New York State
Disadvantaged Communities
Barriers and Opportunities Report
Final Report | Report Number 21-35 | December 2021
New York State Disadvantaged Communities
Barriers and Opportunities Report
Final Report
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority
New York State Department of Environmental Conservation
New York Power Authority
NYSERDA Report 21-35 December 2021
ii
Abstract
New York State’s Disadvantaged Communities Barriers and Opportunities Report, required by the
Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (Climate Act), assesses why some communities
are disproportionately impacted by climate change and air pollution and have unequal access to clean
energy. This report identifies barriers faced by disadvantaged communities in having the opportunity
to own and access the goods and services necessary to:
• Make homes energy efficient, weather-proofed, and powered by renewable energy;
• Obtain and utilize clean transportation such as fuel efficient and electric cars, vans,
trucks, buses, and bikes, as well as walkable streets and livable neighborhoods; and
• Ensure health and safety in the face of more frequent and more severe weather events
driven by climate change.
This report recommends actions for New York State agencies to design climate mitigation and adaption
programs through a lens of justice. The recommendations will be incorporated into New York State’s
Climate Action Council’s final scoping plan, paving the way for the benefits of clean energy and a safe
and healthy environment for all New Yorkers.
Keywords
New York State; New York State Energy and Research Authority; NYSERDA; Department of
Environmental Conservation; DEC; New York Power Authority; NYPA; Climate Act; Climate
Leadership and Communities Protection Act; disadvantaged communities; barriers; opportunities;
recommendations; renewable energy generation; energy efficiency; zero-emissions transportation;
low-emissions transportation
iii
Acknowledgments
Many individuals provided the State with information, feedback, and expertise that has been
incorporated into this report. Thanks go specifically to Illume Advising, LLC and Industrial Economics,
Inc for their consultation services provided under contract with NYSERDA, and to Elizabeth Boulton
of the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority and Sameer Ranade of New York
State’s Climate Action Council who co-managed the research, organizational, and outreach initiatives
required to complete this report. In addition, substantial contributions to the research came from the
public, including members of the Climate Justice Working Group, those who gave oral and written
public comments, and the numerous community members and organizations who lent their expertise
and time to provide direct feedback and encourage their fellow New Yorkers to participate in the public
processes that informed this report.
Lastly, the following agencies designated study advisors to provide extensive input during the
research process: the New York State Energy and Research Development Authority, Department
of Environmental Conservation, Department of Health, Department of Public Service, Department
of Transportation, and New York Power Authority. Additional invaluable input was provided by the
New York State Department of Homes and Community Renewal, the Department of Labor, and the
Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance.
iv
Table of Contents
Abstract ....................................................................................................................................... ii
Keywords ..................................................................................................................................... ii
Acknowledgments ..................................................................................................................... iii
List of Tables ............................................................................................................................... v
Acronyms and Abbreviations .................................................................................................... v
Summary .................................................................................................................................. S-1
1 The Vision of the Climate Act ............................................................................................. 1
2 Legislative Basis of the Report .......................................................................................... 3
3 Report Objectives and Approach ....................................................................................... 4
3.1 Objectives of the Report ................................................................................................................ 4
3.1.1 Identifying Barriers ................................................................................................................ 4
3.1.2 Developing Recommendations and Opportunities ................................................................ 4
3.2 Role of the Report in the Climate Act ............................................................................................ 5
3.3 Key Operating Terms .................................................................................................................... 5
3.4 Data Collection Approach and Process ........................................................................................ 7
4 Barriers ................................................................................................................................. 9
4.1 Overview ....................................................................................................................................... 9
4.1.1 Categories of Barriers ........................................................................................................... 9
4.1.2 Barriers Across the Five Service and Commodity Areas .................................................... 11
4.2 Key Barriers to Access and Ownership ...................................................................................... 12
5 Recommendations and Opportunities Overview ............................................................ 17
5.1 Overview and Background .......................................................................................................... 17
5.2 Recommendations ...................................................................................................................... 17
6 Next Steps
................................
.......................................................................................... 55
6.1 Phase 1—Assessment of Recommendations ............................................................................. 56
6.2 Phase 2—Implementing Recommendations ............................................................................... 57
6.3 Phase 3—Continued Assessment and Refinement .................................................................... 57
7 References ......................................................................................................................... 58
Appendix A. Research Approach .......................................................................................... A-1
Appendix B. Defining Disadvantaged Communities ........................................................... B-1
Appendix C. Principles of Community Engagement ........................................................... C-1
Endnotes ................................................................................................................................ EN-1
v
List of Tables
Table 1. Services and Commodities Definitions and Examples .................................................... 7
Table 2. Physical and Economic Structures and Conditions. ..................................................... 13
Table 3. Financial and Knowledge Resources and Capacity Barriers. ....................................... 14
Table 4. Perspectives and Information Barriers. ......................................................................... 15
Table 5. Programmatic Design and Implementation Barriers. .................................................... 16
Table 6. Summary of Recommendations and Opportunities ...................................................... 18
Acronyms and Abbreviations
BIPOC Black, Indigenous, People of Color
CAC Climate Action Council
CJWG Climate Justice Working Group
Climate Act Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act
COAD Community Organizations Active in Disaster
CSC Climate Smart Communities (DEC program)
DEC New York State Department of Energy Conservation
DOH New York State Department of Health
DOL New York State Department of Labor
DOT New York State Department of Transportation
DPS New York State Department of Public Service
EV Electric Vehicle
GHG Greenhouse Gas
HCR New York State Department of Homes and Community Renewal
HEAP Home Energy Assistance Program (Federal Program)
HPD New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development
NYC New York City
NYCHA New York City Housing Authority
NYPA New York Power Authority
NYS New York State
NYSERDA New York State Energy and Research Development Authority
OTDA New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance
REDC Regional Economic Development Council
SNAP Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (Federal Program)
WAP Weatherization Assistance Program (NYSERDA Program)
S-1
Summary
The Climate Leadership and Community Protection Act (Climate Act) was signed into law on
July 18, 2019. The Climate Act aims to address the rising impacts and inequities of climate change
in New York State by setting tangible requirements and goals for reaching economy-wide carbon
neutrality and significant renewable energy expansion while expanding benefits and community
ownership to disadvantaged communities. This law also requires that the Department of Environmental
Conservation (DEC), in cooperation with the New York State Energy Research and Development
Authority (NYSERDA) and the New York Power Authority (NYPA), (1) prepare a report on the
barriers faced by disadvantaged communities in accessing and owning services and commodities
(e.g., renewable energy systems and cooling shelters) relating to climate change mitigation and
adaptation as well as (2) identify opportunities to increase access and community ownership. The
recommendations from this report will be incorporated, as appropriate, into the Climate Action
Council’s (CAC) Scoping Plan.
S.1 Report Development
In developing this report, DEC, NYSERDA, and NYPA utilized the services of ILLUME
Advising, with support from Industrial Economics (the study team), to assist in data collection
and report preparation. The study team conducted several activities to identify critical barriers that
will affect access to, and ownership of, certain services and commodities identified in the Climate Act
by disadvantaged communities and explored opportunities to break down these barriers. These services
and commodities are listed below:
• Distributed renewable energy generation.
• Energy efficiency and weatherization investments.
• Zero-emission and low-emission transportation options.
• Adaptation measures to improve the resilience of homes and local infrastructure
to the impacts of climate change, including but not limited to microgrids.
• Other services and infrastructure that can reduce the risks associated with
climate-related hazards, including but not limited to:
o Shelters during flooding events.
o Medical treatment for asthma and other conditions that could be exacerbated
by climate-related events.
S-2
The study team engaged State agency staff from the Department of Health (DOH), Department of
Public Service (DPS), Department of Transportation (DOT), Department of Labor (DOL), Office
of Temporary and Disability Assistance (OTDA), and the Homes and Community Renewal (HCR)
to inform the research activities, help recruit residents and organizations to provide feedback, and
provide input into the report. Research activities included the following: (1) a secondary research
review, including publications from academic institutions, non-governmental organizations, and
agencies inside and outside New York State; (2) eight focus groups, engaging 65 individuals who
live or work in disadvantaged communities across the State; and (3) two public hearings, as required
by the Climate Act, attended by 97 individuals. The study team also solicited written comments from
individuals through a public notice, an announcement on the Climate Act website, and recruitment
efforts with community organizations, capturing feedback beyond the hearings and focus groups.
The study team consulted with the Climate Justice Working Group (CJWG) and shared the research
plan at several points, including the list of draft barriers and opportunities. Additionally, the study
team reviewed CAC meeting materials to inform the development of the report.
S.2 Barriers
To identify the barriers that affect access and participation in the services and commodities listed
above, the study team first drew on the extensive research already completed by academic researchers,
agencies in New York State, other states, and other non-governmental organizations. The study team also
incorporated insights from focus groups, public hearings, and written comments. Key barrier categories
were identified that span across the services and commodity areas highlighted in the Climate Act. They
include the following:
• Physical and Economic Structures and Conditions: This category encompasses broad
economic conditions and historical patterns of inequality that exist in the broader context of
all programs and affect access and ownership of infrastructure. “Structures” in this context can
include both physical structures (e.g., aging housing stock that requires additional investment
to support new technologies), and economic and social structures.
• Financial and Knowledge Resources and Capacity: These barriers relate to household,
community, and agency capacity, and to resource availability for residents, communities,
and agencies. Time represents a critical limitation across all levels of community. On the
community and business levels, resource gaps can refer to limited personnel and data
systems and access to professional networks, as well as access to different financing options.
S-3
• Perspectives and Information: Barriers within this category describe community perceptions
of agencies and programs, including lack of trust in local and State authorities that, in some
cases, has developed over decades. In addition, this category includes knowledge gaps and
lack of awareness of programs and resources often due to complex or opaque bureaucratic
and administrative structures.
• Programmatic Design and Implementation: Programmatic barriers include the various
factors in program design and implementation that can limit participation and success,
including lack of information to inform program design and goals, complex eligibility
requirements, insufficient emphasis on engaging communities in the design process,
and limited alignment across agencies and resources.
Specific barriers by service and commodity area are included in section 4.
S.3 Recommendations and Opportunities
To identify opportunities to increase access and ownership of the services and commodities
identified in the Climate Act, the study team reviewed programs, services, and strategies found
through the secondary research review, feedback from agency staff and the CJWG, CAC meeting
materials, and insights from the focus groups, public hearings, and written comments. The study
team reviewed these opportunities for key themes and principles to formulate a list of overarching
recommendations for State agencies and other organizations offering programs or services to
disadvantaged communities.
The study team identified recommendations within three key themes, including (1) ensure processes
are inclusive, (2) streamline program access, and (3) address emerging issues. Table S-1 provides
an overview of the high-level report recommendations by theme. Full descriptions of the report
recommendations are included in section 5.
S-4
Table S-1. Recommendations by Theme Area
Theme Recommendations
1. Co-design programs or projects with and for communities.
Ensure Processes
2. Provide meaningful opportunities for public input in government processes
are Inclusive
and proceedings.
3. Work across intersecting issues and interests to address needs holistically.
4. Transition to program models that require little to no effort to participate
and benefit.
Streamline
5. Establish people-centered policies, programs, and funding across local,
Program Access
State, and federal governments.
6. Find and support resource-constrained local governments.
7. Mobilize citizen participation and action.
Address Emerging
Issues
8. Improve housing conditions and adherence to local bui
lding codes.
While t
his report does not include a comprehensive assessment or review of New York State agency and
authority programs, it should be acknowledged that the State has many programs working closely with
communities to address the barriers identified. In several cases, State agencies are already incorporating
different elements of the report recommendations into their programs. For example, DEC has its own
Office of Environmental Justice, which works to build community capacity and engages communities
in generating climate solutions. Additional program examples are highlighted in section 5.
S.4 Next Steps
This report and the barriers, recommendations, and opportunities identified within it represent an
initial step in the process of ensuring that disadvantaged communities have access to, and community
ownership of, the services and commodities needed to mitigate and adapt to climate change. In some
instances, significant staff effort will be required to implement the report recommendations. For
example, some recommendations may have policy implications that must be addressed or require
additional funding and staffing to facilitate program co-design with disadvantaged communities.
As a next step to continue this work, State agencies will assess the recommendations and complete a
needs assessment. DEC is committed to accepting feedback from the public on this report at any time.
After refining the recommendations with any additional needs and adjustments, information from this
report will be presented to the CAC and the recommendations will be included in the final version of its
scoping plan. Additional details on next steps are included in section 6.
1
1 The Vision of the Climate Act
The devastating effects of climate change are evident across New York State. Average temperatures
are increasing, along with the frequency of dangerous heat events, particularly in urban areas. Coastal
and inland flooding is happening more often. Along the coastline, sea levels are rising. The agricultural
growing season is becoming longer, but late frost, floods, drought, and extreme heat threaten crops.
Geographic ranges of plant and wildlife species are shifting, while biodiversity is diminishing.
Catastrophic weather events are more likely, and their costs to human life and to our built environment
are increasing. In short, climate change is already having a profound impact on the communities of
New York State. Department of Environmental Conservation’s (DEC) August 2021 report Observed
and Projected Climate Change in New York State: An Overview notes the following:
1
• New York State has warmed at an average rate of 0.25°F per decade since 1900.
2
Annual
average temperatures have increased in all regions of the State. More recently, warming
has accelerated: since 1970, the statewide annual average temperature has risen about
0.6°F per decade, with winter warming exceeding 1.1°F per decade.
3
• The nationwide trend of increasingly frequent extreme precipitation events has been
particularly pronounced in the Northeast, including New York State.
4
The proportion
of total annual precipitation falling in the heaviest 1% of events increased by 38% in
the Northeast, between the periods 1901–1960 and 1986–2016. More recently, from
1958–2016, this increase was 55%.
5
These trends are projected to continue and worsen, bringing more frequent flooding to both coastal
and inland areas, along with more frequent and more lengthy extreme heat events.
The impacts of climate change will not fall equally across all New Yorkers. A growing body of
research over the past decade has highlighted the links between vulnerability to the effects of climate
change and persistent disparities in economic opportunity, education, housing, environmental quality,
health status, mobility, and health care access and quality as well as by race and ethnicity, gender
identity, and socioeconomic status. These intersecting impacts affect populations across the State but
are also geographically concentrated in areas that have been historically underserved and marginalized.
These areas are characterized by older housing stock, less infrastructure investment, and historic burdens
increasing risks and vulnerabilities. These communities often have higher concentrations of non-White
racial and ethnic populations as well as populations characterized by lower incomes, education levels,
language barriers, immigration status, and greater vulnerability to climate change. These populations
are more likely to suffer disproportionately from compound or cascading climate or environmental
2
hazards. The COVID-19 pandemic both highlighted and exacerbated these disparities, adding urgency
to equity-focused efforts across State and local agencies.
6
To address these intersecting issues, New York State’s nation-leading Climate Leadership and
Community Protection Act (Climate Act) was signed into law on July 18, 2019. The Climate Act
aims to address the rising impacts and inequities of climate change by setting tangible requirements
and goals for reaching economy-wide carbon neutrality and significant renewable energy expansion
while expanding benefits and community ownership to disadvantaged communities. Among its key
provisions, the Climate Act sets requirements to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 85% below
1990 levels by 2050, use renewable energy to provide at least 70% of New York State’s electricity by
2030, achieve a zero-emission electricity system by 2040, and invest resources to ensure that at least
35% of the benefits of spending, with a goal of 40%, are directed to disadvantaged communities. The
Climate Act explicitly centers on the intertwined issues of equity and climate change vulnerability.
As part of its findings and declaration, the Legislature noted that:
Climate change especially heightens the vulnerability of disadvantaged communities,
which bear environmental and socioeconomic burdens as well as legacies of racial and
ethnic discrimination. Actions undertaken by New York State to mitigate greenhouse gas
emissions should prioritize the safety and health of disadvantaged communities, control
potential regressive impacts of future climate change mitigation and adaptation policies
on these communities and prioritize the allocation of public investments in these areas.
The directives in the Climate Act anticipate a government-wide effort that recognizes the fundamental
changes needed across the economy to address climate change vulnerability and equity. Specifically,
the Climate Act:
1. Establishes the New York State Climate Action Council (CAC), a 22-member committee
with representatives from State agencies and authorities, members appointed by the leaders
of the Senate and Assembly, and two non-agency expert members appointed by the governor.
2. Directs the CAC to prepare a scoping plan that will set out recommendations for attaining
the statewide GHG emission limits across all sectors of the economy.
3. Creates the Climate Justice Working Group (CJWG) to advise the CAC and establish
criteria for identifying disadvantaged communities based on considerations related to
public health, environmental hazards, and socioeconomic factors.
In addition, section 6 of the Climate Act requires the development of a report on “barriers to, and
opportunities for, community ownership of, services and commodities in disadvantaged communities,”
which will be submitted to the Governor, the Senate, and the Assembly, and be posted to the DEC
website. This report therefore fulfills this requirement.
3
2 Legislative Basis of the Report
Section 6(1)-(2) of the Climate Act requires that DEC, in cooperation with the New York State
Energy and Research Development Authority (NYSERDA) and the New York Power Authority
(NYPA), and following two public hearings, develop a “report on barriers to, and opportunities
for, community ownership of services and commodities in disadvantaged communities,” including:
• Distributed renewable energy generation.
• Energy efficiency and weatherization investments.
• Zero-emission and low-emission transportation options.
• Adaptation measures to improve the resilience of homes and local infrastructure to the impacts
of climate change, including but not limited to microgrids.
• Other services and infrastructure that can reduce the risks associated with climate-related
hazards, including but not limited to:
o Shelters and cool rooms during extreme heat events.
o Shelters during flooding events.
o Medical treatment for asthma and other conditions that could be exacerbated by climate-
related events.
To support development of the report, the study team sought input and feedback from other State
agencies throughout the work, as required by the Climate Act, with staff from the Department of
Health (DOH), Department of Public Service (DPS), and Department of Transportation (DOT)
serving as study advisors. Staff from the Department of Labor (DOL), Office of Temporary and
Disability Assistance (OTDA), and Department of Homes and Community Renewal (HCR) were also
engaged to provide input. The CJWG was also consulted as barriers and opportunities were identified.
