Eo the Evidence California

7/31/2019 Eo the Evidence California

1/12

Equal OppOrtunity:

THE EVIDENCEFROM CALIFORNIA

A report on equal opportunity in the State of California, including

evidence of inequality and a review of diversity in the public sector.

A companion report provides a national overview of equal opportunity, including its importance and

history, key lessons, and a list of additional resources.

Download these reports at:

law.berkeley.edu/les/EOTheEvidenceCalifornialaw.berkeley.edu/les/EOTheEvidence

7/31/2019 Eo the Evidence California

2/12

CaliFOrnia anD EqualOppOrtunity

Equal opportunity is deeply rooted in the Americanideals of fairness, justice, and equality. Programs tomeet the goals of equal opportunity seek to realizethese basic values. Moreover, equal opportunity notonly helps individuals but also helps communities inneed and benets our larger society.

In California, people of color and women continue toface discrimination and disparity. However, the useof equal opportunity programs has been curtailedby Proposition 209. Passed by voters on November 5,1996, Proposition 209 forbids the use of traditionalafrmative action programs in the public sector.Despite numerous legal challenges, as of 2012,Proposition 209 is the law in California.

It has been over fteen years since the passage ofProposition 209, allowing for a thorough review of itsimpact in California. This report examines the currentstate of equal opportunity in California in publiceducation, employment, and contracting. It highlightsthe areas where opportunity continues to be limited orreduced in the years since the passage of Proposition209. Additional details are available in the companion

report, Equal Opportunity: The Evidence (law.berkeley.edu/les/EOTheEvidence).

Equality in CaliFOrnia

OppOrtunity anD Disparity

Although all people face challenges, there is ample evidence that Californiaswomen and people of color still face signicant barriers to opportunities.

PAE 1 EqAL OPPORTNITy: THE EVIDENCE FROM CALIFORNIA

White (NH) Men

White (NH) Women

Hispanic / Latino

Asian/Pacic Islander

African American

Other

CAOAS TODA

California was one of the rst and remains the largeststate in which people of color outnumber non-HispanicWhites (White (NH)). The White (NH) and AfricanAmerican populations are both lower than the nationalaverage, but all other groups are represented at higherrates. Together, women and people of color constitute80% of Californias population.

2010 Census Summary File 2, Tables PCT3 and PCT4U.S. Census Bureau

20%

20%

38%

13%

6%

3%

7/31/2019 Eo the Evidence California

3/12

EViDEnCE OF inEquality

Regrettably, though progress has been made, thereis ample evidence that equality remains elusive forsome Californians. In fact, women and people of colorface disparity and discrimination in employment,

homeownership, poverty rates, and education.

UEOET ATES

The unemployment rate was substantially higher forAfrican Americans and Hispanic/Latinos in 2010 thanfor Whites (NH).

Unemployment ate

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Employment Status of the Civilian Noninstitutional Population bySex, Race, Hispanic or Latino Ethnicity, Marital Status, and Detailed

Age, 2010 Annual AveragesBureau of Labor Statisticswww.bls.gov/lau/table14full10.pdf

COESATO

In California, between 2006 and 2010 for full-timeemployees, women earned, on average, almost $8,500less per year compared to men ($49,517 to $41,036).White (NH) women, women of color, and men ofcolor all earned substantially less per year than White(NH) men.

Earnings elative to White (H) men

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2010 American Community Survey

Median Earnings in the past 12 Months (in 2010 Ination-AdjustedDollars) by Sex by Work Experience in the Past 12 Months for thePopulation 16 Years and Over with Earnings in the Past 12 MonthsU.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2010 American Community Survey

EqAL OPPORTNITy: THE EVIDENCE FROM CALIFORNIA PAE 2

100%

90%

80%

70%

60%

50%

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

White (NH) AfricanAmerican

Hispanic/Latino

NativeAmerican

AsianAmerican

PacificIslander

100%

75% 70%

63%

48%42%

70%

Men Women

56%

83%

70%64%

56%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

White (NH)

African American Hispanic/Latino

12%

20%

15%

7/31/2019 Eo the Evidence California

4/12

OVET

In 2009/2010, people of color in California were muchmore likely to live in poverty. The poverty rates for bothAfrican Americans and Hispanic/Latinos were eachmore than double the rate for Whites (NH).

opulation in overty

Source: Urban Institute and Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsuredanalysis of U.S. Census Bureau data

Poverty Rate by Race/Ethnicity, States (2009-2010)Urban Institute and Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and theUninsured estimates based on the Census Bureaus March 2010and 2011 Current Population Survey (CPS: Annual Social and

Economic Supplements)http://www.statehealthfacts.org/comparebar.jsp?ind=14&cat=1

HOEOWESH

In 2010, people of color were less likely to owntheir own homes. Only 45% of people of color werehomeowners relative to 64% of Whites (NH).

