Community Action Plan

Transcription

Community
Action Plan
Community and Economic
Development Association of
Cook County
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
Contents
I.
COMMUNITY ACTION PLAN SUMMARY ............................................................................................... 3
II.
Needs Assessment ................................................................................................................................ 6
The North Region ........................................................................................................................................ 7
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
The South Region ...................................................................................................................................... 21
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
The West Region........................................................................................................................................ 33
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 5Appendix 6
Coalitions, Collaborations, and Associations .............................................................. 76
“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 subsection 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
CEDA 2016 CAP
SUMMARY
Page 3
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 agencywide 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:
Rental Assistance
Auto Repair
Scholarships
Case Management
Skills Training
Dental Care
Vision Care
Employment
Family Nutrition
CEDA 2016 CAP
SUMMARY
Page 4
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 socioeconomic 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
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 7
income of almost $98,000 1. 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.
North Region ethnic/racial
West Region- makeup 2000 *
Hispanic
9%
Asian
10%
North Region ethnic/racial
makeup 2013 *
Hispanic
14%
Asian
13%
Black
4%
White
77%
Black
4%
White
69%
North Region ethnic/racial change
2000- 2013 *
900000
839472
800000
700000
783385
600000
White
500000
Black
400000
Asian
300000
200000
100000 108358
0
157557
102330
Hispanic
151267
38434
2000
39188
2013
(*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
US Census. American Community Survey 2013 3-year estimate.
CEDA 2016 CAP
2
Page 8
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 $365,782 4 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.
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
Page 9
4
2014 SUBURBAN COOK COUNTY PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT PROFILE
%
LowIncome
6
Students
Graduation
7
Rate
% Ready for
8
College
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%
50,729
22
22%
93%
76%
North Region High School Districts
North Region Totals
Total
Enrollment
# High
Schools
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
Page 10
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.
US Census data: Household language by household limited English speaking status. 2009- 2013 5-year estimates.
14
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). 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
Page 11
13
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
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.
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 13
Top ranked concerns NORTH REGION respondents
1.70
1.60
1.50
1.40
1.30
1.20
1.10
1.00
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.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Dental and/or Vision Care
Housing / rent costs
Help paying utility bill(s)
Food costs
Paying for college/higher education
Reducing utility costs
Finding a job
Health insurance/ Healthcare Costs
Transportation
Job Training
Access to healthy foods
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 14
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.
Top 10 Most Urgent Needs: North Region respondents
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
Housing /rent costs
Finding a job
Transportation
Increasing income
Food costs
Job Training
Credit card or loan debt
The Urgent Needs identified by North Region respondents (listed here in order of frequency the need
was cited) were:
11. Reducing utility costs
1. Housing /rent costs
12. Homelessness
2. Finding a job
13. Affordable daycare or before/after
3. Transportation
school care
4. Dental and/or Vision Care
14.
Programs for youth/teens
5. Increasing income
15. Health Insurance/ Healthcare Costs
6. Help paying utility bill(s)
16. Children’s education/tutoring
7. Food costs
17. Neighborhood Safety and Security
8. Paying for college/higher education
18. Immigration/citizenship issues
9. Job Training
19. Services for Disabled people
10. Credit card or loan debt
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 15
20. Mental Health Services
21. 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
2. Finding a job
3. Housing / rent costs
3. Transportation