Per section 6(2) of the Climate Act, this report will be submitted to the Governor, the Assembly, and
the Senate and posted to the DEC website. In consultation with the CAC, DEC will amend the CAC’s
Scoping Plan for statewide GHG emission reductions to include recommendations from the report.
4
3 Report Objectives and Approach
The following sections provide additional background on the overarching objectives of the report, its
role within the Climate Act, key operating terms that provide bounds around the scope of the report
and its contents, and the data collection process.
3.1 Objectives of the Report
As previously noted, the Climate Act requires this report to identify the “barriers to, and opportunities
for, access to or community ownership” of the services and commodities that are key to combating
climate change. As stated in the law, this report will “include recommendations on how to increase
access” to these services and commodities. The approach for identifying barriers and developing
recommendations and opportunities (or tactics), is described further below.
3.1.1 Identifying Barriers
To identify and describe the most significant barriers and difficulties that affect access to and
participation in programs and services, the study team first drew on the extensive work already
done by academic researchers, agencies in New York State and other states, and non-governmental
organizations. This review, with feedback from agency staff and members of the CJWG, culminated
in an initial typology of barriers to be further investigated through this study.
In addition, the study team incorporated insights from focus groups, public hearings, written public
comments, and input from CAC meeting materials and notes. The result is a refined summary of the
suite of barriers that affect access to, and community ownership of, the services and commodities
needed to mitigate and adapt to climate change.
3.1.2 Developing Recommendations and Opportunities
The CAC’s Scoping Plan will provide recommendations for achieving statewide GHG emission
reductions, including regulatory measures. This report identifies the opportunities for accessing or
owning the services and commodities (listed in section 2 above) that may be included in the scoping
plan to meet GHG emission reduction directives. Opportunities were drawn from secondary research
5
review, feedback from agency staff and the CJWG, input from CAC meeting presentations and notes,
along with discussions held during focus groups, and input received through public hearings and written
public comments. The study team assessed these opportunities for key themes and principles to formulate
the overarching recommendations.
3.2 Role of the Report in the Climate Act
This report is intended as a standalone resource to inform the implementation of applicable provisions
of the CAC’s Scoping Plan in disadvantaged communities. Furthermore, the recommendations in this
report are to be shared with the Legislature and Governor, and the public. It will be posted on the Climate
Act and DEC websites to further New York State’s efforts to increase disadvantaged communities’ access
to and community ownership of services and commodities to mitigate and adapt to climate change.
It is important to highlight that the scoping
plan recommends the “what” to do, while this report identifies
the “how” to do it. Therefore, the report does not recommend specific programs or policies, such as GHG
emission reduction initiatives, or procurement or contracting policies, but rather, guidelines and strategies
for designing and delivering the programs and services that will be defined in the scoping plan to
disadvantaged communities.
A limita
tion to this report is its reliance on a finite number of sources for information. Although
the report draws on a range of sources, including primary research with community members and
organizations, it is recognized that a more comprehensive community and agency engagement process
may produce more complete results. Full and effective implementation of the scoping plan will require a
broad-based effort to engage residents of disadvantaged communities in program design and identification
of program priorities. An expanded effort to identify barriers and opportunities could also help to refine
and add to the recommendations and opportunities presented here and may further inform the set of
barriers, integrating community and agency-level feedback to reflect more community and agency
experiences and perspectives.
3.3 Key Operating Terms
Key terms used in this report, and the interpreted or defined meanings, are summarized below. The
study team looked to the Climate Act for definitions where available and worked with agency staff
to clarify these terms as needed.
6
• Access: The ability to use and benefit from programs or services offered to mitigate (i.e., reduce
GHG emissions) or adapt to the effects of climate change.
• Co-Design: Creating programs, projects, or plans with relevant stakeholders (e.g., affected
community members, and community organizations or groups) to ensure that the results meet
their needs.
• Community Ownership: Includes the following interpretations: (1) ownership by individuals
or businesses that reside within a disadvantaged community, (2) a collective ownership (like
cooperative models) of services or resources by several community members, and/or (3) the
result of a decision-making process that originates from within the community, is informed by
the community’s needs and values, and retains the benefits within the community.
• Community Members: People that live or work within disadvantaged communities.
• Community Organization: Organizations (typically nonprofits) founded to serve the various
needs of people within a local community. May offer services, or programs designed to help or
support community members, as well as advocacy in some cases.
• Community Group: A collective of people who organize around a specific issue or set of
issues but are not bound to an established organization registered with New York State.
• Disadvantaged Communities:
7
Defined in the Climate Act to mean “communities that bear
burdens of negative public health effects, environmental pollution, impacts of climate change,
and possess certain socioeconomic criteria, or comprise high-concentrations of low- and
moderate-income households.” Concurrent with the creation of this report, and as required by
the Climate Act, the CJWG is determining criteria by which to define a disadvantaged
community. Additional information is provided in appendix B.
• Local Government: Any city, town, village, or county government office or agency.
• Program: A local, State, or federal offering with a goal of community improvements or
benefits. Often may provide technical or financial assistance.
• Project or Plan: An idea or concept that is designed to achieve a particular aim to benefit the
community. May result in a program, service, or commodity that is provided to a community.
For example, a community-owned solar project, climate adaptation plan, or emergency
response plan.
• Services and Commodities: Interpreted to mean the programs, offerings, resources, and assets
within the five areas listed in section 2 to which New York State wants to increase access to and
ownership of by disadvantaged communities. These five services and commodities are further
defined in Table 1 below, including examples.
7
Table 1. Services and Commodities Definitions and Examples
Services and
Commodities
Definition Example Actions or Initiatives
Distributed Renewable
Energy Generation
Electricity generated from
renewable sources (solar, wind,
etc.) near the point of use, as
opposed to centralized
generation at power plants.
Individuals or Businesses: Small hydro or wind
installation, installation of solar photovoltaic panels,
community solar subscription models.
Municipal or Community-Based: Community-
owned solar or storage, adoption of codes or
ordinances for solar-ready new construction.
Energy Efficiency and
Weatherization
Investments
Optimizing energy use within
buildings to reduce generation
needs; weatherproofing
buildings to protect them from
extreme cold and heat,
moisture, and other natural
elements.
Individuals or Businesses: Heat pumps in
rental/multifamily housing, healthy homes initiatives;
direct installation measures with “energy
ambassadors,” deep energy retrofits.
Municipal or Community-Based: Electrification of
public housing; increased energy and safety code
enforcement.
Zero-emissions and
Low-emissions
Transportation Options
Transportation options that run
completely free of GHG
emissions or have low
emissions.
Individuals or Businesses: Mobility options without
a vehicle, e.g., active transportation, public transit,
ridesharing.
Municipal or Community-Based: Increased
infrastructure and availability for public transportation
systems, such as bus lines, train stops, etc.; electric
vehicle (EV) charging stations.
Adaptation Measures to
Improve Resilience of
Homes and Local
Infrastructure
Designing landscapes,
infrastructure, buildings, and
social systems intentionally to
prevent or reduce disruptions
related to climate-related
weather and extreme events.
Individuals or Businesses: Resilience audits for
homes or businesses, storm-hardening rental
properties, green/natural features, and shade trees
on private property.
Municipal or Community-Based: Upstream flood
mitigation, community resilience plans for public
infrastructure and buildings, microgrid development,
green/natural features and/or shade trees.
Other Services and
Infrastructure to Reduce
Risks associated with
Climate-Related
Hazards
Offering services to decrease
risks (especially health and
safety related) during extreme
heat and weather events.
Individuals or Businesses: Using community
shelters during heat or flooding, installing mini-split
heat pumps.
Municipal or Community-Based: Local emergency
planning, offering cooling centers or storm shelters,
asthma initiatives or heathy homes initiatives.
3.4 Data Collection Approach and Process
NYSERDA, DEC, and NYPA, along with the study team, performed the following data collection
activities to inform the report. These activities were pursued in close collaboration with several other
State agencies, including DOH, DPS, DOT, DOL, OTDA, and HCR. Additionally, the study team
consulted with the CJWG and the CAC to receive input and feedback on the potential barriers
and opportunities.
8
The research activities are summarized in the list below (see appendix A for more details):
1. P
erformed secondary research review focusing on existing literature, including from
academic institutions, non-governmental organizations, and agencies (from within and
outside of New York State), in addition to plans and proceedings to identify barriers
faced by disadvantaged communities and approaches to address those barriers.
2. Held eight focus groups with a total of 65 participants (including one group held in Spanish).
Participants were recruited and selected purposefully to ensure representation across the State.
Focus group discussions centered on four of the five service and commodity areas, including
renewable distributed energy resources, low- or no-emission transportation options, resilience
and adaptation, and climate hazards related to health and safety. Since there is enough secondary
research on the barriers to accessing energy efficiency and weatherization investments for
disadvantaged communities, it was decided to dedicate the focus groups to the other four
topics. These discussions explored people’s experiences as residents, business owners, or
nonprofit or local government staff accessing and participating in public processes and
programs, and barriers and opportunities for greater access and ownership.
3. Facilitated two public hearings attended by 97 individuals (21 of which were speakers),
as required per the Climate Act, and received 26 written public comments. Feedback was
received on the barriers faced in accessing or owning the services and commodities
highlighted in the legislation, as well as opportunities to break down these barriers.
9
4 Barriers
The following sections provide a high-level overview of the disparities faced by disadvantaged
communities in New York State as well as barriers identified through the research activities of
this study.
4.1 Overview
Barriers are obstacles that disadvantaged communities may face in participating in and advancing
New York State’s efforts under the Climate Act. Obstacles to participation and improvement can
be physical (e.g., aging infrastructure and housing stock or vulnerable geography), behavioral,
perceptual, cultural, social, or economic, such as financial constraints, ownership patterns, and
language and cultural structure.
Barriers can also physically affect movement and access (e.g., to zero emission or low-emission
transportation, health care, or shelter during severe weather events), as well as limit effective access
to and ownership of the infrastructure needed to mitigate and adapt to climate change, such as renewable
energy projects, green infrastructure, and the climate planning process itself. In this vein, many barriers
based on historical patterns of decision-making have prevented the social mobility of certain population
groups while promoting the social mobility of others, resulting in disproportionate exposure to risks and
limited access to mitigation and adaptation services and commodities today. Support of social mobility
will be a critical element in addressing barriers and opportunities in disadvantaged communities;
without that support, disproportionate exposures and inequitable access are likely to increase.
4.1.1 Categories of Barriers
This report organizes key barriers into four categories of overarching “themes” that align with
specific structural conditions routinely faced by disadvantaged communities. The categories of
barriers intersect and overlap to some extent, in part because they emerge from interwoven historical
patterns of exclusion, segregation, and disinvestment in communities. These patterns have affected
the quality of housing, schools, transportation, and electrical infrastructure, and have limited access to
capital, financial opportunities, employment, health care, fresh food, and other resources. However,
the categories generally group issues around specific program design challenges and priorities and are
broadly consistent with categories and topics identified in the literature, providing continuity with
other efforts to address equity. These four categories of barriers are described further below:
10
• Physical and Economic Structures and Conditions: This category encompasses the
structural challenges that characterize the broader context of all programs and affect access
to resources and ownership of infrastructure. “Structures” in this context can include both
physical structures (e.g., aging housing stock that requires additional investment to support
new technologies) and economic and social structures. For example, the “split incentive”
complicates investments in rental properties, because property owners have economic
priorities and power that can differ from and conflict with the priorities of renters.
Discrepancies between rented and owned housing are directly connected to social
inequities. In many cases, these structures reflect the cumulative impact of decades
of systematic disparities in public investment and policy priorities.
• Financial and Knowledge Resources and Capacity: These barriers relate to household,
community, and agency capacity, and to resource availability for residents, communities,
and agencies. Time represents a critical limitation across all levels of community. On
the community and business levels, resource gaps can refer to limited personnel (time
and expertise) and data systems and access to professional networks, as well as access
to different financing options. Residents may also face barriers such as lack of credit and
access to financial services and resources that could enable investment and participation.
• Perspectives and Information: Barriers within this category describe community perceptions
of agencies and programs, including lack of trust in local and State authorities that, in some
cases, has developed over decades. In addition, this category includes limits to understanding
of bureaucratic and administrative structures, awareness of programs and resources, as well
as the relative importance of agency programming compared to competing needs and interests.
Opaque regulatory processes preventing community participation and feedback to agencies
are a primary barrier within this category.
• Programmatic Design and Implementation: Programmatic barriers include the various
factors in program design and implementation that can limit participation and success,
including overly complex bureaucratic procedures, lack of information to inform program
design and goals, complex eligibility requirements, insufficient emphasis on designing with
communities, and limited alignment across agencies, resources, and geographical areas.
These barriers categories may be useful in identifying the types of policies and actions that could
effectively address (and remove) key barriers. In particular, the Programmatic Design and Implementation
category presents a slightly different perspective than the other categories, because the challenges in that
category reflect the design of programs themselves, rather than factors external to the programs.
Examining and addressing the barriers in this category are, therefore, critical to identifying opportunities
for addressing obstacles across the other categories.
11
4.1.2 Barriers Across the Five Service and Commodity Areas
In accordance with the Climate Act’s requirements, the study team addressed barriers that disadvantaged
communities face in accessing or owning services and commodities highlighted in the legislation.
Barriers experienced within each of these five areas are discussed further below.
1. Distributed renewable energy generation programs are often limited by barriers related
to building ownership. Due to physical and economic factors like aging building stock and
infrastructure, buildings in historically underserved and under-resourced communities may
need electrical updates or roof repairs before solar can be installed. Renters may not receive
any monetary benefits from tax credits and may need to deal with challenges and logistics
of installation. For example, programs may not communicate clean energy technology or
program benefits in a way that motivates community members, such as community-scale
renewable energy projects, which have not typically focused on historically underserved
and under-resourced communities.
2. Energy efficiency, weatherization, and electrification programs have deployment constraints
related to inadequate community infrastructure and household-level challenges. For example,
community members may live in old homes and have other more pressing personal issues to
overcome before considering energy efficiency, creating a strain on households with already
limited resources. Community members’ homes may also have structural deficiencies or
health and safety issues leading to their deferral and exclusion from energy efficiency and
weatherization program participation until structural issues are addressed. Further, split
incentives leave landlords with limited motivation to invest in improvements because they
will not recoup the investment; therefore, renters do not have the opportunity to improve
their residences or experience energy savings themselves. Energy efficiency barriers are
well-documented in the literature.
8
3. Zero-emission and low-emission transportation programs may not reach the
populations with the most limited access to clean and safe transportation. For example,
changing the vehicles that New Yorkers use from running on fossil fuels to cleaner options
will improve air quality for everyone, but direct benefits to owners are less likely to affect
those in disadvantaged communities, who may be less able to purchase new electric vehicles,
or may prefer to use public transportation. This makes designing programs to increase
accessibility of low- and zero-emission public transit in disadvantaged communities important.
4. Programs addressing community adaptation of homes, buildings, and infrastructure are
often less accessible to communities with limited capacity; that is, having the right resources
and information available to prioritize and finance improvements. Information on the impacts of
climate change and links between climate change and household and community risk is limited
and challenging to communicate. The relationship between climate change and individual risks
has been difficult to convey to communities. Further, communities attempting to plan for climate
change adaptation and resilience may lack the technical skills or tailored technical assistance
(including readily available and well-developed solutions), resources and information to
assess risk, prioritize, plan, and finance critical infrastructure projects.
12
5. Programs that address other services and infrastructure to reduce the risks of climate-related
hazards, such as extreme heat or storms, may also be limited by barriers related to community
capacity, as well as insufficient data collection and communication of risks. The challenges of
extreme heat and the urban heat island effect are amplified for the elderly, infants, and young
children, homeless, mentally ill, drug users, and residents of public housing. Programs may
not effectively mitigate health-related climate risks because of a lack of integrated planning
and coordination across numerous entities, including healthcare providers and planning
authorities in local, State, and federal governments.
4.2 Key Barriers to Access and Ownership
As noted, the study team identified four categories of barriers related to accessing, using, or owning
the services and commodities listed in the Climate Act. Table 3 through Table 6 detail barriers within
each of the categories and provide examples of how they present within three different levels of
community access:
• Individual or household levels.
• Community level (such as local governments).
• Landlord or business level.
Specific service and commodity areas affected are also highlighted in Table 2 through Table 5.
9
13
Table 2. Physical and Economic Structures and Conditions
Baseline conditions of physical or economic systems that impede access, use, or ownership of programs or solutions.
Barrier to Access
or Community
Ownership
Example Barriers: Individual
and Household Level
Example Barriers:
Community Level
(e.g., local agencies)
Example Barriers: Landlord
or Business Level
Specific
Services and
Commodities
Affected
Building stock may be
old and in disrepair.
Increased cost to upgrade, install,
or address more critical priorities
(e.g., roof repair).
Variable building conditions can
limit program reach to residents.
Increased costs to upgrade or
install; Limited financial incentive to
upgrade.
RE, Adaptation,
EE.
Multifamily/rental
structures create split
incentives.
Landlords may not invest in
upgrades, (e.g., electrification or
EV charging). Tenants have limited
ability to improve property or
accrue savings.
Limited influence with landlords;
Limited ability to ensure savings
are passed through to tenants.
Landlords have no/limited financial
incentive to upgrade if savings are
passed through to tenants.
EE, RE,
Adaptation
(buildings).
Products/services
available may not
match community
needs.
Products may not align with
household financial priorities.
New technologies may not be
practical investments (e.g., storage,
new EVs).
Variable community needs and
conditions can limit program reach
(e.g., rooftop solar or
weatherization).
Market-ready products may not be
local priority (e.g., electric vehicle
supply equipment with limited EV
drivers).
Market-ready products may not be
suited to application (e.g., EV
delivery vehicles).
All services and
commodities.
Physical infrastructure
may be insufficient.
Limited access to services (e.g.,
transportation).
Limited access to transportation
based on disabilities, gender, and
safety.
Limited infrastructural and
community resilience to damaging
events.
Limited or outdated infrastructure at
building or community level (e.g.,
drainage) makes adaptation
difficult.
High costs to upgrade outdated
infrastructure, add services (e.g.,
cooling and evacuation centers,
improved drainage).
Limited or outdated physical
infrastructure increases costs,
reduces ability to upgrade/adapt.