Homeownership by RaceCorporation for Enterprise Development, Assets and OpportunityScorecard, Analysis of 2010 American Community Surveyscorecard.assetsandopportunit.org/2012/measure/homeownership-

b-race?state=ca

Equality in CaliFOrnia

OppOrtunity anD Disparity

PAE 3 EqAL OPPORTNITy: THE EVIDENCE FROM CALIFORNIA

40%

30%

20%

10%

0%

White (NH) AfricanAmerican

OtherHispanic/Latino

14%

32%35%

20%

7/31/2019 Eo the Evidence California

5/12

EDUCATO

Native Americans, African Americans, and Hispanic/Latinos were less likely to be enrolled in well-resourced,high-performing schools in California.

Students Enrolled in Well-resourced, High-

performing Schools

Source: Schott Foundation for Public Education analysis of National Assessment forEducation Progress data (redesigned by authors)

On the other hand, Asian Americans, NativeAmericans, Hispanic/Latino Americans, and African

Americans are overrepresented in poorly-resourced,low-performing schools relative to White (NH)students.

Students Enrolled in oorly-resourced, ow-

performing Schools

Source: Schott Foundation for Public Education analysis of National Assessment forEducation Progress data (redesigned by authors)

State Data and Analysis: CaliforniaSchott Foundation for Public Education, National Opportunity toLearn Campaign

www.otlstatereport.org/states/california

Additionally, as of 2008, the diversity of teachers andprincipals did not match the diversity of Californiasstudents, accounting for less than half of the diversitythat would be expected given the student population. In

Californias K-12 public schools, people of color make up: 68% of the students

30% of the teachers

26% of the principals

EqAL OPPORTNITy: THE EVIDENCE FROM CALIFORNIA PAE 4

45%

40%

35%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

AsianAmerican

White (NH) NativeAmerican

AfricanAmerican

41%

36%

25%

19% 19%

Hispanic/Latino

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

White (NH) AsianAmerican NativeAmerican Hispanic/Latino

8%

16%18%

28%

AfricanAmerican

30%

School and Stafng Survey (2007-2008 Academic Year)National Center for Education Statisticsnces.ed.gov/surveys/sass/tables/sass0708_2009321_s1s_03.asp (students)

nces.ed.gov/surveys/sass/tables/sass0708_2009324_t1s_02.asp (teachers)

nces.ed.gov/surveys/sass/tables/sass0708_2009323_p1s_02.asp (principals)

7/31/2019 Eo the Evidence California

6/12

UBC COTACTG

Data from the California Department of Transportation(Caltrans) were used to analyze public contracting. Oneof the largest public contracting agencies in the state,Caltrans awarded over 2.8 billion dollars in 2011.

In 1995, then Governor Pete Wilson signed ExecutiveOrder W-124-95, which dismantled all equal opportunityefforts put into place by previous governors, including

those being utilized for public contracts. After the passageof Proposition 209 in 1996, Caltrans eliminated itsstatewide afrmative action program, but continued tooperate an equal opportunity program for federal awardsas mandated by federal law. This Disadvantaged BusinessEnterprise (DBE) program supports equal opportunity forsmall businesses owned by people of color and women.

During the 1980s and early 1990s, when equalopportunity programs were widely utilized, awards tobusinesses owned by people of color and women rose,reaching a high of 28% in 1994. After equal opportunity

programs were dismantled or scaled back in 1995-96,awards to people of color and women plummeted.Awards fell to less than 10% by 1998 and have neverrecovered, despite Californias increasing diversityduring this time.

