJITNJITNJIT

Clifton High SchoolClifton High SchoolClifton High SchoolClifton High SchoolClifton High SchoolClifton High SchoolClifton High SchoolClifton High SchoolClifton High School

East Brunswick Public LibraryEast Brunswick Public LibraryEast Brunswick Public LibraryEast Brunswick Public LibraryEast Brunswick Public LibraryEast Brunswick Public LibraryEast Brunswick Public LibraryEast Brunswick Public LibraryEast Brunswick Public Library

Middlesex County CollegeMiddlesex County CollegeMiddlesex County CollegeMiddlesex County CollegeMiddlesex County CollegeMiddlesex County CollegeMiddlesex County CollegeMiddlesex County CollegeMiddlesex County College

Huaxia Chinese SchoolHuaxia Chinese SchoolHuaxia Chinese SchoolHuaxia Chinese SchoolHuaxia Chinese SchoolHuaxia Chinese SchoolHuaxia Chinese SchoolHuaxia Chinese SchoolHuaxia Chinese School

Union County CollegeUnion County CollegeUnion County CollegeUnion County CollegeUnion County CollegeUnion County CollegeUnion County CollegeUnion County CollegeUnion County College

Garfield High SchoolGarfield High SchoolGarfield High SchoolGarfield High SchoolGarfield High SchoolGarfield High SchoolGarfield High SchoolGarfield High SchoolGarfield High School

Goodwill, HarrisonGoodwill, HarrisonGoodwill, HarrisonGoodwill, HarrisonGoodwill, HarrisonGoodwill, HarrisonGoodwill, HarrisonGoodwill, HarrisonGoodwill, Harrison

Survey Sites and Survey Sites and Focus GroupsFocus Groups

The Hispanic Focus GroupsThe Arabic Focus GroupsThe Chinese Focus GroupThe Polish Focus GroupThe Russian Focus GroupThe Mixed Language Focus Groups

Demographic CharacteristicsDemographic Characteristics

Age Distribution

0%

15%

30%

45%

60%

Under 20 20~30 31~64 65 or above

Per

cent

Household Size1

9%

224

317%

428%

5 or more22%

SocioSocio--economic Statuseconomic Status

Income Distribution

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

Under $25,000 $25,000~$50,000 $50,000~$75,000 $75,000 or more

Per

cent

Auto O wne rship

313%

236% 1

35%

016%

Language BackgroundLanguage Background

Native languages

Spanish31%

Italian1%

Polish9%

Russian23%

Other21%Korean

3%

Chinese6%

Portuguese3%

Arabic3%

Reading English

Very well17%

well50%

t well2%

not at all1%

Speaking English

Very w ell9%

w ell47%

not w ell40%

not at all4%

Travel ChoicesTravel ChoicesMode Share

not use transit45%use transit

55%

Mode Shares of Transti Users

Bus57%Subway

21%

Light Rail2%

Commuter rail20%

Trip Purposes

working17%

school20%

eating2%recreation

12%

shopping18%

business meeting

4%

siting friends17%

visiting doctor7%

others3%

Desired ImprovementsDesired Improvements

picture signs26%

translator14%

others4%

native language

signs, brochure, & announceme

nt27%

multiligual website

12%

multilingual hone lines

17%

Understanding and Usefulness of Understanding and Usefulness of Mobility Information ProvidedMobility Information Provided

Acceptance of SolutionsAcceptance of Solutions

picturesigns26%

translator14%

others4%

multilingualphone lines

17%

multiligualwebsite

12%

native languagesigns, brochure,& announcement

27%

Mobility Needs Of LEP Mobility Needs Of LEP Travelers in New JerseyTravelers in New Jersey

• The Importance of Transit Services• Mobility Information Needs• Transit Service Needs• Desires of LEP Community

Transit Service Needs Transit Service Needs

• A broader perspective on LEP people’s concerns– Comprehension– Attitude– Inefficient route placement – infrequent service, safety, reliability

Best Practice SurveysBest Practice Surveys

• Survey of Transit Agencies in North America

• Survey of International Transportation Agencies

• Survey of International Related Activity Centers

• Synthesizing w/Market Research Questionnaire Design

QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGNQUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN1. Type of Transit Services, 2. Written agency plan for serving Limited English Proficiency

(LEP) travelers, 3. Top three languages other than English spoken by your

riders, 4. Various multi-language service techniques, 5. Non-verbal Techniques, such as pictograms, 6. Estimated costs, 7. Greatest success in providing services for LEP users, 8. Relevance of the survey to the services you provide?

IDENTIFYING SURVEY IDENTIFYING SURVEY CANDIDATESCANDIDATES

• High concentration around certain metropolitan areas.