Local businesses have limited
resources to meet higher costs,
improve operations.
All services and
commodities.
Data/IT infrastructure
limitations can affect
community access.
Lack of internet access, Wi-Fi, and
hardware.
Limited information/technology
access.
Limited community data; Limits of
trained staff; Limited IT resources;
Impeded planning and
communications.
Limited community data or IT
infrastructure (e.g., broadband)
increases operating costs, limits
resources for other investments.
All services and
commodities,
especially RE,
Transportation.
14
Table 3. Financial and Knowledge Resources and Capacity Barriers
Insufficient resources, including financial resources, time, staffing or individuals on the household, agency, organization, or municipal level.
Barrier to Access
or Community
Ownership
Example Barriers: Individual
and Household Level
Example Barriers:
Community
Level
Example Barriers: Landlord
or Business Level
Specific
Services and
Commodities
Affected
Households and
community members
may lack access to
capital or financing
limits access.
Low/limited incomes.
Unbanked populations with limited
access to credit or cashless
options.
Limited municipal budgets.
Limited access to credit.
Limited small business capital.
Limited access to credit or
resources to improve credit access.
All services and
commodities.
Households and
community members
may lack time and
skills to find and
access programs.
Competing priorities creating
limited time to attend meetings or
learn of new options.
Not enough time to
find/plan/manage project and
submit applications.
Not enough time to
find/plan/manage projects and
programs.
Competing goals with deadlines for
funding.
Limited finances, networks.
Limited capacity for ancillary
projects.
No trained staff to plan or pursue
projects or programs.
All services and
commodities.
Lack of (or lack of
access to) information
networks (e.g.,
personal, or
professional networks)
can reduce ability to
participate.
Limited informal professional
resources/networks to provide
information about risk, benefits.
Limited knowledge resources,
professional contacts.
Limited professional
resources/networks to access
knowledge, support, strategic and
practical input.
Limited capacity and networks
professional resources/networks to
draw on for creative solutions that
aren’t “sales.”
All services and
commodities.
Communities have
limited programmatic
and information
capacity.
N/A
Limited data about population
needs.
Local social and health systems
with limited planning data and
capacity.
Limited information about workforce
availability and options related to
program or project implementation.
All services and
commodities.
Communities and
businesses face
workforce constraints.
Limited training, mobility, access to
jobs (e.g., court-involved workers
that may have a record).
Limited training capacity and
budget.
Limited workforce/contractor pool
due to lack of training opportunities,
job access (e.g., court-involved
workers).
Limited training capacity, need for
specific skill sets.
All services and
commodities.
15
Table 4. Perspectives and Information Barriers
Limited information, competing priorities and preferences, or lived experiences, including historical patterns of interaction that have eroded trust
and impede awareness of and access to programs or services.
Barrier to Access
or Community
Ownership
Example Barriers: Individual
and Household Level
Example Barriers:
Community
Level
Example Barriers: Landlord or
Business Level
Specific
Services and
Commodities
Affected
Communities may be
unaware or uncertain
of risks or needs.
Evolving information on health
effects and impacts of climate
risks may create uncertainty.
Health and risk information may
not be accessible or easy to
understand.
Limited information on impacts
of climate change on individual
health risks.
Evolving information on health
effects and impacts of climate
risks for households and
communities.
Limited documented information
about planning, infrastructure
priorities for addressing climate
vulnerabilities.
Evolving information on health
effects and impacts of climate
risks on businesses, markets,
and communities.
Lack of industry and business
leadership on addressing climate
and health risks to workers and
communities.
All services
and commodities,
focus on
adaptation, and
health and safety.
Communities may
have a lack of trust
in the program or
service provider.
Negative historical patterns of
interaction with utilities, government
agencies, landlords, potentially
due to immigrant status or identity.
Unwillingness to grant access to
homes for improvement or services.
Concern about “unproven” new
technologies.
Negative historical patterns
of interaction with utilities,
government agencies, landlords.
Complex and negative
interactions with State and
private sector.
Negative historical patterns
of interaction with utilities,
government agencies, and public.
All services
and commodities,
focus on EE,
adaptation, and
health and safety.
Communities may
perceive limited
benefits or value
of programs.
Ineffective communication of
value and lack of focus on
community priorities.
Competing priorities and lack
of clear benefit information limit
interest, including “not for me”
perspective.
Concern about “unproven”
new technologies.
Competing priorities and lack
of clear benefit information
limit interest.
Lack of focus on
community priorities.
Competing funding sources
and programs may affect
prioritization.
Concern about “unproven”
new technologies.
Competing priorities and lack of
clear benefit information limit
interest; payback period too long.
Ineffective communication of value,
limited trust in new technologies.
All services
and commodities.
16
Table 5. Programmatic Design and Implementation Barriers
Data and knowledge gaps related to lack of alignment between agencies and program design constraints.
Barrier to Access
or Community
Ownership
Example Barriers: Individual
and Household Level
Example Barriers:
Community
Level
Example Barriers: Landlord or
Business Level
Specific
Services and
Commodities
Affected
Lack of baseline
or benchmarking
and impact
assessment data.
Misaligned or conflicting program
offerings, limited access due
to changes in households or
missing information.
Lack of information about where
needs are across programs and how
well programs would meet them.
Misaligned or conflicting
program offerings, limited access
to meet needs, limited
community application.
Lack of information about where
needs are across programs
and how well programs would
meet them.
Programs not consistent with priorities.
Lack of information about business
priorities, processes, and needs.
All services and
commodities,
focus on EE.
Program not well
designed for
community members.
Limited focus to date on climate-
vulnerable and heat-vulnerable areas.
Historically focused on single-family
homes and homeowners with limited
offerings for multifamily renters.
Limited focus to date on climate-
vulnerable and heat-vulnerable
areas and programming.
Limited focus on multifamily renters.
Limited attention on climate-vulnerable
and heat-vulnerable areas, limited
options for C&I.
All services and
commodities.
Program eligibility
constraints and
application requirements
may eliminate
certain communities.
Programs requiring home ownership
or new technology purchase.
Income eligibility varies and difficult
to understand/navigate, limited
access for renters, technologies
require capital.
Programs requiring home ownership
or new technology purchase.
Multiple programs difficult to
optimize, variable eligibility.
Competitive grant structures favor
communities and organizations
with grant-writing capacity
and experience.
Programs requiring building ownership
or new technology purchase.
Loan-based programs not accessible
to small, cash-based businesses.
Application requirements favor
firms with resources.
All services and
commodities.
Program resources
may be insufficient
or inconsistent.
Program scope, timeframes
too limited to address complex
issues and widespread need.
Program scope, timeframes too
limited to address complex issues
and widespread need; short time
horizons for funding do not align
with planning.
Program scope, timeframes too
limited to address business financing
cycles and project scopes.
All services and
commodities.
Programs may lack
sufficient coordination.
Burdensome applications,
conflicting eligibility.
Lack of coordination across
governments (e.g., city or town
coordination with county or State)
may cause confusion.
Burdensome applications,
conflicting eligibility; local
alignment of programs requires
effort, difficult to optimize, schedules
difficult to implement.
Some agencies may lack authority
to participate at community level.
Burdensome applications,
conflicting eligibility.
All services and
commodities.
Program outreach
may be insufficient
or misaligned.
Lack of awareness of programs and
services because information is not
provided in the best channel,
source, language, or format.
Communities that could benefit
from programs/services aren’t
aware; programs have difficulty
communicating to residents.
Lack of awareness of programs and
services because information is not
provided in the best channel, source,
language, or format.
All services
and commodities.
17
5 Recommendations and Opportunities Overview
This section provides an overview of the report recommendations, including describing the structure of
recommendations and opportunities.
5.1 Overview and Background
This section details recommendations and opportunities identified through the activities described in
the report. Note that the recommendations do not address the significant and important work that will
be necessary to put them into practice, which is further discussed in section 6. Some examples of
remaining work and how they relate to the recommendations are highlighted below:
• Identifying and addressing policy implications. Some recommendations may have
larger policy repercussions. For example, integrating communities in program design is
an endeavor that takes additional time and money and could imply substantial changes to
established processes.
• Finding and gaining support for additional funding and staffing. Several recommendations
require local and State agencies to take a more active role within communities during planning
processes and to provide support to identify and address climate hazards. In many cases,
agencies or other organizations may not have the requisite budget, authority, skills, or
staffing to do this.
• Conducting a full-stakeholder review and feasibility assessment. Most, if not all,
recommendations require numerous parties to collaborate and determine a path forward
to implementation. Implementing agencies must establish organizational structures, develop
new and existing relationships, and build trust to facilitate this stakeholder collaboration.
The study team also recognizes that some of the recommendations identified may already be in
practice within certain communities or programs and has included some examples.
5.2 Recommendations
The study team makes eight high-level recommendations that are organized under three key themes:
• Recommendation Theme 1: Ensure processes are inclusive.
• Recommendation Theme 2: Streamline program access.
• Recommendation Theme 3: Address emerging issues.
18
For this report, a “recommendation” is considered a high-level principle to increase access and
ownership in disadvantaged communities, while an “opportunity” is a strategy or tactic that supports
the implementation of the related recommendation. Table 6 below summarizes these recommendations,
as well as the opportunities identified to implement them.
Table 6. Summary of Recommendations and Opportunities
Recommendation Related Opportunities
Recommendation Theme 1: Ensure Processes are Inclusive
1. Co-design programs
or projects with and
for communities.
1a. Staff agencies and funding programs to implement co-design processes
with communities.
1b. Build trust by dedicating time and resources to develop relationships
with communities.
1c. Co-design with and for the most vulnerable New Yorkers.
1d. Develop wealth-building and asset-building options or pathways.
2. Provide meaningful
opportunities for
public input in
government
processes and
proceedings.
2a. Revisit public outreach and engagement protocols and practices with communities
to bring more people into conversations earlier and show them how their input is
being addressed.
2b. Track and assess participation in public processes.
2c. Continue seeking and supporting community groups and representatives
in public processes.
3. Work across
intersecting
challenges and
interests to address
needs holistically.
3a. Recognize and address intersecting barriers in accessing programs and services.
3b. Describe the benefits of clean energy, transportation, environmental and adaptation
projects on several dimensions, with cultural awareness.
3c. Actively seek and recruit community partners for communication and program
or service facilitation needs.
3d. Expand intermunicipal and regional collaboration.
3e. Include a range of stakeholders with different roles and areas of expertise.
3f. Update codes, rules, and policies that currently limit or prevent climate
change solutions.
3g. Recognize and address the compounded effects of systemic racism
and environmental and climate injustice within climate plans.
Recommendation Theme 2: Streamline Program Access
4. Transition to
program models that
require little or no
effort to participate
and benefit.
4a. Automatically enroll people into programs where possible.
4b. Automatically refer eligible people and businesses between programs,
with follow-through.
4c. Directly award grants to communities instead of requiring lengthy and competitive
application processes, to the extent consistent with relevant legal requirements.
5. Establish people-
centered policies,
programs, and
funding across local,
State, and federal
governments.
5a. Expand eligibility where feasible to maximize impact and coordinate
between programs.
5b. Provide clearer participation roadmaps and pathways for community members.
5c. Offer more direct access to resources, information, data, and knowledge.
5d. Assess opportunities to merge, combine, or closely coordinate related programs
across State agencies, to the extent consistent with legal requirements.
5e. Review and reemphasize the State’s role as the connector between federal
and local programs and services and across different market actors.
19
Table 6 continued
Recommendation Related Opportunities
6. Find and support
resource-
constrained local
governments.
6a. Identify the most vulnerable communities and craft a set of services that
are most frequently needed.
6b. Provide digestible data and information to help local governments identify
climate risks and potential adaptation strategies.
6c. Bring education and training to local governments so they are prepared to receive
funding and understand what resources are available.
Recommendation Theme 3: Address Emerging Issues
7. Mobilize citizen
participation and
action.
7a. Develop channels and tools for people to report local concerns.
7b. Support people and neighborhoods in providing feedback about climate issues
that affect them.
7c. Facilitate ways for community members to contact and support each other
in emergencies.
7d. Find and support local champions.
8. Improve housing
conditions and
adherence to local
building codes.
8a. Address building integrity from a health and safety perspective.
8b. Continue to improve housing and energy upgrade incentives and financing for
building owners serving disadvantaged community members.
8c. Address the possibility of climate-related displacement or relocation early, and
work with communities to develop questions and options.
8d. Institute anti-displacement, relocation, or managed retreat policy that considers social,
cultural, and historical context in addition to infrastructure and natural environment.
8e. Increase building health and safety and energy code enforcement efforts
and partnerships.
8f. Bring energy code education and training to frontline contractors.
The fol
lowing sections further describe the recommendations and opportunities. Recommendations
are organized by the three key themes described above: ensure processes are inclusive, streamline
program access, and address emerging issues. Opportunities (or tactics) are grouped according to
the target audiences, differentiating among opportunities to work with individuals, households, or
businesses; to increase access and ownership; and opportunities to work at the community level
with community organizations, groups, or local government to increase access and ownership.
Where available, examples of the opportunities are provided, identifying the relevant service or
commodity area.
10
,
11
In most cases the recommendations do not name a specific responsible party or actor, as the same
opportunities may exist at the State, regional and local levels, and could be implemented by government
entities and nonprofits alike. Per above, a next step toward implementing this report may be a baseline
or gap analysis to understand current actions and processes, and the agencies or other entities that may
be best positioned to implement the recommendations.
20
Recommendation Theme 1: Ensure Processes are Inclusive
Recommendation 1: Co-Design Programs
or Projects with and for Communities
Involve community members and relevant community stakeholders
as programs or projects are designed, inviting participation at an early
stage in the process to ensure that the outcomes reflect the concerns
and needs of the community. The reason to encourage participation
of community members is that residents of disadvantaged communities
are often excluded from planning and other processes that impact their
communities. Rectifying these historical harms requires transforming
typical government processes and inviting participation from
stakeholders and residents who can fully explore the needs, concerns,
resources, and attitudes of a community. Early participation can also
unlock new synergies for effective and impactful program delivery.
Opportunities to work with individuals, households, or businesses:
1a. Staff agencies and fund programs to implement co-design processes with communities.
• Dedicate agency staff and funding to help residents of communities organize (or work
with trusted community organizations) to ensure they have a role in the co-design process
and that their priorities and needs are reflected in the programs or projects that impact them.
• Hire a diverse and bilingual staff who can engage with community members based on shared
experiences in the language they prefer and ensure that non-English speaking individuals
or those with limited English proficiency can participate in the co-design process.
• Ensure that agencies develop capacities to support co-design processes with
multi-disciplinary research and inquiry and diverse forms of expertise.
• Continue developing emergency response plans with input from public housing residents.
• Provide fair compensation for organizations and individuals to contribute to the
co-design process.
Effectively collaborating with communities will require new and inclusive processes. Such changes
will require staff time and effort and may require additional time to build relationships with community
stakeholders. Dedicated funding streams will assure these programs benefit from consistent support.
“Community members
and leaders need to be
involved in this discussion;
government agencies can’t be
left to their own silos to come
up with these plans, they are
not attuned to the real needs
of communities and have blind
spots. A comprehensive plan
that’s created with the input
of community members and
[organizations] that represent
front
line communities [is
what’s needed].”
- Focus Group Participant
21
Example Program: New York State has established through Executive Order a Language Access
Policy that directs each state agency that provides direct public services to offer interpretation services
to individuals in their primary language. These agencies are also required to translate vital documents,
including public documents such as forms, in the ten most common non-English language spoken by
Limited English Proficiency individuals in the State of New York. The agencies are also required to
appoint a Language Access Coordinator to publish a Language Access Plan. (Services or Commodity
Area: All).
Example Project: NYSERDA is establishing procurement mechanisms for compensating community
organizations to participate in program planning and co-design. An Energy Equity Collaborative is also
in development to identify opportunities for program innovation and co-design. (Service or Commodity
Area: EE, RE).
Example Program: The New York State Lake Ontario Resiliency and Economic Development
Initiative is a funding program that was designed with community and local government involvement
through several months of active engagement. All projects were identified by community members and
local government representatives and prioritized by regional planning committees comprised of local
government and State agency representatives. (Service or Commodity Area: Adaptation, All).
1b. Build trust by dedicating time and resources to develop relationships with communities.
• Find local community groups or organizations early in the process and work with them to build
understanding of the experiences, needs, concerns, and points of pride within the community.
• Provide State and local government staff with education on environmental justice issues
and approaches.
• Partner with local champions for project planning and demonstrate a commitment to listen
to local experts by acting on their input. Doing so will require involvement early enough
that local input can shape the outcome.
Building trust with communities that have been marginalized is a critical first step in working
with communities to co-design solutions. During focus groups, community organizations working
in historically disadvantaged areas shared their skepticism about the commitment that State or local
agencies would make given generations of neglect and discrimination. They also pointed out that many
of the topics covered were not new but had been discussed in other forums before. In this context, State
agencies must work to build trust with community stakeholders and ensure that when working together,
agencies respect and build from the knowledge and experiences of local communities in tangible actions.
22
Example Program: NYSERDA’s Regional Clean Energy Hubs program will serve as extensions
of NYSERDA for building relationships, supporting outreach and engagement of residents around
needs, barriers, and opportunities for improving access to clean energy programs. (Service or
Commodity Area: EE, RE).
Example Program: NYSERDA’s NY-Sun program partnered with the New York City Environmental
Justice Alliance to receive input on the Inclusive Community Solar Adder program and incorporated
this input into the program. (Service or Commodity Area: RE).
Example Program: DEC’s Hudson River Estuary program helps communities anticipate and manage
climate risks through several longstanding assistance programs, including the Climate-Adaptive Design
Studio and place-based waterfront flooding task forces. (Service or Commodity Area: Adaptation).
1c. Co-design with and for the most vulnerable New Yorkers.
• Design programs and create plans intentionally for different types of disadvantaged
communities, considering the specific barriers and opportunities they face (e.g., renters, people
without cars, etc.).
• Actively collaborate with community groups and residents from the start when designing
programs or projects (rather than retrofitting an existing program) to enable community input
and ensure that programs leverage and build community resources. Note that within this,
agencies must also balance solicitation rules and requirements to ensure a fair process.