5. Food costs
7. Food costs
8. Finding a job
9. Health insurance/ Healthcare Costs *
9. Job Training
10. Transportation
10. Credit card or loan debt **
11. Job Training
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.
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 16
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.
Community Services Scoring North Region
80
75
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
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.
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 17
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 faced
with?
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 in
the 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 in
the 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 the
community 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?
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 18
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 support
o 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 community
o 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 adults
o 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 subCEDA 2016 CAP
Page 19
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.
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 20
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.
South Region ethnic/racial
makeup 2000 *
South Region ethnic/racial
makeup 2013 *
Hispanic
Asian 7%
Asian
2%
1%
Hispanic
12%
White
52%
Black
29%
Black
34%
White
63%
South Region ethnic/racial change
2000-2013*
600000
500000
496188
431806
400000
300000
200000
100000
0
278376
223860
White
Black
Asian
Hispanic
56953
10915
2000
101227
13239
2013
(*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
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 22
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 8.4 20 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 languages 23. This is the
only CEDA service region without significant language challenges.
18
US Census data: ACS 2013 3-Year Estimates.
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.
19
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 23
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.
%
LowIncome
25
Students
Graduation
26
Rate
% Ready for
27
College
All Suburban Cook
31%
55%
51%
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%
39,341
23
49%
84%
32%
Total
Enrollment
South Region High School Districts
South Region Totals
# High
Schools
24
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.
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 24
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.
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
29
2009-2013 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.
See Appendix 2 for graphs of Needs Survey response demographics for all regions
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 25
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.
Top ranked concerns SOUTH REGION respondents
1.50
1.40
1.30
1.20
1.10
1.00
0.90
0.80
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.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
Food costs
Finding a job
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 26
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Job Training
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 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.
Top 10 Most Urgent Needs: South Region respondents
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
Housing /rent costs
Finding a job
Increasing income
Food costs
Transportation
Job Training
The Urgent Needs identified by South Region respondents were (listed here in order of frequency):
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Housing /rent costs
Finding a job
Increasing income
Food costs
Transportation
CEDA 2016 CAP
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Job Training
Homelessness
Health Insurance/ Healthcare Costs
Page 27
13.
14.
15.
16.
Home repairs
Help with managing money
Affordable daycare or before/after
school care
17. Children’s education/tutoring
19. Programs for youth/teens
20. Programs and services for Senior
Citizens
21. Immigration/citizenship issues
22. Veterans’ Services
23. Access to healthy foods
24. High school drop-outs
25. Parenting support and education
26. 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
3. Finding a job
7. Food costs
10. Food costs
11. Transportation**
12. Finding a job
14. Health insurance/ Healthcare Costs
15. Job Training
18. Access to healthy foods*
20. Job Training
21. Homelessness**
22. Neighborhood Safety and Security*
** Urgent Need, but not high ranked
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 28
SERVICES SCORING METHODOLOGY (reprinted from previous Regional Section)
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:
Good = 3 points
Fair = 2 point
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.
Community Services Scoring South Region
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
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.