• Along both coasts and southern borders.• Highest number of LEP population according

to the 2000 census • Intermodal and multimodal Transportation

Services

SURVEY CANDIDATESSURVEY CANDIDATES

OVERVIEW OF SURVEY RESULTSOVERVIEW OF SURVEY RESULTS• Response rate: 64%.• Various Types of transit services.• No written plan devoted to the

strategies for serving LEP travelers. • Top 10 Languages other than English.• Type of strategies to serve LEP

communities.• Costs of each plan by different

agencies.

Type of Transit ServicesType of Transit Services

Commuter Rail 10%

Light Rail14%

Bus46%

Other19%

Heavy Rail11%

Top 10 Languages Top 10 Languages Other Than EnglishOther Than English

31

64 3 2 2 2 2 2 2

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Spanis

hChin

ese

Vietna

mese

Portug

uese

Russia

nHmon

gBos

nian

Germna

nFre

nch

Korean

Num

ber o

f Sys

tem

s

Multilanguage TechniquesMultilanguage Techniques

11

21

5

16

16

5

10

0 5 10 15 20 25

Multi-languageAnnoucement

Multilingual Timetable orRoute Map

Multilingual TicketMachines

Multilingual Phone Lines

Multilingual InformationBooths

Multi-language Website

Multi-languagePictograms

Type

of T

rans

it In

form

atio

Number of Transit Systems

ESTIMATED COSTS OF LEP SERVICESESTIMATED COSTS OF LEP SERVICES

27%

45%

27%

0%5%

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

0--5000 10,000-30,000 100,000--250,000

cost($)

port

ion

of tr

ansi

t sys

tem

s su

rvey

EXAMPLES OF TRANSIT AGENCIES EXAMPLES OF TRANSIT AGENCIES SERVING LEP TRAVELERSSERVING LEP TRAVELERS

• Washington DC Metro (WMATA)• Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation

District of Oregon• Central Puget Sound Regional Transit

Authority• New York City Metropolitan Transit

Authority

Washington D.C. METRO (WMATA)Washington D.C. METRO (WMATA)• Serves the Nation’s Capital area. • 800 railroad cars, 100 miles of track, and 1400

buses. • A live translation service capable of handling 140

languages; receives approximately 80 calls a month with 96% in Spanish.

• Eight languages are available in Pocket Guide and website.

• Spanish bus schedules and 12 bi-lingual service employees

• Multilingual video.• Over 30 representatives of social service agencies

that work with LEP communities.

TriTri--County Metropolitan Transportation County Metropolitan Transportation District of OregonDistrict of Oregon

• Serves the Portland-Salem MSA with light rail and bus systems. • Multilingual timetables and booklet.• Multilingual website for complaints or suggestions • Seven pictographic symbols. • $7,000 to print 100,000

copies of the “How to Ride” booklet and$7,000 in staff costs.

• The multilingual phone line costs approximately $2,600 per month.

Central Puget Sound Central Puget Sound Regional Transit AuthorityRegional Transit Authority

• Serves the Seattle-Tacoma-Bremerton metropolitan area.

• Light rail, commuter train, and bus services.

• Multilingual telephone line with community mailings in nine languages besides English.

• Budgets $15,000 per year to communicate with LEP communities; Budgets $150,000 per year to communicate with all people in the area-at-large about new projects.

New York City TransitNew York City Transit

• Provides heavy rail and bus services to the densely populated, multi-lingual New York metropolitan area.

• Three languages other than English are displayed at any given ticket machine.

• Two-sided brochures in English and the appropriate foreign languages and distributes the material at different stations.

• Approximately $250,000 per year including map production and translation services.

SURVEY INDICATIONSSURVEY INDICATIONS

• Multilingual phone lines and the bi- or multi-lingual personnel are widely practiced.

• Ticket-machine instructions in languages other than English and multi-language websites are less used strategies.

• Two thirds of the respondents have systems for receiving and processing complaints from LEP travelers.

• Only a few agencies have mechanisms for evaluating the success of their tactics.

• The lack of evaluation procedures increases the difficulty of analyzing the success or cost effectiveness of many strategies.

BEST PRACTICESBEST PRACTICES

• Multilingual Verbal Materials—Publications and Signs

• Multilingual Announcements • Multilingual Phone Lines • Pictograms and Other Visual Aids • Multilingual Websites • Multilingual Personnel – Human Contact • Cooperating with Other Organizations • Publicizing What Is Available

Incorporating LEP in the Incorporating LEP in the Emergency Evacuation PlanEmergency Evacuation Plan

• Estimate Evacuation Demand• Assess Transportation Systems• Maintain Communication

Unique Aspects of LEP Need for Unique Aspects of LEP Need for Emergency PlanningEmergency Planning

• Timely information accessible to LEP people in EMGERENCES

• Primary information sources may not serve the needs of LEP communities

• To maximize effective emergency communication, learn about their needs

Spotlighting Critical Issues Spotlighting Critical Issues

• Definition of LEP• Accurate Reflection of LEP Needs• Service Coverage• Particular Needs of LEP Population in

Emergency Evacuation Situations• Dissemination of Best Practices