• Learn about the community member experience through approaches like design thinking or
journey mapping that require designers to empathize with community members’ experiences.
Too often, programs are designed for groups or communities that are
considered the “norm” or the median (e.g., homeowners), and then adapted
to fit communities and households who do not fit within that normative
frame. However, to take the example of homeownership, the needs of
renters are quite different from those of homeowners, just as the needs
of transit riders are different from people with personal vehicles.
Example Suggestion: Focus group participants highlighted gaps in their
day-to-day public transit journeys, for example—noting that regular trips
to get groceries or commute to work/school, as well as urgent needs such
as medical or other essential services, could take hours of planning.
Participants also emphasized bringing dignity to the transit experience
“HEAP benefits are
available in the winter to
help people with heating
bills, but there is no
commensurate program
to help people with AC bills
in the summer. Not that I
want everyone cranking
AC, but if there aren’t other
investments in cooling
(like shade trees or public
cooling areas) then what
are the options?”
- Focus Group Participant
23
by ensuring that transit facilities and stops are clean, well-maintained, and well-lit, as well as including
more amenities to stay warm or cool, safe, and comfortable while waiting for transit (e.g., roofs on
bus shelters, benches, heated bus hutches, and lockers). (Service or Commodity Area: Transportation).
Example Program: NYSERDA worked with a group of 30 community organizations across the State
to co-design the Regional Clean Energy Hubs program offering to ensure the program met their needs.
(Service or Commodity Area: EE, RE).
Example Program: The DEC Climate Smart Communities (CSC) Grant program provides opportunities
for local governments to apply for funding to implement or upgrade cooling centers and cooling sites
in their jurisdictions. Local governments are encouraged to assess existing facilities that could serve as
cooling centers in their communities and ensure accessibility to vulnerable populations like the elderly
and those without vehicles. (Service or Commodity Area: Health and Safety).
Example Project: DEC conducted a multi-year, state-of-the-art South End Air Quality Study.
Conducted in Albany’s South End neighborhood, an Environmental Justice community, the study
collected air quality data on the ground to advance solutions to address air pollution in the area.
The study was designed and executed in partnership with residents,
who also participated in the collection of air quality data, and additional
State and local agencies, and serves as a model for other communities.
(Service or Commodity Area: Health and Safety).
Example Project: NYSERDA partnered with Tompkins
Consolidated Area Transit (TCAT) and a diverse project team to
develop and demonstrate a flexible, on-demand transit service for
disadvantaged communities in Tompkins County. TCAT, along
with Way2Go-Cornell Cooperative Extension, developed educational
materials, conducted rider surveys, and hosted workshops with
community members to identify transportation needs directly from
members of the public, especially in rural, low-income communities.
(Service or Commodity Area: Transportation).
One CJWG member shared a
vision for community ownership
reaching beyond energy benefits.
For community solar or heat
pumps, community members
should:
Build the system with their
workforce (with training).
Maintain the systems—Be the
technicians and subscription
managers.
Sign up for benefits—Have
150–300 community members
subscribe.
Give back revenue from
project as community
dividends or reinvestment.
“It’s a way to grow community
wealth and bring community
control of the resources.”
24
1d.
Develop wealth-building and asset-building options or pathways.
• Collaborate with community representatives, State, and energy programs to identify and
develop wealth-building and asset-building pathways to clean energy, healthy homes, and
clean transportation.
• Offer non-traditional options where financing is necessary (e.g., forgivable loans where
revenues can be reinvested in community, on-bill financing, micro-lending, and options
for people without credit history).
The wealth gap in the United States has been created over generations. Histories of redlining,
employment and housing discrimination, and other instances of structural racism have resulted
in disparities in household and community wealth, even setting aside gaps in individual household
income. Many programs or services that offer the highest savings (e.g., energy or bill savings;
fuel cost savings) require substantial investment and were designed for homeowners.
Example Suggestion: The New York City Community Energy Co-Op works with communities
to develop and implement community-owned solar projects. Community-owned solar projects can
build wealth within the community by saving money on members’ energy bills that can then be put
to other uses, along with other potential benefits (examples highlighted in sidebar). (Service or
Commodity Area: RE).
Example Suggestion: Provide arrears forgiveness for low- to moderate-income households to
clear the way for wealth development instead of accumulation of additional debt. (Service or
Commodity Area: EE).
Recommendation 2: Provide Meaningful Opportunities for Public Input in
Government Processes and Proceedings
Reassess and revise ways that State and local government agencies reach out to disadvantaged
communities during official public input processes to increase engagement and accessibility. Increase
accountability so the public understands how their input is being addressed. Revising ways to reach out to
disadvantaged communities and increasing accountability is important because standard public outreach
and engagement strategies are more likely to reach those organizations and individuals who are already
aware of and involved in an issue. These strategies may not account for the additional barriers, such as
time constraints and lack of trust for public processes, that disadvantaged communities face.
25
Opportunities to work with individuals, households, or businesses:
2a. Revisit public outreach and engagement protocols and practices with communities to bring
more people into conversations earlier and show them how their input is being addressed.
Develop or reassess public engagement policies State
and local) to reach people across numerous channels,
in their preferred languages, and with earlier notices
about public input to allow more time for community
networks to spread the news. Structure public engagement
opportunities to enable meaningful and leveled participation.
Where possible and appropriate, explore opportunities
to share control of engagement processes and outcomes
with the communities. This includes increasing outreach
through community organization partners, and where
appropriate, compensating them.
• Build environmental and social justice practices into public input and planning, such as
the Jemez Principles for Democratic Organizing or other community engagement strategies
(see appendix C).
• Dedicate local agency staff (e.g., planning departments) to help individuals and community
groups learn about and participate in permits, planning, or budget decisions that will affect
them, including one-on-one education or assistance about a project proposal and/or process.
Where local agency staff are not located, identify an agency community liaison or ombudsman.
• Improve accessibility of public projects and input materials by considering a range of education
levels, cultural contexts, and understanding of the planning process. For example, use visuals
or diagrams where possible. Explain where a project is in the process and how public input
matters (i.e., what might it change) so people see a reason to try. Simplify the public
participation process, provide clear instructions for how to participate, provide relevant
documents and other information readily, early, and transparently, and provide several
ways for a person to participate.
• Build in State and local government accountability by showing communities how their input
is used to address their needs.
In focus groups and public input, some community members felt that they did not hear about
opportunities early enough, or at all. Sometimes, the process seemed too far along to have an impact
(including materials that looked too official to believe they could change). Some voiced frustration
that their individual voices were not heard.
Jemez Principles for Democratic Organizing
1. Be inclusive.
2. Emphasis on bottom-up organizing.
3. Let people speak for themselves.
4. Work together in solidarity and mutuality.
5. Build just relationships among members.
6. Commitment to self-transformation.
Developed at a meeting of the Southwest
Network for Environmental and Economic
Justice (SNEEJ), Jemez, New Mexico, 1996.
26
Example Suggestion: As part of its Equitable Energy Efficiency Proceeding (E3), the State of
Connecticut summarized and published public comments received for each goal and addressed how
the suggestions were incorporated into the agency decision. (Service or Commodity Area: EE).
Example Program: Tompkins County offers a public participation toolkit on its website, offering
resources and information about how to engage the public in important projects and decisions. (Service
or Commodity Area: All).
Example Program: NYSERDA’s Low- to Moderate-Income Portfolio Implementation Plan
development process included multiple stakeholder engagement events to understand community
needs and concerns. The process included a review of all stakeholder input received and responses
to input. (Service or Commodity Area: EE).
Example Project: NYSERDA worked with MTA to demonstrate
a collaborative transportation planning software tool that helped
streamline the transit authority’s ongoing Bus Network Redesign
process at the time. By hosting an interactive map online, the MTA
was able to solicit public feedback and share information on the
network redesign in a more easily accessible approach than its
traditional channels. Furthermore, the cloud-based tool allowed
MTA to quickly adapt bus service to COVID-related overnight
subway shutdowns, helping provide a critical transit service for
essential workers. (Service or Commodity Area: Transportation).
2b. Track and assess participation in public processes.
• Determine what information local and State agencies can legally and systematically
capture about participants to assess whether community members are at the table. Example
characteristics could include income level (or receipt of income-eligible public assistance),
age range, race/ethnicity, disability status, location (e.g., neighborhood), renter status, or
residence in public or subsidized housing.
• Systematically track outreach accessibility (see sidebar), and who is participating and
contributing to public input (e.g., by location or demographics), to assess what strategies
or partnerships may work best, and who is missing. If local or State governments see gaps
in who is participating, they can find community organizations representing that constituency
to co-design improvements.
Example Accessibility Goals
or Metrics:
Outreach channels.
Community-based partners
for outreach.
Notification lead time.
Meeting times-of-day.
Language (translation
or interpretation).
Legibility (plain language).
Cultural, racial, and
ethnic relevance.
Physically accessibility to meetings
Transparency and context.
Incentives or compensation.
27
• Develop access and participation goals and metrics
for planning and program design processes, and where
possible, integrate these procedural metrics into policies
or evaluation (e.g., assessment of Climate Act implementation).
Baseline information on who is participating can help identify
opportunities to improve outreach and public input processes,
and measure progress. Procedural metrics, such as accessibility
(physical, language, or educational), can help to inform notification
timelines and channels, and participation.
Example Program: The New York Metropolitan Transportation Council adopted a Public
Involvement Plan in 2019, which identified three key goals: (1) provide a robust, creative, and
inclusive outreach process for all populations within the region to engage in meaningful discussions;
(2) educate the public so they can purposefully participate; and (3) evaluate current and ongoing
public involvement activities on a periodic basis to identify successes and areas for improvement.
(Service or Commodity Area: Transportation).
Opportunities to work at the community level (via community organizations, groups, or
local government):
2c. Continue seeking out and supporting community groups and representatives in
public processes.
• Actively find and reach out to neighborhood and community organizations to weigh in on
climate, energy, housing, transportation, and health issues (without limiting invitations to
specific sectors, per recommendation 3).
• Provide compensation for community organizations to help with outreach and facilitating
community member participation in public processes (see recommendation 1a. regarding
fair compensation).
• Provide financial and technical support to nonprofit and community organizations to build
capacity (e.g., information or knowledge, staffing resources, etc.) so they can participate in
public processes.
“The most important thing
is representation and
keeping the lines of
communication open.
People like us are not
represented in the rooms
where these decisions are
being made. We need
people who can voice our
problems and the needs of
our communities.”
- Focus Group Participant
28
As one CJWG member noted, due to time, resource, educational, and trust
barriers, it is not reasonable to expect everyone to participate as individuals;
nor is it reasonable to expect everyone to participate directly, but grassroots
organizations are well-suited to provide input. However, it takes staff time
and resources to stay informed about the status and input opportunities of
local projects as well as to post or share information. One way to respect
(and facilitate) grassroots organizational help is to provide adequate
compensation.
Example Program: DEC offers Environmental Justice Capacity Building
Grants to help community organizations build administrative, technical, and
programmatic capacity to support their efforts to serve low-income populations, communities
of color, and underserved communities across the State. (Service or Commodity Area: Adaptation).
Example Program: The Clean Transportation NY Plan, coordinated by DEC, guides the spending of
New York State’s allocation of Volkswagen Settlement funds. DEC held a series of public informational
meetings, established a dedicated webpage to accept stakeholder suggestions and potential projects,
and incorporated the plan’s environmental justice commitments by directing incentives in or near
disadvantaged communities. Community input was used to design programs that replace older diesel
vehicles and equipment with new, cleaner vehicles. Several programs focus on providing New York
State’s vehicle and equipment electrification efforts (e.g., transit buses, school buses, cargo handling
equipment) to disadvantaged communities. The NYC Clean Trucks Program limits eligibility of its
truck replacements to certain industrial zones in the city based on environmental justice considerations.
(Service or Commodity Area: Transportation).
Recommendation 3: Work Across Intersecting Issues and Interests to
Address Needs Holistically
Find the intersections across different programs and projects to strengthen community support
and increase chances for funding. The solutions that people and organizations seek are rarely one
dimensional. Regular medical appointments require navigating public transportation connections,
and health insurance as well as transportation or housing assistance. Flooding in one community
may be caused or exacerbated by development or infrastructure in another town. Large-scale
and community-scale energy projects have the potential to impact communities beyond their
energy-related benefits. For example, these projects may include other benefits like local job
“[Save the Sound]
held a forum to talk
about intersecting
issues— resiliency,
transportation options
(lack thereof), and water
quality. Speakers from
different organizations
came, and it raised
awareness. [They] had
meetings with a State
Senator.”
- Focus Group Participant
29
creation, revitalized abandoned lots, or projects coupled with agricultural land. Finding intersections
across interests and issues is not only necessary for problem-solving, but will help strengthen projects
and support, and increase chances for funding.
Opportunities to work with individuals, households, or businesses:
3a. Recognize and address intersecting barriers in accessing programs and services.
• Identify the cross-sector barriers people face accessing and participating in clean energy,
housing, transportation, health, or climate programs through understanding community
member experience (per recommendation 1c).
• Create bridges between sector or program areas to connect participation paths and
overcome barriers.
Program participation often drops off when people encounter barriers “outside of” the program,
and when programs do not facilitate solving problems outside their direct areas of scope or expertise.
Example Program: The New York State Healthy Homes Value-Based Payment Pilot, delivered by
DOH and NYSERDA, aims to address several intersecting health-related and energy issues in the
home, including energy efficiency and weatherization, environmental trigger reduction, and home
injury prevention services. In-home visits are performed by a registered nurse, with community
health worker support throughout the process. (Service or Commodity Area: EE, Health and Safety).
Example Program: NYPA is participating in a National Indoor Food Production Collaborative to
help electric utilities understand the impact of agricultural industry electrification within communities.
As part of the project, NYPA is partnering with community organizations to place large indoor food
systems in disadvantaged communities, along with providing education about sustainability, climate
change, and food justice issues. At the end of the program, the container remains with the community
organization, enhancing their ability to grow food locally and year-round, and providing crop protection
from extreme weather events. (Service or Commodity Area: Adaptation, Health and Safety).
Example Program: The Hudson River Flood Resilience Network is supported by DEC’s Hudson
River Estuary Program, Cornell University’s Water Resources Institute, Scenic Hudson and the
Consensus Building Institute. The Network is a group of Hudson riverfront communities that
work together to address current and future flood risks. (Service or Commodity Area: Adaptation).
30
3b. Describe the benefits of clean energy, transportation, and environmental and adaptation
projects on several dimensions, with cultural awareness.
• Ask and listen to community concerns outside of the core
project area (e.g., energy capacity or emission reductions).
• Then, explain or quantify project benefits based on the other
dimensions identified by the community (e.g., education, jobs,
or access to jobs; outage recovery time; air quality and health;
housing or energy costs).
• Learn if and how concerns or benefits matter for
underserved racial, ethnic, linguistic, or cultural groups.
• Craft community benefits agreements that address
education, workforce, environmental, or economic concerns.
Single-issue projects may not get broad enough attention or support for budget allocations or funding,
and successful projects often address numerous interests. Additionally, single-dimension community
benefit agreements (e.g., revenue) may not address workforce or training concerns.
Example Program: In press releases and other communications about clean energy projects or other
funding opportunities, DPS and other State agencies often associate energy saved in terms of the number
of homes heated or number of cars off the road. Other benefits are also communicated, like workforce
development efforts and jobs created. (Service or Commodity Area: EE, RE).
Example Program: NYSERDA’s New York Clean Transportation Prizes program offered the Clean
Neighborhoods Challenge, which makes up to three $10 million grand prizes available for innovative
projects that address local air pollution reduction at scale in disadvantaged communities. Projects
must align with community needs and improve the quality of life for residents in communities.
(Service or Commodity Area: Transportation).
Opportunities to work at the community level (via community organizations, groups, or
local governments:
“In Geneva, we have been
able to layer urban forestry,
parks, green roofs, etc. with
our food justice and housing
justice initiatives to reclaim
abandoned lots for infill
gardens, fruit trees, native
plantings.”
-Focus Group Participant
31
3c. Actively seek out and recruit community partners for communication and program
or service facilitation needs.
• Continue to strengthen government and utility services that already have partnership-based
models by actively recruiting grassroots and frontline organizations.
• Stay actively informed about missions, constituencies, locations, etc., of community-based
organizations to understand current and potential partnership opportunities. Seek input
from organizations with seemingly unrelated missions or interests.
• Ask community partners what benefits or compensation they need to be a bridge between
a program and their constituents.
• After listening to communities’ concerns, work with community partners to communicate
climate risks and identify accessible ways to mitigate and manage those risks. Discuss
how governmental agencies can support their outreach and social media efforts.
Local organizations working on the ground are trusted and well-positioned to share information
and support but are not aware of the many government programs and services available.
Example Suggestion: Focus group participants said that in Spanish-speaking cultures, it is
considered wasteful to replace still-working (but old) equipment. To build on the idea of avoiding
waste, program messaging could be adapted to highlight the waste that is created by running old
and inefficient equipment, and what can be saved by participating in efficiency programs. (Service
or Commodity Area: EE).
3d. Expand intermunicipal and regional collaboration.
• Encourage and support intermunicipal planning on cross-
boundary issues like flooding.
• Make funding opportunities easier for intermunicipal alliances
to apply for and receive funds (at the same time, do not penalize
grant applications from disadvantaged communities without
partnerships).
Climate hazards, like flooding, do not adhere to political boundaries,
nor do many transportation needs. Additionally, communities need and
want help coming together.
“Programs targeting local
governments often miss
the relationship between
choices that communities
make that affect other
communities—e.g.,
suburban sprawl. Growth
of parking lots around
our older cities
impact drainage.”
- Focus Group Participant
32
Example Program: Waterfront Alliance of New York and New Jersey has brought together local elected
leaders, community boards, planners, public and private organizations, and residents to craft a vision for a
resilient future for New York Harbor, including waterfront accessibility, businesses, and jobs, “waterfront
edge” climate adaptation, and education. The task force includes environmental justice leaders from both
states. (Service or Commodity Area: Adaptation)
Example Program: The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey is collaborating with State
agencies and community groups from New York and New Jersey to transform operations at their facilities
with environmental initiatives that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve air quality. An example
program from this collaboration is the Truck Replacement Program at the Port of New York and New
Jersey. This program is reducing diesel truck emissions by phasing out older trucks serving the marine
terminals and offering grant funding to qualified drayage truck owners towards the purchase of newer,
cleaner, more fuel-efficient replacement trucks. The program reduces emissions of criteria pollutants and
improves air quality within the marine terminals and the surrounding areas, which include disadvantaged
communities and environmental justice areas. (Service or Commodity Area: Transportation, Health and
Safety).