Although supporters of Proposition 209 claimed itwould create equal opportunity, female contractors andcontractors of color believe that it failed to address theroot causes of the discrimination and disparity theyfaced. In fact, they note that it appears to have had achilling effect on contracting diversity in the state. Forexample, one female contractor noted:

When Proposition 209 passed, I was working on $200,000worth of projects. The day after Proposition 209 passed,the senior project manager walked up to me and said, Hey,Prop 209 passed, and we dont have to use you anymore.

Starting in 2006, awards fell even further when Caltranssuspended its race-conscious DBE program in order toavoid a lawsuit by equal opportunity opponents. Theprogram was re-implemented in 2009 after a disparitystudy provided support for the program, at which pointawards to people of color- and women-owned businessesstarted to rebound.

DiVErsity in tHE puBliC sECtOr

tHE arEas DirECtly aFFECtED By prOpOsitiOn 209

This section summarizes recent research about Californias diversit in threeareas that have been directl affected b Proposition 209: public contracting,

education, and emploment.

PAE 5 EqAL OPPORTNITy: THE EVIDENCE FROM CALIFORNIA

7/31/2019 Eo the Evidence California

7/12

Awards to Businesses Owned by eople of

Color and Women

Source: Caltrans

DSAT STUDES

A disparity study measures the amount of publiccontracting dollars that might be expected to go tobusinesses owned and operated by people of color andwomen in a non-discriminatory environment comparedto what they actually receive.

In a study published in 2007, disparity was assessedboth for federal and state awards. For federal awards,

Caltrans operated an equal opportunity program perfederal law. For state awards, Caltrans ceased operatingits equal opportunity program after the passage ofProposition 209.

The study found evidence of disparity for both federaland state awards. The rates of disparity were twoto three times higher for state awards, suggesting

reduced opportunities for people of color- andwomen-owned businesses as a result of eliminatingthe equal opportunity program. Caltrans is currentlycommissioning a second disparity study.

Availability and Disparity Study: California Department

of TransportationBBC Research & Consulting for Caltranswww.dot.ca.gov/h/bep/stud/disparit_stud.htm

Free to Compete? Measuring the Impact of Proposition 209 on

Minority Business Enterprises

Discrimination Research Centerwww.law.berkele.edu/les/thcsj/Free_to_Compete.pdf

A Vision Fullled? The Impact of Proposition 209 on Equal

Opportunity for Women Business Enterprises

Thelton E. Henderson Center for Social Justicewww.law.berkele.edu/les/thcsj/A_Vision_Fullled_Sept_2007.pdf

EqAL OPPORTNITy: THE EVIDENCE FROM CALIFORNIA PAE 6

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

1985

1987

1989

1991

1993

1995

1997

1999

2001

2003

2005

2007

2009

2011

Executive OrderW-124-95

Caltrans re-implementedrace-conscious program

Caltranssuspended

race-consciousprogram

Proposition209 passed

7/31/2019 Eo the Evidence California

8/12

PAE 7 EqAL OPPORTNITy: THE EVIDENCE FROM CALIFORNIA

UBC HGHE EDUCATO

Californias public higher educational system includesthe top-tier University of California (UC) system (10campuses), the California State University (CSU)system (23 campuses), and the California CommunityCollege (CCC) system (109 campuses). Schools such asthe University of California, Berkeley (UC Berkeley) andthe University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA) areconsidered to be elite universities.

In 1995, the UC Board of Regents passed two policies(SP1 and SP2) that barred the consideration of race,ethnicity, and gender in the University of Californiasystem for student admissions, employment, andcontracting. The community college and state collegesystems were also barred from using afrmative actionby the passage of Proposition 209 in 1996.

After the passage of Proposition 209, the number ofundergraduate and graduate students of color fellsharply at several schools, including UC Berkeley andUCLA. As of 2009 and 2010, the number of studentsof color has been increasing. However, much of thisgain is due to the increasing diversity of the states

population, rather than a reduction in discriminationor the elimination of afrmative action.

A UC system examination of twenty years of dataregarding underrepresented students of color (AfricanAmericans, Hispanic/Latinos, and Native Americans)highlights how these trends have changed over time. In1989, the rst year of available data, the gap between

graduating high school seniors and undergraduateenrollment for underrepresented students of color was8%. This gap rose steadily for ten years and peaked at26% in 2005. The gap remains high; in 2009, it was 23%.