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 29
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:
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 30
o
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 their
programs and discuss emerging issues.
Collaboration between CEDA and Rich Township on annual collection of donations for homeless
veterans.
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 care
2. Housing/ rent costs
4. Home repairs
6. Transportation
7. Health insurance/healthcare costs
9. Programs for youth/teens
10. 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:
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 31
•
•
•
Not enough employers
Need more jobs
Lack adequate public transportation.
No buses on some of the major streets
Buses don’t run late enough in the evening
No 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 businesses
o Set up better communication between villages and absentee landlords
o 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.
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 32
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.
West Region ethnic/racial makeup
2000 *
West Region ethnic/racial makeup
2013 *
Hispanic
22%
Hispanic
29%
Asian
2%
Black
11%
Asian
2%
White
65%
White
58%
Black
11%
West Region ethnic/racial change
2000-2013 *
500000
474785
446156
400000
White
300000
200000
100000
0
227624
158810
81018
81355
14925
17043
2000
Black
Asian
Hispanic
2013
(Data in charts above comes from the US 2000 Census and ACS 2013 1-year estimates.)
30
31
US Census. American Community Survey 2013 3-year estimate.
ibid
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 34
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 $932 33 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
%
LowIncome
Students
Graduation
Rate
% Ready for
College
All Suburban Cook
31%
55%
51%
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%
30,474
15
45%
72%
36%
West Region High School Districts
West Region Totals
Total
Enrollment
# High
Schools
32
US Census, 2009-2013 American Community Survey 5 year estimates
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
33
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 35
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 femaleheaded 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.
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 36
NEEDS ASSESSMENTS SURVEY RESULTS - WEST REGION
CEDA received 453 Community Needs Assessment Survey responses from West Region residents.
Who Responded 38
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.
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.
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 37
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.
Top ranked concerns WEST REGION respondents
1.40
1.30
1.20
1.10
1.00
0.90
0.80
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.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Food costs
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 38
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
Finding a job
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.
Top 10 Most Urgent Needs: West Region respondents
0%
2%
4%
6%
8%
10%
12%
14%
16%
18%
20%
Housing /rent costs
Finding a job
Increasing income
Food costs
Transportation
Children’s education/tutoring
The Urgent Needs identified by West Region respondents were (listed here in order of frequency):
2. Finding a job
CEDA 2016 CAP
4. Food costs
Page 39
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
Transportation
Home repairs
Job Training
Affordable daycare or
before/afterschool care
16. Credit card or loan debt
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
Homelessness
High school drop-outs
Juvenile Delinquency/Crime
Immigration/citizenship issues
Parenting support and education
Services for Disabled people
Mental Health Services
Drug or Alcohol Abuse
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 NEEDS
2. Finding a job
4. Food costs
4. Food costs
6. Dental and/or Vision Care *
7. Health insurance/ Healthcare Costs
8. Transportation**
9. Finding a job
9. Children’s education/tutoring **
10. Access to healthy foods *
12. Job Training *
12. Home repairs **
** Urgent Need, but not high ranked
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 40
SERVICES SCORING METHODOLOGY (reprinted from previous Regional Section)
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:
Good = 3 points
Fair = 2 point
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.
Community Services Scoring West Region
70
65
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
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
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 41
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.
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 42
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 classes
o Teen pregnancy prevention
o More partnerships and collaborations.
o Improved communication (something to replace the newspaper)