3e. Include a range of stakeholders with different roles and areas of expertise.
• Couple State-level resources, data, and technical assistance with local knowledge for planning.
• Continue to encourage and reward planning across political levels, such as bringing
community groups and organizations, and local, State, and federal agencies to the
table for climate resilience planning.
• Educate State representatives on how they can support or fund local initiatives while
in office and encourage organizations to invite their State representatives to participate
in local planning.
• Build agency capacity for producing information and resources in partnership
with multi-disciplinary researchers and communities.
Including various types of stakeholders helps to address the many
needs that communities have and ensures important stakeholders are
not missed. Elected officials can help get projects off the ground by
connecting local organizations to resources or funding.
“Our congressman has been helpful;
[he] got Biden to put some money
in the budget to combine all past
studies into one for Howard
Beach [resilience efforts].”
- Focus Group Participant
33
Example Suggestion: Couple the provision of climate risk and vulnerability information by State
or regional agencies (e.g., flood-risk areas or vulnerability assessments), with technical resources for
local planning discussions where neighborhood leaders, local representatives and planners can assess
the information. (Service or Commodity Area: Adaptation).
3f. Update codes, rules, and policies that currently limit or prevent climate change solutions.
• Ask community leaders what housing, zoning, transportation, infrastructure, and
environmental codes are preventing actions to (1) create fair and safe housing,
(2) make communities more resilient, and (3) make transportation options cleaner
and more accessible, etc.
• Utilize model codes or policies to make updates (e.g., International Energy Conservation Code).
Housing and transportation policies developed without climate impacts in mind may conflict
with community interests, including just and equitable housing and climate goals.
Example Suggestion: Amend local code ordinances toward stormwater-friendly practices
(e.g., reduce minimum parking requirements). Look to “model” codes and policies like
NYSERDA’s zero-energy codes, for example. (Service or Commodity Area: Adaptation).
Example Program: As required by the Community Risk and Resiliency Act, the Department of State
worked with the DEC and other partners to create model local laws to help local governments be more
resilient to sea-level rise, storm surge, and flooding. Cities, towns, and villages may adopt model local
laws to meet the resilience needs of the community with the assistance of their municipal attorneys.
(Service or Commodity Area: Adaptation).
3g. Recognize and address the compounded effects of systemic racism and environmental and
climate injustice within climate plans.
• As above, plan for the most vulnerable, by asking and listening for existing problems that
will worsen in emergencies, such as poor housing conditions (with health implications),
inadequate or obsolete communications infrastructure, limited access to jobs and services,
poor energy reliability and high energy costs, limited access to food, and poor security.
• Invite people representing diverse and specific interests (e.g., food security; mental
health services) to the table for climate planning.
The effects of systemic racism are compounded in climate plans (especially relocation and displacement
plans) and climate emergencies.
34
Example Program: New York City is working on a comprehensive study of environmental justice.
The Environmental Justice for All Report will identify which communities are being disproportionately
affected by environmental burdens and not seeing the benefits of the City’s investments in climate
resiliency. The report will inform the development of an environmental justice plan, which will
guide how city agencies should incorporate environmental justice into decision-making and
community engagement processes. (Service or Commodity Area: All).
Example Project: The process to develop the recommendations for the CAC’s draft scoping plan
employed inclusive strategies to ensure that the recommendations deliver climate justice to New
York State’s disadvantaged communities. The CAC’s sectoral advisory panels, which included
representatives of environmental justice organizations, conducted a public process to develop
their recommendations, hold public engagement sessions, conduct public surveys, meet with the
CJWG, and accept and incorporate comments throughout the process, with a focus on benefits and
impacts to disadvantaged communities. This stakeholder input is reflected in the recommendations
delivered to the CAC and, after further input from the CJWG, have been incorporated into the draft
scoping plan. (Service or Commodity Area: All).
35
Recommendation Theme 2: Streamline Program Access
Recommendation 4: Transition to Program Models that Require Little
or No Effort to Participate and Benefit
Programs and services directed at disadvantaged communities should offer models that require either
no effort, or a very limited amount of effort, to participate. These communities often have several
competing demands on their time to meet basic needs. For individuals or households, these demands
could include finding and maintaining employment, balancing and prioritizing essential expenses with
strictly constrained resources (having to make decisions between paying for rent, food, or medication),
and arranging childcare. Local agencies or community organizations may face several competing and
often urgent community needs and priorities with lack of or limited staff and resources. Many programs,
including those that could help alleviate those resource constraints, require additional staff and resource
investments to make them accessible to the communities most in need of program benefits. To overcome
these barriers, programs or services directed at communities should offer models that require either no
effort, or a very limited amount of effort, to participate.
Opportunities to work with individuals, households, or businesses:
4a. Automatically enroll people into programs where possible.
• Switch from application-based or opt-in models
to automatic or opt-out models when it is possible
to automatically screen, qualify, or enroll people
without risk to them (i.e., they are not penalized
nor lose out on participation in another offering).
Qualify or enroll participants based on meeting
specific and measurable criteria, such as income
eligibility, that may be collected through other
efforts or programs.
• Offer program measures or solutions that are,
preferably, no-cost to the community member.
Individuals in disadvantaged communities often do not have the time, money, or resources to dedicate to
lengthy application processes or invest in measures with high-upfront costs, but still want to benefit from
programs and services.
“Making it…something you don’t
have to sign up for, not (have to)
go out of your way, that would be
good. If your town could enroll
every customer and business in
it, that would be great. Only pay
one bill. Don’t want to have to
pay separately.”
- Focus Group Participant
36
Example Program: NYSERDA and National Grid propose to provide electric customers who are
enrolled in the Energy Affordability Program (i.e., a low-income bill discount program) with automatic
participation in Community Solar through a program called Solar for All. Customers would receive up
to $10 per month in additional utility bill assistance with no need to provide more paperwork. (Service
or Commodity Area: EE, RE).
Example Program: Energy utilities automatically enroll eligible customers in their utility bill
assistance programs based on data received from State agencies. (Service or Commodity Area: EE).
4b. Automatically refer eligible people and businesses between programs with follow-through.
• State and local programs assume the responsibility for coordinating across and within programs,
including through information and data sharing (e.g., eligibility, documentation), or community
member outreach.
• Establish a “no wrong door” approach, which gives responsibility to agencies to coordinate
and find solutions for community members rather than referring them to another agency
without knowing whether that agency can help. Explore the feasibility for a single public
gateway for applications.
It is a community member burden to complete several applications (often with same information)
and causes confusion/frustration as the application is re-directed between programs or people
within a program.
Example Suggestions: A focus group participant said that individuals enrolled in the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) are automatically referred to Home Energy Assistance
Program (HEAP). (Service or Commodity Area: EE).
Example Program: Energy utilities refer their low-income community members to the NYSERDA
EmPower NY program to receive energy efficiency services. Additionally, OTDA refers HEAP
clients to the NYSERDA EmPower program to receive energy efficiency services. (Service or
Commodity Area: EE).
37
Opportunities to work at the community level (via community organizations, groups, or
local governments):
4c. Directly award grants to communities instead of requiring lengthy and competitive application
processes, to the extent consistent with relevant legal requirements.
• Distribute funding based on specific criteria
that indicate the level of risk a community
faces to climate vulnerabilities and hazards.
• Reduce application requirements and support
communities in bringing necessary
information together.
Often, grant processes can be complicated, and past applicants
who are more familiar with them are better positioned to win
future work. For disadvantaged communities that face time
and resource constraints, this may perpetuate a cycle where they are consistently several steps
behind in climate planning. (See opportunity 6c. for support to prepare communities to receive funding).
Example Program: DOH Lead Service Line Replacement grants are awarded based on criteria like
childhood blood levels within the community. (Service or Commodity Area: Health and Safety).
Recommendation 5: Establish People-Centered Policies, Programs, and Funding
Across Local, State, and Federal Governments
In many cases, opportunities are not presented in an accessible or clear way to communities.
Where automatic or “opt-out” participation models are not feasible, policies, programs, and funding
opportunities should be more people-centered. This means finding out about and gaining access
to programs and services is made as easy as possible and in a way that communities can understand
how they fit in and can benefit. In many cases, opportunities are not presented in an accessible or
clear way to communities, and as a result people may miss opportunities to participate.
“Consultant groups that hold
charrettes and public meetings in
upscale communities…which may have
less potential impact or [have] already
taken steps to address resiliency, end
up looking more engaged and responsive
than communities that are right in the
mix with under-resourced groups in
highly impacted areas.”
- Focus Group Participant
38
Opportunities to work with individuals, households, or businesses:
5a. Expand eligibility where feasible to maximize impact, and coordinate between programs.
• Review and revise participation requirements where possible to increase the number
of community members who can benefit, recognizing that creating long waiting lists
for high-demand programs has its own implications.
• Assess eligibility across related offerings, and to the extent possible, make eligibility
uniform and consistent across-the-board; conduct a review to identify discretionary
criteria that create barriers to participation and revise them to increase access.
Too strict or arbitrary eligibility requirements and inconsistencies across programs and services
can limit access to the populations that need them.
Example Suggestions: Expand the Home Energy Assistance Program (HEAP) to supplement utility
costs associated with cooling as well as heating. Focus group participants also suggested that eligibility
for energy efficiency programs should include all fuel types through dual-fuel or fuel-blind programs,
and that income ranges for income-qualified programs should be expanded to avoid arbitrary cut-offs.
Note: Many of the rules for these programs are federal and not subject to change by the State. (Service
or Commodity Area: EE).
Example Program: The Weatherization Assistance Program (WAP), administered by New York
State Homes and Community Renewal and NYSERDA’s EmPower New York program, established
categorical eligibility for energy efficiency and weatherization services based on the OTDA-administered
HEAP, and other publicly administered assistance programs. In addition, these agencies coordinate
to improve access to the programs and to increase the impact of public funds by working to streamline
income eligibility and simplifying participation. For instance, NYSERDA and HCR have developed
a common application that can be used for the WAP and EmPower programs, which enables HCR and
NYSERDA to streamline the referral of clients between programs. (Service or Commodity Area: EE).
5b. Provide clearer participation roadmaps and pathways for community members.
• Review the participation process from the community member’s perspective to identify
pain points.
• Proactively chart out the participation process for community members through providing
clear and concise visuals and guidance.
• Reduce or eliminate roadblocks, including (but not limited to) lengthy or
confusing applications.
39
Community members do not have the time nor resources to navigate and wade through numerous
webpages or program processes.
Example Program: DEC’s Climate Smart Communities (CSC) certification program
recognizes municipalities that have led by implementing local climate mitigation and adaptation
actions. Participating CSCs earn points toward achieving bronze or silver certification and must also
complete a set of priority actions. The program’s priority actions are focused on local capacity building
and planning, providing a framework that allows the CSC to select actions that are appropriate to local
goals and circumstances. (Service or Commodity Area: All).
5c. Offer more direct access to resources, information, data, and knowledge.
• Present programs, services, and information in a way that is
relevant and meaningful to communities.
• Provide segmented examples or case studies from peers about
how to address/resolve issues and offer clear value propositions.
• Expand one-on-one outreach to vulnerable communities in
emergencies, either through local government or community
organizations about services available (e.g., flood or cooling
shelters, transportation options, etc.).
If a program does not appear relevant or for community members, they will be less likely to participate
or want to understand further.
Example Suggestion: Focus group participants who are small business owners/managers in
disadvantaged communities said that maintenance costs for running diesel trucks are significant.
Agencies could emphasize this more as a value proposition for small businesses to transition to
electric vehicles. (Service or Commodity Area: Transportation).
Example Program: The DOH Heat Vulnerability Index helps identify heat vulnerable populations,
including those who do not speak English very well. Local agencies can use the “Language Vulnerability”
component mapping to identify areas with high proportions of such populations and translate messaging
to improve awareness. (Service or Commodity Area: Health and Safety).
“The key to anything is
information—cities should
put a blurb out saying you’re
in X flood zone. Utilities
should do the same.”
-Focus Group Participant
40
Example Program: NYSERDA’s Clean Energy Hubs are designed to be centers of outreach,
awareness, and education in each of the 10 Regional Economic Development Council (REDC)
regions, to improve community engagement and ensure that all New Yorkers can benefit from the
State's clean energy transition. A Regional Clean Energy Hub is defined as an organization or network
of organizations, responsible for establishing and fostering partnerships in their region to deliver services
at the community level. Organizations with experience in providing services in clean energy, energy
efficiency, social services, housing, economic development, health, and training are all encouraged to
participate in the development of a Hub as a new way to offer services to members of their communities.
(Service or Commodity Area: All).
5d. Assess opportunities to merge, combine, or closely coordinate related programs across State
agencies, to the extent consistent with legal requirements.
• Provide consistency in offerings once program offerings are combined and coordinated.
• Offer a more streamlined and clear presentation of participation opportunities to the community
member, deprioritizing irrelevant details (e.g., the different funding streams or sources involved,
agency tracking requirements, etc.).
Too many program options (and changing options) can be confusing and lead
to non-participation.
Example Program: NYSERDA and New York energy utilities jointly file an
implementation plan for the statewide portfolio of energy efficiency programs
and initiatives for low- to moderate-income communities in New York State.
Key objectives of the plan are to (1) improve the experience and benefits to
low-income community members, (2) reduce administrative costs and increase
the impact of ratepayer funds, and (3) provide more consistent and streamlined
participation. (Service or Commodity Area: EE).
Opportunities to work at the community level (via community organizations, groups, or local
governments):
“State programs come
and go in fits and starts.
They are around for a few
years and disappear. No
reasoning for why things
disappear. People move
on and look for different
sources of funding.
Need consistency.”
- Focus Group Participant
41
5e. Review and reemphasize the State’s role as the connector between federal and local
programs and services and across different market actors.
• Identify areas where State agencies can provide direct consultation and support to
local governments, so they can easily understand and access federal funding and resources.
• Provide centralized and concierge-type consultation to local governments to help them
navigate through federal requirements, funding opportunities, and contracts.
• Expand access to mentorship, networking, and subcontracting opportunities so that small
businesses can build relationships and find success with government actors in contracting.
Local governments want to benefit from federal programs but often do not have the time and resources
to navigate them. Similarly, small businesses want to participate in local, State, and federal funding
and contracting opportunities, but may not be aware, have the time to explore and develop their options,
or face historic barriers. State agencies can play a vital role in serving as the connective tissue between
local and federal resources and across different actors (local government agencies, small businesses, etc.).
Recommendation 6: Find and Support Resource-Constrained Local Governments
To ensure that towns, villages, cities, and counties (i.e., local governments) are prepared to face the
climate crisis, the State government should proactively identify and provide additional support to the
most vulnerable municipalities. Additionally, the State government should develop targeted information,
education, and training opportunities for these municipalities, and the State should make existing data
and information, education, and training opportunities more accessible. Some local governments may
face multiple barriers to addressing the climate crisis in their community, including a lack of awareness
and uncertainty about risk levels and needs, a lack of information and data to be able to assess needs, and
limited resources (e.g., limited tax base) to plan or act on adaptation or mitigation strategies. At the same
time, disadvantaged communities often face locally specific challenges that require unique and potentially
not readily available targeted solutions and approaches, for example in the context of historic burdens
of pollution and contamination, disinvestments, or specific social, cultural, and economic needs
and capacities.
Opportunities to work at the community level (via community organizations, groups, or
local governments):
42
6a. Identify the most vulnerable communities and craft a set of services that are most
frequently needed.
• Define criteria that make a community especially vulnerable
to climate change, such as low levels of historical investment
and inequities, high utility arrearages or shut offs, etc.
• Provide an expanded level of services to the most
vulnerable communities, so they can plan for and act
on climate adaptation and mitigation strategies, bringing
together outside or State agency expertise with local
knowledge, resources,and capacities.
These communities are especially at risk to the effects of climate
change and require additional support.
Example Suggestion: Focus group participants said there should
be more State and county resources to support local planning, especially
for communities with minimal or no staff (e.g., paid “climate coordinators” for the Climate
Smart Communities and Clean Energy Communities programs, or funding positions for
Community Organizations Active in Disaster (COAD). (Service or Commodity Area:
Adaptation, EE, RE, All).
Example Program: As previously noted, DOH developed a Heat Vulnerability Index to help local
agencies with identifying areas with high proportions of heat-vulnerable populations and inform local
heat-mitigation and resource planning. Maps and data are available for public access and download on
the website, and DOH can also help local agencies that need support with identifying and mapping heat
vulnerability in their community. (Service or Commodity Area: Health and Safety).
6b. Provide digestible data and information to help local governments identify climate risks and
potential adaptation/mitigation strategies.
• State agencies work together to serve up informative and actionable data, tools, and
information to local governments about climate risks.
• Offer easily accessible information about the range of measures communities can implement
to reduce specific climate risks, from infrastructure improvements to nature-based features.
• Assist local governments in understanding the costs and benefits of implementing certain
improvements over others, including how to avoid maladaptation.
“It’s not about throwing money
at the problem, or even the
savings…you have to bring a
bunch of people here who have
the expertise. But people in the
community may be interested in
learning these skills—bartenders
who don’t want to be bartenders
anymore. They may want
education. Train technicians.
The community would welcome
training and homegrown orgs
with open arms.”
- Focus Group Participant
43
Local governments do not always have access to the right data or the time necessary to analyze it and
visualize the impacts.
Example Projects: Create tools to meaningfully relate
data on climate hazards, risks, vulnerabilities, and adaptive
capacities to local contexts, like the New York City Hazard
Mitigation maps and the DOH Heat Vulnerability Index
previously mentioned. (Service or Commodity Area:
Adaptation, Health and Safety).