The Gap Between UC Enrollment and High School

Graduation ates for Underrepresented Students

of Color

Source: niversit of California

A review of enrollment rates at UCs graduate schoolsalso offers evidence of disparity. African American andHispanic/Latino enrollment at both UC Berkeleys andUCLAs law schools fell sharply after the passage ofProposition 209, erasing decades of gains in enrollment.

DiVErsity in tHE puBliC sECtOr

tHE arEas DirECtly aFFECtED By prOpOsitiOn 209

30%

25%

20%

15%

10%

5%

0%

1989

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

SP1 andSP2 passed

Proposition 209 passed

7/31/2019 Eo the Evidence California

9/12

As the table above shows, people of color comprise64% of high school graduates, but a somewhat smallerpercentage of the undergraduates in the public highereducation system. People of color are much less likely tobe faculty or administrators relative to their share of thestudent population or adults aged 18 to 64 in California.

In the UC system, the high numbers of Asian Americanstudents mask the underrepresentation of AfricanAmerican, Hispanic/Latino, and Native Americanstudents relative to their percentage of graduating

high school seniors.

Overall, Proposition 209 appears to have led to areduction in the enrollment of students of color inCalifornias higher education systems. The effectwas most pronounced in the UC system. Althoughthe diversity of Californias public universities andcolleges is increasing, particularly for Asian Americans,a signicant portion of this is the result of theincreasing diversity of high school seniors. The facultyand administrators of the public education system,however, do not reect the student population or the

population as a whole of the State of California.

Equal Opportunity in Higher Education: The Past and Future of

Californias Proposition 209

Eds. Eric Grodsky & Michal Kurlaender

www.hepg.org/hep/book/127/EualOpportunitInHigherEducation

The Struggle for Access from Sweatt to Grutter: A History of AfricanAmerican, Latino, and American Indian Law School Admissions,

19502000

William C. Kidderwww.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/blj/vol19/kidder.pdf

Ralph J. Bunche Center for African American Studieswww.bunchecenter.ucla.edu/index.php/2012/05/bunche-research-

report/

The University of California systemwww.universitofcalifornia.edu/diversit/staff/career_

workforce_2009.pdf

www.ucop.edu/acadpersonnel/datamgmt/documents/allranks09_

discipline_ethnicit_race.pdf

www.universitofcalifornia.edu/diversit/documents/diversit-

accountabilit-report-and-appendix-0910.pdf

The California State University systemwww.calstate.edu/hr/emploee-prole/documents/

Fall2010CSProles.pdf

www.calstate.edu/as/stat_reports/2010-2011/feth01.htm

The California Community College systemdatamart.cccco.edu/Students/Enrollment_Status.aspx

emploeedata.cccco.edu/statewide_summar_11.pdf

High School Graduation Rates

California Department of Educationd.cde.ca.gov/datauest/raduateReporting/raduatesBEth.aspx?c

Topic=raduates&cChoice=StrdbEt&cyear=2008-09&level=State&

cTpe=All&cender=B&croup=12

EqAL OPPORTNITy: THE EVIDENCE FROM CALIFORNIA PAE 8

ercentage eople of Color

UC CSU CCC

Graduating High School Seniors 64% Students 59% 50% 59%

aculty 25% 29% 30%

Administrators 18% 29% 30%Californians aged 18 to 64 57%

7/31/2019 Eo the Evidence California

10/12

$60,000

$45,000

$30,000

$15,000

$0

1990

1991

1992

1993

1994

1995

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

White (NH) Men

White (NH) Women

Men of Color

Women of Color

UBC EOET

As of 2011, the State of California employed 216,261people. This workforce was 48% White (NH) and 53%male. Research examining trends over time ndsthat people of color and women have been modestlyunderrepresented relative to the private sector andpeople between the ages of 18 to 64 in California.

Among people of color, African Americans were em-ployed at higher rates and Hispanic/Latinos at lowerrates than expected compared to their proportion of the

population. As the State of California has grown more di-verse, its public workforce has also grown more diverse.