o Online social services directory
o Create an app
o 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.
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 43
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 neighborhoods 39, and at ten
additional suburban municipalities 40. 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.
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
40
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
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 45
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.
Weatherization
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.
reduced or eliminated: K. Obtained Weatherization
assistance
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,
*Transitional
housing,
*Rental support
reduced or eliminated: H. Obtained and/or maintained
safe and affordable housing.
Dental Care
GOAL 6: Low-income people, especially
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)
WIC
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 46
Vision 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
(Vision)
Auto Repair
1.2.F Barriers to initial or continuous employment are
reduced or eliminated: Obtained access to reliable
transportation.
Water Bill Assistance
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
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
Family Nutrition
6.3.K Parents and other adults learn and exhibit
improved family functioning skills.
6.5.A Food Boxes
1.2M Barriers to initial or continuous employment are
reduced or eliminated: Made progress towards postsecondary degree or certificate.
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
Scholarship
more self-sufficient
Employment
Program
Educational Talent
Search
6.3.I. Youth increase academic, athletic, or social skills
for school success
Skill Training
1.2A Barriers to initial or continuous employment are
reduced or eliminated: Obtained skills/competencies
required for employment
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 47
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.
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 48
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 personnel 41. 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. Outcome
Each 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.
CEDA 2016 CAP
OUTCOME
Page 54
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.
CEDA 2016 CAP
OUTCOME
Page 55
TOP IDENTIFIED NEEDS FROM SURVEYS
NORTH
NEEDS RANKING
RESPONSES
SOUTH
URGENT NEED
RESPONSES
NEEDS RANKING
RESPONSES
WEST
URGENT NEED
RESPONSES
NEEDS RANKING
RESPONSES
URGENT NEED
RESPONSES
1.
Housing /rent costs
2. Dental and/or Vision
Care
2. Finding a job
2. Finding a job
2.
Finding a job
3. Transportation
3.
Increasing income
4. Help paying utility
bill(s)
4. Dental and/or
Vision Care
Care
4. Food costs
4. Food costs
4.
Food costs
5. Food costs
Care
bill(s)
5.
Help paying utility
bill(s)
6. Paying for
college/higher
education
bill(s)
6. Food costs
6. Transportation
Care
6.
7. Food costs
7. Finding a job
7. Health insurance/
Healthcare Costs
7.
Health Insurance/
Healthcare Costs
8. Finding a job
8. Paying for
college/higher
education
7. Paying for
college/higher
education
Healthcare Costs
8. Job Training
8.
Transportation
Healthcare Costs
9. Job Training
9. Paying for
college/higher
education
8. Paying for
college/higher
education
bill(s)
9. Finding a job
9.
Children’s
education/tutoring
10. Transportation
10. Credit card or
loan debt
10. Access to healthy foods
10. Access to healthy
foods
10. 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”
CEDA 2016 CAP
OUTCOME
Page 56
Appendix
2016 CEDA CSBG OUTCOME MEASURES
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Needs of Low-Income Residents in Suburban Cook County
Program & Services
Goal
Addressing Needs
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.
Goal 1: Low-income people become more
self-sufficient
And
Goal 6: Low-income people, especially
6.3.K Parents and other adults learn
and exhibit improved family
Case Management
potential by strengthening family and other functioning skills.
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
potential by strengthening family and other 6.5A Pounds of Food
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.
1.2M Barriers to initial or
continuous employment are
Scholarship Program
reduced or eliminated: Made
self-sufficient.
progress towards post-secondary
degree or certificate.
Families lack financial assistance when faced with emergency situations resulting in a hardship which could lead to
displacement or homelessness.
1.2H Obtained and/or maintained
Rental Assistance
self-sufficient.
safe and affordable housing.
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.
6.2F The number of low-income
vulnerable populations achieve their
individuals who sought emergency
Dental Care
potential by strengthening family and other assistance and for whom assistance
was provided:
Emergency Medical care
(Dental)
CEDA 2016 CAP
OUTCOME
Page 57
Appendix