Example Project: DOH developed County Heat and
Health Profiles to help local agencies identify areas likely
to have larger heat-vulnerable populations and inform
mitigation and adaptation efforts. The DOH has also developed a StoryMap to disseminate information
on the impact of extreme heat on health in the State. The StoryMap is informative and interactive and
summarizes temperature trends and health impacts across the State. (Service or Commodity Area:
Health and Safety).
6c. Bring education and training to local governments, so the governments are prepared to receive
funding and understand what resources are available.
• Synthesize and organize existing information (like a central “hub”) about federal and State
grant opportunities and educate communities about these different funding opportunities.
• Provide “coaching” or advisory services via State agency staff to assist communities in
accessing resources and understanding funding opportunities. Offer training and support
to communities with limited experience, so they are prepared to receive and service grants.
For example, this could include assistance with navigating funding requirements, help
with identifying needs, or walking through application processes. Note that this may require
additional State agency staff resources or contractors to remove any conflicts of interest
(i.e., staff who score applications are not the same staff who provide help).
• Facilitate peer-to-peer learning opportunities so that communities can benefit from each
other’s real-world experiences.
Local governments are dealing with multiple community needs and State and federal requirements
daily, and do not have time to navigate multiple websites or resources to identify new opportunities.
“Quantifying impacts [of stream-based
mitigation projects] is difficult, but there
is more [of] an upside to protecting
systems. Projects we put more money
into seem more cost effective than
engineered building projects.
Engineering natural systems works
sometimes but doesn’t work other
times. We need to think through
more cost effective, multi-beneficial
projects with conservation.”
44
Example Program: Cornell Cooperative Extension provides grant and loan summaries to place
active opportunities in one place. (Service or Commodity Area: All).
Example Program: With funding from the United States Centers for Disease Control, New York
State has worked to increase awareness around the links between climate change and health among
local health departments and other agencies. For example, DOH and DEC participated in “Public
Health Live” monthly webcasts focusing on climate change. In the “Climate Smart Communities:
Connections with Public Health” webinar, attendees learned more about the program and the impact
of climate change on public health, including several examples of local adaptation work. In the webcast
“Preparing for Extreme Heat in New York State” attendees learned about health risks of exposure to
extreme heat, current and projected climate trends, and practical strategies to help the public prepare
for extreme heat. (Service or Commodity Area: Health and Safety, Adaptation).
Example Programs: The Hudson Valley Regional Council, through its work as a NYSERDA
Clean Energy Community coordinator, offers the Clean Energy Communities (CEC) Institute to
participating communities in its service area. The institute provides instruction on completion of
CEC high-impact actions through webinars, testimonials, web content and cohort-style workshops.
(Service or Commodity Area: All).
45
Recommendation Theme 3: Address Emerging Issues
Recommendation 7: Mobilize Citizen Participation and Action
Make it easier for community members to share and report on what they see at the local or State level
to ensure that opportunities and capacities are supported and leveraged, concerns are heard and addressed,
and result in solutions that match the needs. Throughout focus groups and public input, participants
gave detailed examples of problems they observed (e.g., sewer overflows, brittle trees, health-vulnerable
neighbors) and potential solutions they identified. In many cases, people tried to raise the concern
locally but were not sure of the right channel or did not receive attention or help.
Opportunities to work with individuals, households, or businesses:
7a. Develop channels and tools for people to report local concerns.
• Expand marketing, outreach, and education about phone, app-based or web-based
reporting tools to report substandard housing conditions, power outages, flooding concerns,
and other issues.
• Provide a follow-up process to demonstrate that local and State governments are
listening and acting.
• With respect to housing, continue educating tenants and local organization on renter rights
around housing quality and options to raise concerns, including anonymous reporting for
those fearful of landlord response or retaliation.
• Reach out to housing service providers (e.g., refugee resettlement agencies) to understand
what these providers have heard or observed and co-design a reporting and resolution process.
People are noticing how and where their environment is changing and are ready to act. There is
tremendous information in what people already see and observe, and power in listening and
mobilizing their ideas.
Example Suggestion: Citizen reporting through 311, coupled with a “citizen request management
process” to respond to neighborhood and housing-related concerns. Many communities have adopted
“SeeClickFix” for people to anonymously (if desired) report non-emergency problems like waste and
trash disposal or property maintenance. (Service or Commodity Area: EE, All).
46
7b. Support people and neighborhoods in providing feedback about climate issues that affect them.
• Continue to expand “citizen response” processes to track and record incoming ideas,
respond to, or explore emergent issues with citizens, community groups, organizations,
and local government.
• Connect citizens with community groups and organizations, local planners, or officials,
technical assistance, and resources (data, tools, or experts), or coaching and guidance
on navigating the process.
Individuals take many different paths to raise their concerns, from contacting a local official in-person,
by phone, email, or social media, to writing a letter to their town or state representative. Often their
approach does not align with “official” channels, and they become frustrated by lack of a response.
Example Suggestion: When a neighborhood group points out repeated
local flooding without full scientific documentation and/or direction
to the right department, allocate staff time to help them navigate city
processes or find resources to build out their evidence. (Service or
Commodity Area: Health and Safety, Adaptation).
Example Program: The NYSERDA Climate Justice Fellowship
program supports the professional development, training, and mentoring
of full-time fellows currently residing in disadvantaged communities
and priority populations including individuals that are low income,
disabled, homeless, formerly incarcerated, residents of environmental
justice communities, veterans, and Native Americans. Fellows work
with community-based organizations, universities, municipalities,
climate tech innovators and startups, and clean energy businesses to
assist with and support community engagement activities, clean energy
project development and implementation, partnership building, clean
energy startups, or other projects that advance climate justice and
clean energy priorities in disadvantaged communities. (Service
or Commodity Area: All).
“Every apartment had an outage.
It was out for six days…No hot
water, no refrigerator, no food,
and food went bad. They [public
housing] were dragging their
feet to get it fixed. People had
breathing equipment they needed
to use. We got creative and went
to [the] Family Dollar Store and
put care packages together. We
bought candles, and hot pots that
heat with gas, battery-operated
lights. Fourteen people put
together all the money we had
to help everyone get through six
days…This was a horrible time.
And not even from a hurricane.
But nice to see the community
come together. Nice to see
how many people cared.”
- Focus Group Participant
47
7c. Facilitate ways for community members to contact and support each other in emergencies.
• Help neighbors form smaller groups or cohorts at the neighborhood level, such as mutual
aid networks, to learn about each other’s needs in emergencies, provide direct outreach or
support after an emergency and help link State resources directly to local communities in need.
• Ask existing neighborhood organizations what may help them build capacities and mobilize
in emergencies. Encourage and fund volunteer training (e.g., through Community Emergency
Response Teams).
• Identify roles for people with less time for training, or with physical or other limitations
(e.g., phone, SMS, or social media support roles). Provide tangible resources (e.g., outreach
materials, care packages, vouchers).
• Continue developing and promoting Wi-Fi locations with backup power.
Neighbors are ready and willing to help each other, but may not feel well-connected, and need
a pre-existing structure/system to facilitate this.
Example Program: New York City offers a Community Preparedness Boot Camp, a Public
Safety Communications Training, and a Community Emergency Response Team training. (Service
or Commodity Area: Health and Safety).
Example Program: Many New York State counties have and maintain their own Community Emergency
Response Teams, with volunteer members who undergo a training program that covers basic safety and
disaster response skills. Also, the New York Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Services
offers the Citizen Preparedness Corps training for the general population. The goal of this training is
to allow residents to have the tools and resources to prepare for any type of disaster, to respond
accordingly, and recover as quickly as possible. (Service or Commodity Area: Health and Safety).
7d. Find and support local champions.
• Facilitate peer-to-peer learning and inspiration through local connections and events, with
help from early adopters and local champions who are eager to share what they have learned.
• Start small, for example through faith-based organizations, local libraries, or community
centers, where people feel comfortable asking questions.
Peers who have navigated a tough process are often interested in sharing their experience,
and their stories may be more powerful than State-level outreach.
48
Example Suggestion: Train a volunteer corps of “solar and resilience ambassadors” to distribute
information, make presentations, provide a roadmap, and help people. (Service or Commodity
Area: RE, Adaptation).
Example Program: NYPA, through its Environmental Justice Community Energy Education
programming, conducts weatherization workshops for low-income homeowners and renters.
Workshop participants learn about simple ways to lower their heating and cooling costs, including
low-cost changes they can make in their homes to help prepare for winter and summer energy
needs. These interactive sessions are taught by NYPA’s expert staff, in partnership with community
organizations, including places of worship and neighborhood organizations. Workshops and materials
are translated into different languages to ensure weatherization messages are appropriately communicated
to audience members that may speak different languages. (Service or Commodity Area: EE).
Recommendation 8: Improve Housing Conditions and Adherence to Local
Building Codes
Dramatic action must be taken at the intersection of environmental and housing policy to mitigate
and adapt to climate change. The most vulnerable communities and households will bear the brunt of
the changing climate and increasingly frequent and severe natural disasters. In focus groups with New
York State residents, as well as representatives of community organizations, participants explained they
are experiencing the threat of climate change in the context of a housing crisis. Rising prices, housing
scarcity, and deferred maintenance have created a housing affordability crisis and substandard living
conditions that disproportionately affect renters and households with limited financial resources.
Addressing the climate and housing crises in tandem will be more effective than addressing
them separately.
Opportunities to work with individuals, households, and businesses:
8a. Address building integrity from a health and safety perspective.
• Explore program interventions that identify and/or address building integrity
or weatherization needs alongside health and safety concerns.
• Provide healthy homes services which include an in-home environmental assessment
to identify health, safety, and building performance issues, provide needed home
improvements and/or modifications to improve the home environment, offer supportive
products, resident education, and/or resources to support maximization of services.
• Coordinate energy, building, local health departments, health systems, and
community-based delivery partners to identify and serve the most vulnerable New Yorkers.
49
Connecting weatherization and other energy efficiency measures to health and safety interventions
facilitates synergies and cross-benefits. Benefits can include better home health, reduced hospitalization
and/or illness, or lowered medical expenses, alongside lower energy consumption and bills, all
contributing to residents’ financial and physical health. Programs that address environmental,
energy efficiency, health, and safety issues simultaneously can reduce burden on the residents and
maximize the impact of State or program spending. The same measures can also reduce emissions.
Example Program: DOH and NYSERDA developed the Healthy Homes Value Based Payment
Pilot to fund the combination of in-home asthma trigger reduction services and energy efficiency
services, with the goal of validating healthcare cost savings to Medicaid. Four Managed Care
Organizations are currently participating in the pilot statewide. The pilot’s residential healthy
homes intervention combines energy efficiency/weatherization measures with in-unit measures
aimed at addressing respiratory conditions such as asthma and includes additional measures aimed
at addressing home injury. The intervention includes home visits from a registered nurse providing
education related to asthma self-management and medication adherence, with community health worker
support. Based on the pilot, it is expected that managed care organizations will invest in asthma trigger
reduction as a preventive measure under Medicaid. (Service or Commodity Area: EE, Health and Safety).
Example Program: The DOH Healthy Neighborhoods program includes home visits to identify
environmental, health and safety challenges in the home. The checklist includes evidence of mold or
mildew, pest, or rodent infestation, working smoke detectors, smoking in the home, or whether anyone
in the home has asthma. Working with residents to address concerns identified in the first visit can result
in reduced missed days of school for children with asthma, along with other benefits (e.g., most homes
are able to manage the pest or rodent infestation or obtain a working smoke detector). (Service or
Commodity Area: Health and Safety).
8b. Continue to improve housing and energy upgrade incentives and financing for building owners
serving disadvantaged community members.
• Use touch points like (1) the time of property purchase or refinance, (2) municipal
interactions (e.g., permit applications, re-assessments) or (3) interactions with utility
companies to promote building improvement programs and offers to multifamily building
owners. Additionally, consider performing outreach through existing channels and local
networks used by building owners, like local or regional apartment associations.
50
• Continue expanding multifamily incentive programs and offering low-cost financing options
to cover both energy upgrades and related repairs. For example, mini-split heat pumps that offer
both heating and cooling, solar arrays, and other energy efficiency and weatherization measures,
like attic insulation and air sealing, can both reduce monthly energy costs and make buildings
more comfortable and safer during extreme heat or storms. Programs should also cover other
building repairs that may prohibit energy upgrades if left unresolved, such as inadequate or
damaged electrical equipment or roofing.
• Like recommendation 5d, find ways that State agencies can combine, coordinate, and simplify
incentive and financing offerings for multifamily building owners so that the amount of effort
necessary to participate is reduced.
Although numerous weatherization and energy efficiency programs exist with high incentives for
landlords of buildings with low- to moderate-income occupants, the need for other building repairs
(e.g., electrical upgrades, roof replacement or repairs, asbestos, or mold remediation work) and lack
of time or interest may impede participation.
Example Program: HCR and NYSERDA have partnered on a pilot initiative to support current and
future affordable housing developers in pursuing very efficient, all-electric new construction or adaptive
reuse projects. To make this possible, HCR and NYSERDA worked together to coordinate and streamline
clean energy incentives, technical support, and financing offerings. (Service or Commodity Area: EE).
Opportunities to work at the community level (via community organizations, groups, or
local governments):
8c. Address the possibility of climate-related displacement or relocation early, and work with
communities to develop questions and options.
• Provide earlier and better outreach about climate adaptation plans, especially if
relocation or managed retreat are under consideration.
• When discussing managed retreat or relocation, involve renters (especially those in public
housing), people with physical disabilities, undocumented immigrants, and people who
are homeless, in figuring out what it could look like—scenarios, timing, locations, etc.
• Provide data, tools, resources, and technical assistance to help residents understand the
risks, costs, and trade-offs of multiple scenarios.
• Work with residents to determine what fair reimbursement and other services would look
like (e.g., going beyond reimbursement to tenant relocation assistance such as legal aid,
job-seeking resources, utility connection or bill assistance).
• Help communities identify funding for planning, include federal, State, local and
philanthropic sources.
51
In focus groups, some residents were acutely aware that “housing
mobility” is being discussed as an option for them. They expressed
fear of displacement, frustration with planning processes that feel
exclusionary, and a sense of injustice that “luxury” developer interests
are often prioritized over the needs of less affluent community members.
Several residents felt they heard about planning discussions or policies
too late, and by the time a draft policy was written, they felt it was too
late to get involved. If climate migration, retreat, or “housing mobility”
toward areas less vulnerable to flooding or extreme weather is a
possibility, they want to be involved early in understanding what
that means and how to support people at risk of displacement.
Example Program: After Hurricane Sandy, community members from Oakwood Beach on Staten
Island formed the Oakwood Beach Buyout Committee to plan for coastal retreat. The committee
educated residents about State government buyouts and created a plan to petition the State government
to buyout entire neighborhoods, which resulted in a larger scale risk reduction to future storms than
if individual buyouts were pursued. (Service or Commodity Area: Adaptation, Health and Safety).
8d. Institute anti-displacement, relocation, or managed retreat policies that consider social,
cultural, and historical context in addition to infrastructure and natural environment.
• When new affordable or public housing is built, where possible, give preference to
people residing in the area and/or with generational ties to the area.
• If climate-relocated is necessary, per the recommendation above, work with residents
to understand how/where they may want to move and try to find options that are within
reasonable travel (transit) distance to social, family, and employment networks.
• Co-design managed retreat strategies that do not exacerbate historical and systemic
discrimination and inequalities, including but not limited to unequal participation or
reimbursement, or climate redlining.
• Account for the social and community costs and impacts of relocation, among people
moving and remaining in vulnerable areas, when planning and funding strategies.
“The plan basically says that if
there’s not a flood protection
plan in place, their plan is
“housing mobility” which means
you get relocated! But who gets
relocated? Black, female, low
income. This is a major concern.
Hard to believe that we can’t do
better than “housing mobility” as
the plan to relocate people.”
- Focus Group Participant
52
In focus groups, participants who expressed fear of climate-related displacement or migration expressed
fear or uncertainty about being moved from their social, family, or work networks. They were also
aware that federal disaster aid is often much lower than needed or insufficient to rebuild or relocate,
not to mention nonmonetized costs. Climate-related migration evokes the historical trauma of redlining
and forced relocation of Black and Indigenous communities, through the present in experiences, such
as Hurricane Katrina. The average amount of disaster aid that households receive is much lower than
the federal caps, and the assistance rarely accounts for the actual costs of rebuilding or compensates for
the disproportionate effects of even slight financial disruptions on lower-income, vulnerable households,
and the nonmonetizable costs to lives and livelihoods.
Example Program: The New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development (HPD)
facilitated an 18-month, community-driven relocation plan with the Edgemere neighborhood in Queens
after Hurricane Sandy that included community members, elected officials, nonprofits, New York City
Housing Authority (NYCHA), and city agencies. Together they addressed related issues like job training
and access, transportation, amenities for healthier neighborhoods, and potential blight of vacant retail
into a long-term vision (Resilient Edgemere Community Plan). (Service or Commodity Area: Adaptation,
Health and Safety).
8e. Increase building health and safety and energy code enforcement efforts and partnerships.
• Increase funding and technical support for local training and code enforcement of both
energy codes and housing health and safety codes.
• Integrate both health and safety and energy code enforcement into funding and program
implementation, to align incentives for property owners, residents, utilities, and
local governments.
• Focus on rental housing with (1) higher concentrations of economically or health-vulnerable
New Yorkers, populations who have historically experienced housing discrimination or
insecurity (e.g., Black, Indigenous, People of Color (BIPOC), limited English proficiency,
New Americans, formerly incarcerated), or who are at risk of displacement from climate
change or gentrification, or (2) a history of housing code violations.
• Organize and fund building code coalitions with key stakeholders (e.g., utilities, State
energy office, regulatory bodies, housing advocates, public health, building professionals,
and community-based organizations).
• Provide legal education and support for tenants and their representatives. Include
community organizations and housing advocates in training and coalition-building
so that they can understand and advocate for tenant rights.
53
Safety code violations affect living conditions and the ability to
make energy improvements, particularly in rental and public housing.
Renters in disadvantaged communities typically experience more
housing quality and housing energy issues than homeowners given
the “split incentive” for landlords to invest in building or energy
maintenance or improvements. Lack of maintenance and upgrades
can impact occupant health (via indoor air quality and temperature
comfort), economic security (via energy bills and “surprise” costs),
stress and anxiety (from discomfort, costs, poorly functioning or broken systems/appliances).