The passage of Proposition 209 appears to havenot signicantly altered diversity in public sectoremployment. However, research suggests thatdiversity in the private sector decreased afterProposition 209s passage. This trend suggests thata statewide chilling effect may have occurred inemployment, as it did in contracting, in which equalopportunity was devalued and decision makers mayhave been fearful to take race, ethnicity, or sex intoconsideration in order to remedy discrimination.

COESATO AD OSTO

Men of color and White (NH) women working forthe State of California earned about 80% of thecompensation of White (NH) men, while women ofcolor earned less than 70% of White (NH) men.

Compensation of State of California Employees

Source:

California State Personnel Board

White (NH) men are particularly overrepresented inhigh-level executive positions (called Career ExecutiveAssignment positions), which come with increasedresponsibilities and compensation. Men and womenof color continue to be underrepresented in thesehigh-level positions, though White (NH) women haveshown steady gains in this area.

DiVErsity in tHE puBliC sECtOr

tHE arEas DirECtly aFFECtED By prOpOsitiOn 209

PAE 9 EqAL OPPORTNITy: THE EVIDENCE FROM CALIFORNIA

7/31/2019 Eo the Evidence California

11/12

Overall, research suggests that Proposition 209 had alimited impact on public employment. Although publicemployment overall in California is diverse, women ofcolor, men of color, and White (NH) women still earn lessthan their White (NH) male counterparts, and people ofcolor continue to struggle to reach top positions.

Annual Census of Employees in the State Civil Service: 2010 2011Fiscal YearCalifornia State Personnel Boardwww.spb.ca.gov/WorkArea/showcontent.aspx?id=7120

Proposition 209 and Public Employment in California: Trends inWorkforce Diversity.Thelton E. Henderson Center for Social Justice at Berkeley Law.www.law.berkele.edu/les/September_2008_Proposition_209_and_

Public_Emploment_-_Workforce_Diversit.pdf

The Impact of Proposition 209 on Public Employment in CaliforniaMichael Sumnerwww.law.berkele.edu/les/Prop209EmplomentCAERP.ppt

Myers, C.K. (2007). A Cure for Discrimination? Afrmative Actionand the Case of Californias Proposition 209. Industrial & Labor

Relations Review. 60(3), 379-396

U.S. Census Bureauwww2.census.gov/govs/apes/10stca.txt

www2.census.gov/govs/apes/10locca.txt

EqAL OPPORTNITy: THE EVIDENCE FROM CALIFORNIA PAE 10

suMMary

There is ample evidence that disparit is still

prevalent in the State of California. While there

are some promising trends in the public sector,

it is clear that discrimination and disparit

have not et been full remedied in housing,

education, emploment, and other sectors.

Though the research results are complex,

the passage of Proposition 209 in 1996 (and

additional anti-eual opportunit policies in

higher education and contracting) appear

to have limited opportunities in the State of

California for people of color and women.

For an overview of eual opportunit at the

national level and details on current research

in states where eual opportunit efforts have

been limited, please see the companion packet

to this report:

Eual Opportunit: The Evidence

law.berkele.edu/les/EOTheEvidence

7/31/2019 Eo the Evidence California

12/12

THE HEDESO CETE O SOCA JUSTCE, BEkEE AW

ATESH WTH THE W COSUTG GOU, C

JU 2012

The MWM Consulting roup, LLC conducts research and provides

technical assistance to advance concepts of fairness, diversit,

and inclusion in the public and private sphere. Toward the goal of

elevating a collective consciousness and implementing policies that

promote fairness and diversit, the MWM Consulting roup, LLC

facilitates processes to remove structural barriers to eualit and

justice for all.

www.mwmconsultingroupllc.com

The intellectual hub of the law schools vibrant social justice

communit, the Thelton E. Henderson Center for Social Justice is

a training and research center that prepares the next generationof lawers to represent underserved communities and produces

innovative and accessible scholarship on issues of race, sex

and povert.

Thelton E. Henderson Center for Social Justice

niversit of California, Berkele, School of Law

2850 Telegraph Ave., Suite 500

Berkele, CA 94705-7220

www.law.berkele.edu/HendersonCenter.htm

This report was made possible by the generous support of the

ullling the Dream und, ublic nterest rojects.

Equal OppOrtunity:

THE EVIDENCEFROM CALIFORNIA