PROBLEM STATEMENT
Needs of Low-Income Residents in Suburban Cook County
Program & Services
Goal
Addressing Needs
ROMA Outcome Measure of
the Program(s)
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.
6.2F The number of low-income
individuals who sought emergency
Vision Care
potential by strengthening family and other assistance and for whom assistance
was provided:
Emergency Medical care
(Vision)
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.
1.2F Barriers to initial or continuous
self sufficient
employment are reduced or
and
eliminated: Obtained access to
reliable transportation.
6.1 The number of vulnerable
Auto Repair
potential by strengthening family and other individuals receiving services from
Community Action who maintain an
independent living situation as a
result of those services.
Unemployment rates in suburban Cook County continue to be high, especially for low skilled workers.
1.1A Unemployed and obtained a
job.
1.2A Barriers to initial or continuous
Employment Program
eliminated: Obtained
self-sufficient.
skills/competencies required for
employment.
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.
1.2A Barriers to initial or continuous
Skills Trade
eliminated: Obtained
self-sufficient.
skills/competencies required for
employment.
CEDA 2016 CAP
OUTCOME
Page 58
APPENDIX 1 - SURVEY TOOLS
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)
Male
3. Please indicate your gender.
Older Adults (65+)
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
White
Multi-race
7. Are you Hispanic?
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
Other:
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
9. In your home, what language is spoken most? (Check one box please)
English
Spanish
Arabic
Chinese
Vietnamese
Russian
German
More than $75,000
Polish
Tagalog
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
Unemployment
General Assistance
Social Security
Self-Employment
Disability /Workers Comp.
Part-Time Employment
Other Pensions
TANF
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
Associate’s Degree
Bachelor’s Degree
High school diploma/GED
Certified Vocation
Post-Graduate Degree
13. Please indicate any agency that provided services for you or a household member in the past 12 months. (check any that
apply)
CEDA
Salvation Army
Township Office
IL Department of Human Services (SNAP/TANF/ MEDICAID)
Catholic Charities
Other: (list all)
Thank you for your time and participation in this survey!
Page 59
14. Based on the current needs of your household and your community, please rate each of the issues below by marking 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
Affordable daycare or before/after school care
Domestic Violence
Programs and services for Senior Citizens
Veterans’ Services
Language Barrier(s)
Finding a job
Job Training
Other:
15. Which ONE item of the list above is MOST important need right now?
___________________________________________________________________
Page 60
16. Thinking about the resources and programs that already exist, how would you rate the following services in your
community? (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:
Page 61
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:
2. Which of the following best describes the organization
you represent?
and zip code:
3. Do you invest in the community where your organization
resides 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+
Yes
5. Do you recruit employees from the community in which your business resides?
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 by
marking 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
Page 62
2015 Stakeholder Survey
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 your
community? (Please Check one per line)
Jobs Training and Employment
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor/None
Don’t Know
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
Page 63
Appendix
Appendix 2 Needs Assessment Data Graphs
Gender of Respondents
120%
100%
80%
Male,
25%
Male,
20%
Male,
20%
Female,
75%
Female,
80%
Female,
80%
NORTH
Appendix 4
SOUTH
60%
40%
20%
0%
CEDA 2016 CAP
Page 75
WEST
Race of Respondents
70%
62%
60%
50%
40%
43%
38%
33%
22%
18%
20%
10%
29%
26%
30%
5%
5%
2%
0%
NORTH
23% HISPANIC
0.4% 1%
5% 6%
SOUTH
11% HISPANIC
2% 0.4% 4%
WEST
35% HISPANIC
White
African-American/Black
Asian
Native American or Alaska Native
Multiracial
Other
CEDA 2016 CAP
Appendix 2
Page 64
Appendix
Age of Respondents
50%
45%
40%
35%
30%
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
45%
30% 31%
23%
23%
22%
33%
30%
17% 18%
14%
9%
1%
1%
1%
NORTH
SOUTH
Under 18
18-30
31-49
WEST
50-64
65 or older
Houseshold Income of respondents
70%
60%
59%
51%
50%
40%
30%
10%
10%
36%
29%
23%
20%
45%
4% 4%
10%
6% 4%
13%
3% 3%
0%
NORTH
<$15,000
CEDA 2016 CAP
SOUTH
$15,000-30,000
$30,000-50,000
Appendix 2
WEST
$50,000-$75,000
>$75,000
Page 65
Appendix
Housing status of Respondents
60%
Rent
50%
Rent
Rent
40%
Own
30%
Own
Own
20%
10%
0%
Live w/ family
Homeless
Live w/ family
Homeless
Live w/ friends
Live w/ family
Live w/ friends