Additionally, unsafe building conditions are often an impediment to weatherization or clean energy.
For example, outdated electrical wiring, mold or mildew, and roof conditions may stop a project.
Stronger education, training, and enforcement of building codes is needed to improve housing quality
and living conditions for vulnerable New Yorkers.
Many renters are uncertain or afraid to complain or ask for repairs. In their report and toolkit, Hester
Street and the Cities RISE projects note that code enforcement is reactive, rather than proactive, where
code enforcement officers spend more time responding to complaints. This has the effect of privileging
those residents who have the resources (time, effort) and capabilities (language, comfort with
government) to navigate the necessary channels to raise a concern.
Example Suggestion: Create an amnesty program for income-eligible property owners to improve the
property to meet code. Such amnesty or funding programs, when accompanied by a limit on raising the
rent for a given period (e.g., five years after the repairs) can prevent owners from selling to someone else
who might be able to afford the repairs but would then increase the rent prices, potentially contributing to
gentrification and displacement. (Service or Commodity Area: Adaptation, EE, Health and Safety).
8f. Bring energy code education and training to frontline contractors.
• Work with local contractor networks to bring energy code training—including new
building or installation practices—to their sites, workplaces, or events.
• Continue supporting younger New Yorkers (ages 18–24) in green building and
technology training and apprenticeships.
• Fund and design training to be accessible in terms of mode or channel, time, and resource
commitment, language, education level (e.g., increased online trainings, abbreviated
guidelines, translation, staff resources for live training or support).
“It’s a slumlord epidemic.
They buy up so much
housing, and it’s aging,
they’re not addressing it,
there’s no accountability.
With climate change you
risk serious loss. People
can lose their homes.”
- Focus Group Participant
54
Building with the latest energy codes requires not only awareness of the new codes, but significant
changes to construction, installation, and Quality Assurance/Quality Control practices, which can
seem time-consuming and onerous to learn, especially without real-life, on the ground examples.
Seeing tangible examples or work from people you trust can help build trust and interest in learning
new practices.
Example Program: NYSERDA’s Energy Efficiency and Clean Technology Training program
partners with local organizations, community colleges, and unions to offer numerous training and
certification initiatives. NYSERDA’s Talent Pipeline also encourages participation by and job
placement for disadvantaged workers, including but not limited to, residents of low-income
communities and environmental justice areas, displaced and dislocated workers, veterans, and
People of Color. (Service or Commodity Area: EE, Health and Safety).
Example Program: Although not related to energy code training, the NYPA EV Fleet Donation
program is pursuing efforts that exemplify workforce development partnerships within disadvantaged
communities. As a part of this effort, NYPA partners with the Boards of Cooperative Educational
Services of New York State to provide training to underserved students in environmental justice
communities. NYPA donates retired EV fleet vehicles, offers training curriculum on EV technology
and the positive role that EVs can play in the community, as well as provides EV supply equipment
infrastructure and mentorship. (Service or Commodity Area: Transportation).
55
6 Next Steps
Following publication of this report, DEC and NYSERDA will commence reviewing the
recommendations and opportunities with the CAC and incorporate recommendations and opportunities
into the scoping plan. In addition, the agencies will work together to develop a process for assessing,
refining, and ultimately implementing recommendations outlined herein. To ensure that the barriers and
potential solutions outlined in this report reflect the evolving clean energy policy and program landscape,
lessons learned from implementation, input from the CAC, and additional input from the public will
be accepted and incorporated. DEC will continue to accept public comment on this report at any time.
In addition, DEC will establish an ongoing assessment of disadvantaged communities’ access to
programs and resources, and opportunities for community ownership, as required by the Climate
Act Implementation Reporting. This assessment will be informed by the outcomes of current climate
change mitigation and adaptation programs, the implementation of recommendations outlined in this
report, and through continued engagement with community members.
It is expected that the implementation of recommendations in this report will require additional work
to assess the current state of climate change mitigation and adaptation programs—including uptake
in disadvantaged communities—to identify policy and regulatory considerations that may need to
be addressed, as well as to develop a mechanism to foster the interagency coordination necessary to
achieve the recommended solutions. The following outlines the phases of activity that are expected
to be necessary to implement these recommendations. Given the complexity involved in program
modifications, securing additional funding, or addressing policy and regulatory changes, some
recommendations may take longer to assess and implement. Estimated timelines for implementation
will be included in the assessment of each recommendation. Finally, the agencies will incorporate
a continuous assessment and refinement approach to ensure that market and policy developments
are incorporated into any program or recommendation.
56
6.1 Phase 1—Assessment of Recommendations
• Sort each recommendation and its associated opportunities by implementing agency,
priority, and feasibility for immediate action.
o Each recommendation will be assessed for level of complexity; the modifications
to existing programs, policy, or regulatory structure; and estimated timeline
for implementation.
o Priority will be assigned to those with the greatest potential impact in eliminating the
identified barriers. Each recommendation will be further analyzed for the ability of
agencies to incorporate it within existing organizational structures and staff assignments.
Some recommendations will require additional resources for implementation, such as
funding and training for agency staff and community member capacity. Strategies will
be identified to procure these necessary resources.
• Assess the current uptake of clean energy programs in disadvantaged communities and
explore current community ownership models to identify opportunities for refinement
and inform assessment of and prioritize recommendations.
• Accelerate progress to coordinate interagency actions and secure meaningful community
member involvement in program design and implementation.
o For interagency coordination, the Low-Income Energy Task Force will be explored
for adaptability or replicability, with consideration of the administrative capacity to
adequately meet the needs.
o New and existing structures and programs within New York State will be utilized
for securing robust community member engagement.
In consultation with the CJWG, DEC and NYSERDA will select 10 disadvantaged
communities across the State in which to deploy hyperlocal air monitoring technology
and develop emissions reduction strategies based on the measurements. Community
capacity building grants will be provided to ensure robust community participation
in this initiative. This report’s recommendations under the theme of ensuring inclusive
processes can be embedded into the implementation of this initiative.
NYSERDA will launch the Energy Equity Collaborative and the Clean Energy Hubs.
These could also be utilized by State agencies to meaningfully involve disadvantaged
communities in all aspects of New York State’s effort to respond to climate change.
To illustrate the Clean Energy Hubs that will be established in each of New York State’s
10 economic development regions may be leveraged locally to support the
recommendations in this report to improve engagement, increase access to programs,
or to advance accessible cooling centers, for example. Accordingly, consideration will
be given to expand or replicate these structures to accommodate the actions required
by other agencies to implement each recommendation.
57
DEC’s CSC program serves as a vehicle for climate change communication from
State agencies to local governments and from local governments to the general
population. The program has significant buy-in from rural and under-resourced
communities where consensus on climate action can be harder to build. Given its
high degree of trust, CSC could be an effective conduit to implement this report’s
recommendation to find and support resource constrained local governments.
• Create target goals for achieving measurable progress in improving access to programs
and advancing ownership models, accountability to stakeholder input, and transparency
in program design and implementation and policy decisions.
6.2 Phase 2—Implementing Recommendations
• Implement the recommendations based on priority and level of complexity.
o Document this experience for further analysis and potential refinement of
the recommendations.
o Incorporate community member input in the prioritization and implementation
of each opportunity.
• Make tangible progress towards acquiring the additional resources needed to implement
select recommendations.
o This may include draft proposals for new agency policies, programs, and budget requests.
• Maintain the flexibility to continue refining these recommendations as new insights are gained
from their ongoing implementation as well as periodic reviews by the CJWG on the definition
of disadvantaged communities.
6.3 Phase 3—Continued Assessment and Refinement
• Develop a reporting plan to provide updates on progress, as part of the Climate
Act implementation reporting.
• Develop a plan to update these recommendations, with input by key stakeholders
in disadvantaged communities, at least as often as updates to the scoping plan occur.
• Assess progress in implementing the recommendations through Climate Act Implementation
Reporting. Share findings with Executive leadership and the CAC, community members,
and other relevant stakeholders, and obtain feedback on these items or other priorities that
must be considered.
58
7 References
Agency Orders and Public Comments. (2021). CEF Modifications, CDG Program, EV Infrastructure,
Solar Incentives, and LMI Stakeholder Orders/Proceedings. Received from New York Department
of Public Services.
American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy. (2020). “How High are Household Energy
Burdens?” https://www.aceee.org/research-report/u2006
American Community Survey 2013; cited in Clean Energy Fund: Low- to Moderate-Income Chapter,
Portfolio: Market Development. Matter Number 16-00681, In the Matter of the Clean Energy Fund
Investment Plan. Submitted by: The New York State Energy Research and Development Authority
Revised June 15, 2020.
America’s Rental Housing 2020. Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University
https://www.jchs.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/Harvard_JCHS_Americas_Rental_Housing_2020.pdf
Anguelovski, Isabelle, Linda Shi, Eric Chu, Daniel Gallagher, Kian Goh, Zachary Lamb, Kara Reeve,
and Hannah Teicher. (2016). “Equity Impacts of Urban Land Use Planning for Climate Adaptation:
Critical Perspectives from the Global North and South” Journal of Planning Education and Research,
https://doi.org/10.1177/0739456X16645166
Asian Pacific Environmental Network. “Mapping Resilience: A Blueprint for Thriving in the Face of
Climate Disasters.” https://apen4ej.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/APEN-Mapping_Resilience-
Report.pdf
Blacks in Green. “The 8 Principles of Green-Village-Building.” Accessed Nov. 9, 2021.
https://www.blacksingreen.org/8-principles
California Energy Commission. (2016). “Low-Income Barriers Study, Part A: Overcoming Barriers
to Energy Efficiency and Renewables for Low-Income Community members and Small Business
Contracting Opportunities in Disadvantaged Communities.”
https://www.energyefficiencyforall.org/resources/low-income-barriers-study-part-a/
Cities for Responsible Investment and Strategic Enforcement. (2019). “The Power and Proximity
of Code Enforcement: A Tool for Equitable Neighborhoods.” https://hesterstreet.org/wp-
content/uploads/2019/07/CR_-Phase-I-_Equitable-Code-Enforcement-report_FINAL-JUNE-2019.pdf
City of Austin, Texas. (2017). “Strategic Housing Blueprint: Displacement Mitigation Strategy.”
https://www.austintexas.gov/sites/default/files/files/Housing/Displacement_Mitigation_Strategy_Blue
print_Chapter__002_.pdf
Connecticut Department of Energy and Environmental Protection. (2021). “Equitable Energy Efficiency.”
https://portal.ct.gov/-/media/DEEP/energy/ConserLoadMgmt/Final-E3-Phase-I-Determination.pdf
59
Douglas, Ellen, Paul Kirshen, Michael Paolisso, Chris Watson, Jack Wiggin, Ashley Enrici, and Matthias
Ruth. (2011). “Coastal flooding, climate change and environmental Justice: Identifying obstacles and
incentives for adaptation in two metropolitan Boston Massachusetts communities.” Mitigation and
Adaptation Strategies for Global Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11027-011-9340-8
Dupigny-Giroux, L.A., Mecray, E.L., Lemcke- Stampone, M.D., Hodgkins, G.A., Lentz, E.E., Mills,
K.E., Lane, E.D., Miller, R., Hollinger, D.Y., Solecki, W.D., Wellenius, G.A., Sheffield, P.E.,
MacDonald, A.B. & Caldwell, C. (2018). Northeast. In Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the
United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment, Volume II [Reidmiller, D.R., C.W. Avery, D.R.
Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, K.L.M. Lewis, T.K. Maycock, and B.C. Stewart (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change
Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 669–742. doi: 10.7930/NCA4.2018.CH18
Environmental Defense Fund. (2018). “Low-Income Energy Efficiency.” EDF,
https://www.edf.org/sites/default/files/documents/liee_national_summary.pdf
EPA. (2021). “Climate Change and Social Vulnerability in the United States: A Focus on Six Impacts.”
https://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2021-09/climate-vulnerability_september-2021_508.pdf
Gonzalez, Rosa. (2020). “The Spectrum of Community Engagement to Ownership.” Facilitating Power,
https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/facilitatingpower/pages/53/attachments/original/1596746165/
CE2O_SPECTRUM_2020.pdf?1596746165
Grannis, Jessica. (2016). “Rebuilding with Resilience: Lessons from the Rebuild by Design
Competition After Hurricane Sandy.” Georgetown Climate Center,
http://www.rebuildbydesign.org/data/files/504.pdf.
Georgetown Climate Center. “Managed Retreat Toolkit: Community Engagement and Equity.”
https://www.georgetownclimate.org/adaptation/toolkits/managed-retreat-toolkit/social-equity-
community-engagement-and-equity.html
Hester Street. (2019). Tools and Tactics for Engaging Communities around Code Enforcement.
https://hesterstreet.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/Cities-RISE_CE-101_v10_-FOR-PRINT.pdf
Hester Street Collaborative and Ford Foundation. PLANNING FOR A JUST RECOVERY: A Collective
Crisis Response for an Equitable and Resilient NYCHA. January 2021. https://hesterstreet.org/wp-
content/uploads/2021/02/Planning-For-A-Just-Recovery_February2021.pdf
Hino, Miyuki and Earthea Nance. (2021). “Five ways to ensure flood-risk research helps the
most vulnerable.” Nature, https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01750-0
Hoerling, M., Eischeid, J., Perlwitz, J., Quan, X.W., Wolter, K. & Cheng, L. (2016).
Characterizing recent trends in U.S. heavy precipitation. Journal of Climate, 29 (7), 2313–2332.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/ jcli-d-15-0441.1
Horton, R., Bader, D., Rosenzweig, C., DeGaetano, A. & Solecki, W. (2014). Climate Change in New
York State: Updating the 2011 ClimAID Climate Risk Information. New York State Energy Research
and Development Authority, Albany, New York. http://www.nyserda.ny.gov/climaid
60
Illume Advising. (2020). “Residential Nonparticipant Market Characterization and Barriers Study.”
https://illumeadvising.com/files/Residential-Nonparticipant-Market-Characterization-and-Barriers-
Study.pdf
Jemez Principles for Democratic Organizing. (1996). https://www.ejnet.org/ej/jemez.pdf
Maine Climate Council. (2020). “Assessing the Potential Equity Outcomes of Maine’s Climate
Action Plan: Framework, Analysis and Recommendations.” University of Maine,
https://www.maine.gov/future/sites/maine.gov.future/files/inlinefiles/MCC_EquityAssessmentReport
_201007.pdf
Martin, Carlos and Jamal Lewis. (2019). “The State of Equity Measurement.” Urban Institute,
https://www.urban.org/research/publication/state-equity-measurement
Nayak, S.G., Lin, S., Sheridan, S.C., Lu, Y., Graber, N., Primeau, M., Rafferty, C. J., & Hwang,
S-A. Surveying Local Health Departments and County Emergency Management Offices on Cooling
Centers as a Heat Adaptation Resource in New York State. Journal of Community Health. 23:
1-8. 2016.
Nayak, S.G., Shrestha, S., Kinney, P.L., Ross, Z., Sheridan, S.C., Pantea, C.I. Hsu, W.H., Muscatiello,
N., & Hwang, S-A. Development of a heat vulnerability index for New York State. Public Health.
161:127-137. 2018.
Nayak, S.G., Shrestha, S., Sheridan, S.C., Hsu, W.H., Muscatiello, N.A., Pantea, C.I., Ross, Z.,
Kinney, P.L., Zdeb, M., Hwang, S-A. and Lin, S. Accessibility of cooling centers to heat-vulnerable
populations in New York State. S. Journal of Transport & Health. 14, p.100563. 2019.
New York City Department of Housing Preservation and Development. (2016). Resilient Edgemere
Community Plan. https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/hpd/downloads/pdfs/services/resilient-edgemere-
report.pdf
New York City Environmental Justice Interagency Working Group. (2021). Environmental Justice for
All Report – Draft Scope. https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/sustainability/downloads/pdf/EJ-Report-
Draft-Scope.pdf
New York City Housing Authority. (2016). “Sustainability Agenda.”
https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/nycha/downloads/pdf/NYCHA_Sustainability_Agenda.pdf
New York City Housing Authority. (2019). “Sheltering Seniors from Extreme Heat: A Study of
NYCHA Senior Housing.” https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/nycha/downloads/pdf/n20-sheltering-
seniors-from-extreme-heat.pdf
New York City Mayor’s Office of Resiliency. (2021). “New York City Stormwater Resiliency Plan.”
https://www1.nyc.gov/assets/orr/pdf/publications/stormwater-resiliency-plan.pdf
New York Metropolitan Transportation Council. (2019). “Public Involvement Plan.”
https://www.nymtc.org/Get-Involved/Public-Involvement-Plan
61
New York State Climate Action Council. (2021). “Power Generation Advisory Panel Meeting 11.”
New York Department of Public Services.
New York State Department of Public Services. (2021). LMI Stakeholder Summaries.
New York State Department of State. (2021). Model Local Laws to Increase Resilience.
https://dos.ny.gov/model-local-laws-increase-resilience
NRDC and WE ACT for Environmental Justice. (2021). “Improving Community Resilience to Extreme
Summertime Heat in Northern Manhattan.” https://www.nrdc.org/sites/default/files/community-
resilience-summertime-heat-nomanhattan-report.pdf
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA). (2021). “Clean Energy
Fund Investment Plan.” https://www.nyserda.ny.gov/About/Funding/Clean-Energy-Fund
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA). (2017). “Population
Vulnerability to Climate Change in New York State.” NYSERDA Report Number 18-02.
Prepared by the New York State Department of Health/Health Research Inc., Albany, NY.
nyserda.ny.gov/publications
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA) Clean Energy Advisory
Council. (2017). “Report on Alternative Approaches to Providing Low and Moderate Income
(LMI) Clean Energy Services.”
https://documents.dps.ny.gov/public/Common/ViewDoc.aspx?DocRefId={F84BD434-DD25-483F-
B481-CCDD92B0A187}
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA). (2021). “Equitable
Access to Cooling Under a Changing Climate.” Draft report.
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA). Toward a Clean
Energy Future: A Strategic Outlook 2021–2024.