Live w/ friends
Homeless
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST
Own
21%
29%
28%
Rent
56%
45%
48%
Live w/ family
14%
17%
21%
Live w/ friends
4%
2%
2%
Homeless
5%
7%
1%
CEDA 2016 CAP
Appendix 2
Page 66
Appendix
Household Size -NORTH
5 or more
35%
Household Size - SOUTH
Single
19%
2
members
16%
4
members
19%
Single
5 or more 20%
29%
3
members
11%
4
15%
3
16%
2
20%
Household Size - WEST
Single
15%
5 or
more
32%
2
19%
3
4
14%
20%
Household Education Attainment Level
Post-Graduate Degree
Bachelor’s Degree
Associate’s Degree
6%
7%
3%
7%
17%
15%
14%
10%
14%
6%
8%
Certified Vocation
10%
48%
High school diploma/GED
9th – 12th grade, no diploma
46%
42%
0 - 8th grade
CEDA 2016 CAP
15%
10%
4%
12%
1%
7%
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST
Appendix 2
Page 67
Appendix Language used at home ‐ NORTH Resonpondents
Polish
Russian
1%
2%
Vietnamese
1%
Arabic
1%
Other
4%
Spanish
14%
English
77%
Language used at home ‐ SOUTH Resonpondents
Arabic Polish
0.4%
3%
Spanish
5%
Other
1%
English
90%
Language used at home ‐ WEST Resonpondents
Vietnamese Polish Tagalog
0.2% Other
0.4%
Arabic 0.2%
0.6%
5%
Spanish
18%
English
76%
CEDA 2016 CAP Appendix 2 Page 68 Appendix Needs ranking ‐ comparison of Regional responses
0.35 0.55 0.75 0.95 1.15 1.35 1.55 1.75
Increasing income
Food costs
Finding a job
Job Training
Transportation
Affordable daycare or before/after school…
SOUTH
WEST
NORTH
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
CEDA 2016 CAP Appendix 2 Page 69 Appendix The Most Urgent Needs‐Regional Comparison
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
South %
Home repairs
West %
Affordable daycare or before/after school…
North %
High school drop‐outs
Language Barrier(s)
Domestic Violence
CEDA 2016 CAP Appendix 2 Page 70 Appendix
Community Services Scores - comparison by region
NORTH
SOUTH
WEST
80.0
75.0
70.0
65.0
60.0
55.0
50.0
45.0
40.0
35.0
30.0
CEDA 2016 CAP
Appendix 2
Page 71
Appendix
Results of sub-sectors
Top 10 ranked concerns HISPANIC respondents
1.80
1.70
1.60
1.50
1.40
1.30
1.20
1.10
1.00
0.90
Top Concerns of respondents
Under 18 years of age
CEDA 2016 CAP
Appendix 2
Page 72
Appendix
Top 10 Concerns of respondents over 65
1.60
1.50
1.40
3
1.30
1.20
1.10
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
Top 10 Concerns of Household with children
1.50
1.40
1.30
1.20
1.10
1.00
0.90
0.80
0.70
CEDA 2016 CAP
Appendix 2
Page 73
Appendix
Appendix 3
CEDA 2016 CAP
Map of CEDA Service Locations
Appendix 3
Page 74
Appendix
Appendix 4 “Family Nutrition Sites for CEDA CSBG”
SITE NAME
Fresh Produce Distribution and Nutrition Education Sites
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
CEDA 2016 CAP
Appendix 4
Page 75
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)
CEDA 2016 CAP
Appendix 5
Page 76
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
th
South
RESTORATION MINISTRIES
253 E. 159 Street
Harvey, IL 60426
South
RICH TOWNSHIP
22013 Governors Highway
Richton Park, IL 60471
nd
South
THORNTON TOWNSHIP
333 E. 162 Street,
South Holland, IL 60473
South
14323 S. Halsted St
Riverdale, IL 60827
West
THORNTON TOWNSHIP SENIOR,
YOUTH & FAMILY
ARAB AMERICAN FAMILY SERVICES
9044 S. Octavia Avenue
Bridgeview, IL 60455
West
BROOKFIELD VILLAGE
8820 Brookfield Ave
Brookfield IL 60513
st
West
1701 S. 1 Ave.
Maywood, IL 60153
West
EMPLOYMENT & EMPLOYER
SERVICES, INC.
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
1115 N. 23rd Ave.
West
OUR LADY OF CARMEL “CASA
ESPERANZA”
VISION OF RESTORATION
1221 W. Madison Street
Maywood, IL 60153
West
TRITON COLLEGE
2000 5th Ave
River Grove, IL 60171
CEDA 2016 CAP
Appendix 6
Melrose Park, IL. 60160
Page 77
Appendix 7 “LIHEAP/ Weatherization Intake Sites”
SITE NAME
Action Coalition of Englewood Inc.
ADDRESS
6455 S. Peoria St
CITY
Chicago
ST
ZIP
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
CEDA 2016 CAP
Appendix 6 LIHEAP 2015 Contracted Site List 6.24.15.xlsx
Appendix 7
Page 1 of 3
Page 78
LIHEAP / WEATHERIZATION INTAKE SITES
SITE NAME
Labor Coalition for People's Action
ADDRESS
37 S. Ashland Ave
CITY
Chicago
ST
ZIP
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
60644
South‐East Asia Center
5120 N. Broadway St.
Chicago
IL
60640
Southland Hispanic Leadership Counci
21110 S. Western Avenue Olympia Fields
IL
60461
IL
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
IL
60630
CEDA 2016 CAP
Chicago
Page 2 of 3
Appendix 7
Page 79
LIHEAP / WEATHERIZATION INTAKE SITES
SITE NAME
The Link and Option Center ADDRESS
15652 Homan Ave.
CITY
Markham
ST
ZIP
IL
60428
The New Love and Faith Church Total Resource Comm. Organization / Triedstone
611 N. Waller Ave.
Chicago
IL
60644
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
Chicago
IL
60608
CEDA 2016 CAP
3339 S. Halsted St.
Appendix 7
Page 3 of 3
Page 80

Community Action Plan

Transcription

Similar documents

UPGRADE YOUR MULTI-FAMILY BUILDING

HELPING PEOPLE. CHANGING LIVES.

CommunITy neTworkIng news

COMMUNITY NETWORKING

2010 Report to the People

ALWAYS - Sunset on Third Street

I`m helping to end MS by participating in the 2016 Jayman BUILT MS