Rebuild by Design. “Elements of Effective Engagement: 12 Best Practices of Community
Engagement.” http://www.rebuildbydesign.org/data/files/375.pdf
Rosenzweig, C., Solecki, W., DeGaetano, A., O'Grady, M., Hassol, S. & Grabhorn, P., (Eds.),
(2011). Responding to Climate Change in New York State: The ClimAID Integrated Assessment
for Effective Climate Change Adaptation. Technical Report. New York State Energy Research and
Development Authority (NYSERDA), Albany, New York. http://www.nyserda.ny.gov/climaid
Town Creek Foundation. (2015). “Planning for Climate and Energy Equity in Maryland.”
https://mde.maryland.gov/programs/Marylander/Documents/MWGPlanningClimateEnergyEquity.pdf
Urban Institute. (2021). “A Federal Policy and Climate Migration Briefing for State, Tribal, and Local
Governments.”
https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/2021/03/25/a_federal_policy_and_climate_migration_briefi
ng_for_state_tribal_and_local_governments.pdf
62
WE ACT. (2020). “A Call for NYC Cooling Center Improvements: Results from WE ACT
for Environmental Justice’s Cooling Center Audit Project.” https://www.weact.org/wp-
content/uploads/2020/07/WE-ACT-Cooling-Center-Report-Short032320.pdf
Widerynski, S., Schramm, P., Conlon, K., Noe, R., Grossman, E., Hawkins, M., Nayak, S., Roach, M.,
& Shipp Hilts, A. The Use of Cooling Centers to Prevent Heat-Related Illness: Summary of Evidence
and Strategies for Implementation. Climate and Health Technical Report Series. Climate and Health
Program, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. 2017.
Williams-Rajee, Desiree and Taren Evans. (2016). “Climate Action Through Equity.” City of Portland
Bureau of Planning and Sustainability, https://www.portland.gov/sites/default/files/2019-07/cap-
equity-case-study-web29jul.pdf
A-1
Appendix A. Research Approach
The study team completed the following tasks to inform the report: (1) agency coordination and input,
(2) CAC and CJWG input and feedback, (3) secondary research review and analysis, (4) focus groups,
and (5) public hearings and comments.
Specific research tasks are described in the sections below.
A.1 Agency Coordination and Input
In addition to several staff from agencies included in the study team, agency staff from DOH, DPS,
DOT, DOL, OTDA, and HCR provided key input throughout the design and implementation of this
study. DOH, DPS, and DOT also identified one or more study advisors to provide ongoing guidance to
the project and review of key deliverables. Agency staff contributed to the study in several ways, as
listed below.
• Participated in a kick-off meeting. Agency staff provided input on the objectives
of the research, proposed study design, and key terms and definitions.
• Review of key deliverables. Study advisors reviewed key drafts of research instruments,
including the focus group research plan, focus group participant screener survey, recruitment
emails and other items. Study advisors also reviewed an interim memo on the secondary
research findings, along with the draft report.
• Contributed to an agency workshop. The study team held an agency workshop to
discuss findings from the secondary research and have discussions around key barriers
faced by communities and how agencies were approaching them through programs or
thinking about them.
• Assisted in focus group recruitment. Study advisors also played a key role in identifying
and recruiting local government, community organizations, small business representatives
and heat-vulnerable community members to participate in the focus groups.
• Assisted in focus group topics and discussion guides. Study advisors helped prioritize
the topics for focus groups and identify, for each group, at least one tangible or
programmatic example to discuss or test with participants.
In addition to the contributions above, study advisors also provided ad hoc support as needed.
A-2
A.2 Climate Action Council and Climate Justice Working Group
Input and Feedback
The study team reviewed CAC meeting presentations and notes to gather input that could inform
the report. The study team also requested and received guidance and input from the CJWG at several
stages. CJWG members:
• Provided feedback on the study design, particularly the community-based outreach
approach and importance of sharing/showing tangible examples of services/offerings
in focus groups and hearings.
• Supported outreach for focus groups, public comments, and hearings through
their organizations. CJWG member organizations posted and shared invitations and
links through their organizations via social media and email.
• Provided feedback on the draft list of barriers and opportunities during a public
meeting. NYSERDA also distributed the list of barriers and provided time for written
or verbal feedback on barriers and opportunities.
A.3 Secondary Research Review and Analysis
The study team conducted secondary research to help to define the types and categories of barriers
faced by households, communities, and small business in disadvantaged communities. Specific examples
of barriers were identified in each category, in addition to examples of thematic models or programs
for opportunities to overcome the barriers.
The secondary research effort focused specifically on sources identifying and documenting barriers
that disadvantaged communities face in accessing or owning the five areas of services and commodities
(listed in section 2 of the report), and programmatic approaches to addressing those barriers. The research
focused primarily on three types of data sources:
• Existing reports prepared by other states and by New York State agencies to define
and describe barriers to access and ownership faced by disadvantaged communities.
• Direct input from New York State agencies and public input to existing projects
describing both barriers and the programs and strategies designed to address these
barriers that are currently underway or in development.
• Targeted literature review focused on defining and addressing concepts of equity
and climate resilience and the barriers to achieving equity and climate resilience in
disadvantaged communities.
A-3
This research does not represent a full-scale literature search on the broader topics of energy equity
and climate justice, or a comprehensive review of the programmatic offerings in New York State or
other states. In addition, the term “secondary” in this context broadly refers to “existing” and can
include current materials about and/or provided directly by New York State agency staff participating
in the project.
A list of references is included in the associated appendix section.
A.4 Focus Groups
Drawing on guidance from agency study advisors and knowledge gaps identified in the secondary
research task, the study team prioritized the broad Climate Act services and commodities for additional
primary research through focus groups targeting community members (individuals or small business
members) and community organizations or local government representatives.
Working closely with study advisors, the team then identified target participants and a relevant tangible
example for each topic area to ground the focus group discussion. As an example, for the Climate Act
service and commodity area of distributed renewable energy generation, the team identified “community
solar subscription models” as the tangible example for the focus group targeting community members
in disadvantaged communities. The Climate Act service and commodity areas, tangible examples, and
target audiences are shown in Table A-1.
Table A-1. Focus Groups Details
Climate Act Service and
Commodity Area
Tangible Example Audience
Distributed Renewable Energy
Generation
Community Solar Subscriptions Community members
Community-owned or community- Municipalities and Community
initiated solar or storage. Organizations.
Low-Emission and No-Emission
Transportation
Climate emergency mobility options
and accessibility without a car.
Community members
vehicles.
w/o personal
Freight/delivery truck electrification.
Small business owners with
truck/commercial vehicles.
Community Adaptation of Homes,
Buildings, and Infrastructure
Climate resilience planning with
natural features.
Municipalities and
Organizations.
Community
Community interest in resilience
infrastructure, e.g., microgrids.
Community members
Mitigating Health-Related Climate
Risks
Keeping people safe in extreme heat,
storms, and emergencies.
Municipalities and
Organizations.
Community
Access to cooling in extreme heat. Community members (Spanish only).
A-4
Focus group participants were recruited through an online application linked from the Climate
Act website (climate.ny.gov) disseminated through a network of study advisor contacts and
community organizations (local, regional, and statewide) through email and social media posts.
The online application funneled applicants to the different services and commodities based on
their role (community members, community-based organizations, government representatives,
small business owners), preferred language (English or Spanish) and selected areas of interest.
Community members were screened based on whether they lived in zip codes classified as disadvantaged,
using the method described in appendix B, with priority given to community members who are Black,
Indigenous, or People of Color, and low- to moderate-income applicants. Local government, community
organizations, and small business applicants were screened based on having relevant front-line experience
in the topic area. In cases where there were more eligible applicants than spaces in a focus group, the
team randomly selected participants within demographic subgroups to capture a diversity of perspectives
across the State.
The basic breakdown of total focus group applicants, number eligible applicants, and final attendees
by focus group is summarized in Table A-2.
Table A-2. Focus Group Applicant and Attendee Counts
Date
Topic
Audience
Applicants
Eligible
Attendees
10/18
Renewables (Solar subscription
models).
Community members 27 24 7
10/19
Renewables (community
owned/leased).
Municipalities and
community organizations
31 30 8
10/20 Transportation options w/o cars. Community members 19 16 7
10/21 Clean fuels for comm. Vehicles.
Small or Medium
Business
Owners/Managers
147 87 10
10/25
Adaptation/Resilience (flooding,
heat).
Municipalities and
community organizations
21 21 9
10/26 Preparing for climate change. Community members 17 17 10
10/27
Emergency response to extreme
weather.
Municipalities and
community organizations
50 50 8
10/28 Health/safety in climate change.
Community
(Spanish)
members
14 10 6
TOTAL 326 255 65
A-5
All focus groups were 90 minutes and conducted online via Zoom. The team structured each discussion
around initially soliciting the groups’ needs and experiences around the general topic of climate change
to identify broad barriers and experiences. This was then followed by a guided discussion of the tangible
example, which served to prompt specific reactions, concerns, experiences, and barriers related to one of
the five service and commodity areas in the Climate Act. The study team then wrapped up with an open-
ended discussion of perceived opportunities for overcoming the barriers identified related to the tangible
example and the topic more broadly.
A.5 Public Hearings and Comments
The study team held two virtual public hearings on November 3 and 4, 2021, as required by the
Climate Act. Prior to the hearings, DEC posted a public notice and fact sheet, in both English and
Spanish, explaining the purpose of the report and describing the team’s early findings of the barriers
that communities face in accessing and owning services and resources related to the five service and
commodity areas in the Climate Act.
Each hearing included a presentation by the study team, providing an overview of the requirements of the
Climate Act and the report, a summary of the initial findings, and questions to prompt feedback and input
from the public. Written public comments were also solicited via online form, email, and postal mail. The
number of public comments received are summarized below:
• Hearing on November 3, 2021: 35 attendees with 11 speakers
• Hearing on November 4, 2021: 62 attendees with 10 speakers
• Written public comments received: 26
B-1
Appendix B. Defining Disadvantaged Communities
During this study, DEC and the CJWG were in the process of defining and identifying disadvantaged
communities per the following criteria of the Climate Act:
• Areas burdened by cumulative environmental pollution and other hazards that can
lead to negative public health effects.
• Areas with concentrations of people that are of low income, high unemployment, high
rent burden, low levels of home ownership, low levels of educational attainment, or members
of groups that have historically experienced discrimination based on race or ethnicity.
• Areas vulnerable to the impacts of climate change such as flooding, storm surges, and
urban heat island effect.
On December 13, 2021, the CJWG voted to approve the release for public comment of draft criteria
to identify disadvantaged communities.
12
However, the draft criteria and draft list of census tracts were
not available for this study. Therefore, to identify potential disadvantaged community members and
organizations for focus groups, the study team considered a combination of several definitions to
screen focus group applicants, including the following:
1. DEC Potential Environmental Justice Areas (PEJAs).
2. United States Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Low-income Housing Qualified
Census Tracts.
3. Working draft of the CJWG’s disadvantaged communities criteria and list of census tracts
(draft from September 2021).
The first two definitions—DEC PEJAs and HUD Low-Income Housing Qualified Census
Tracks—consider sociodemographic factors only (income and race/ethnicity). The third working
draft scenario contains additional indicators for environmental burdens and climate change risks.
C-1
Appendix C. Principles of Community Engagement
The Jemez Principles for Democratic Organizing (Jemez Principles) are used by several community
organizations in New York State, including WE ACT. New York City has also included characteristics
of “meaningful engagement” within its draft scope for the Environmental Justice for All Report.
C.1 Jemez Principles
1. Be Inclusive: If we hope to achieve just societies that include all people in decision-making
and assure that all people have an equitable share of the wealth and the work of this world, then
we must work to build that kind of inclusiveness into our own movement to develop alternative
policies and institutions to the treaties policies under neoliberalism. This requires more than
tokenism, it cannot be achieved without diversity at the planning table, in staffing, and in
coordination. It may delay achievement of other important goals, it will require discussion,
hard work, patience, and advance planning. It may involve conflict, but through this conflict,
we can learn better ways of working together. It is about building alternative institutions,
movement building, and not compromising to be accepted into the anti-globalization club.
2. Emphasis on Bottom-Up Organizing: To succeed, it is important to reach out into new
constituencies, and to reach within all levels of leadership and membership base of the
organizations that are already involved in our networks. We must be continually building
and strengthening a base which provides our credibility, our strategies, mobilizations,
leadership development, and the energy for the work we must do daily.
3. Let People Speak for Themselves: We must be sure that relevant voices of people directly
affected are heard. Ways must be provided for spokespersons to represent and be responsible
to the affected constituencies. It is important for organizations to clarify their roles, and who
they represent, and to assure accountability within our structures.
4. Work Together in Solidarity and Mutuality: Groups working on similar issues with
compatible visions should consciously act in solidarity and mutuality and support each other’s
work. In the long run, incorporating the goals and values of other groups with your own work,
to build strong relationships would be a more significant step. For instance, in the long run, it is
more important that labor unions and community economic development projects include the
issue of environmental sustainability in their own strategies, rather than just lending support to
the environmental organizations. So, communications, strategies, and resource sharing are
critical to help us see our connections and to continue to build on these efforts.
5. Build Just Relationships Among Ourselves: We need to treat each other with justice and
respect, both on an individual and an organizational level, in this country and across borders.
Defining and developing “just relationships” will be a process that won’t happen overnight.
It must include clarity about decision-making, sharing strategies, and resource distribution.
There are clearly many skills necessary to succeed, and we need to determine the ways for
those with different skills to coordinate and be accountable to one another.
C-2
6. Commitment to Self-Transformation: As we change societies, we must change from operating
on the mode of individualism to community-centeredness. We must “walk our talk.” We must
be the values that we say we’re struggling for, and we must embody the meaning of justice,
peace, community.
C.2 New York City’s Environmental Justice for All—Meaningful
Involvement
New York City’s Draft Scope document for the Environmental Justice for All Report defines meaningful
involvement using the following characteristics identified by the United States Department of Energy:
• Opportunity to participate in agency decision-making.
• Ability to influence agency decision-making.
• Concerns of community members are taken seriously.
• Public is educated about potential impacts of agency decisions.
• Early engagement with affected communities.
• Consistent engagement with affected communities throughout the planning process.
• Language accessibility.
• Varied meeting styles.
• Accessible facilities.
• Both electronic and non-electronic communication.
• Consider forming committees composed of members of affected communities.
EN-1
Endnotes
1
DEC (2021). Observed and Projected Climate Change in New York State: An Overview. Department of
Environmental Conservation, Albany, New York: https://www.dec.ny.gov/docs/administration_pdf/ccnys2021.pdf
2
Horton, R., Bader, D., Rosenzweig, C., DeGaetano, A. & Solecki, W. (2014). Climate Change in New York State:
Updating the 2011 ClimAID Climate Risk Information. New York State Energy Research and Development
Authority, Albany, New York. http://www.nyserda.ny.gov/climaid
3
Rosenzweig, C., Solecki, W., DeGaetano, A., O'Grady, M., Hassol, S. & Grabhorn, P., (Eds.), 2011. Responding to
Climate Change in New York State: The ClimAID Integrated Assessment for Effective Climate Change Adaptation.
Technical Report. New York State Energy Research and Development Authority (NYSERDA), Albany, New York.
http://www.nyserda.ny.gov/climaid
4
Hoerling, M., Eischeid, J., Perlwitz, J., Quan, X.W., Wolter, K. & Cheng, L. (2016). Characterizing recent trends in
U.S. heavy precipitation. Journal of Climate, 29 (7), 2313–2332. http://dx.doi.org/10.1175/ jcli-d-15-0441.1
5
Dupigny-Giroux, L.A., Mecray, E.L., Lemcke- Stampone, M.D., Hodgkins, G.A., Lentz, E.E., Mills, K.E., Lane,
E.D., Miller, R., Hollinger, D.Y., Solecki, W.D., Wellenius, G.A., Sheffield, P.E., MacDonald, A.B. & Caldwell, C.
(2018). Northeast. In Impacts, Risks, and Adaptation in the United States: Fourth National Climate Assessment,
Volume II [Reidmiller, D.R., C.W. Avery, D.R. Easterling, K.E. Kunkel, K.L.M. Lewis, T.K. Maycock, and B.C.
Stewart (eds.)]. U.S. Global Change Research Program, Washington, DC, USA, pp. 669–742. doi:
10.7930/NCA4.2018.CH18
6
See, for example, https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-24/the-unequal-pandemic-in-nyc, which
highlights food hardship, housing insecurity, unemployment.
7
Note that while the term “Disadvantaged Communities” is used throughout this report for consistency and to align
with Climate Act language, terminology is still developing and being explored by state agencies.
8
California Energy Commission. “Low-Income Barriers Study, Part A: Overcoming Barriers to Energy Efficiency and
Renewables for Low-Income Community members and Small Business Contracting Opportunities in Disadvantaged
Communities.” 2016, https://www.energyefficiencyforall.org/resources/low-income-barriers-study-part-a/
9
Labelled as RE (distributed renewable energy generation), EE (energy efficiency and weatherization), Transportation
(low- or no-emission transportation), Adaptation (community adaptation of homes, building, and infrastructure), and
Health and Safety (other services and infrastructure to reduce the risks of climate-related hazards).
10
Examples highlighted may include examples of programs (either within our outside of New York), or suggestions
collected by the study team through secondary research, focus groups, public hearings, and comments.
11
Labelled as RE (distributed renewable energy generation), EE (energy efficiency and weatherization), Transportation
(low or no-emission transportation), Adaptation (community adaptation of homes, building, and infrastructure), and
Health and Safety (other services and infrastructure to reduce the risks of climate-related hazards).
12
As of the date of this report, DEC is finalizing documentation and materials that describe the draft Disadvantaged
Communities criteria and list census tracts identified by the draft criteria. The draft criteria and list will be posted
publicly online when available. CJWG meeting materials describing draft criteria prior to the CJWG vote are
available at: https://climate.ny.gov/Climate-Justice-Working-Group
Notice
This report was prepared by ILLUME Advising, LLC in the course
of performing work contracted for and sponsored by the New York
State Energy Research and Development Authority, the New York State
Department of Environmental Conservation, and the New York Power
Authority (hereafter the “Sponsors”). All of the opinions expressed in
this report do not necessarily reflect those of the Sponsors or the State
of New York, and reference to any specific product, service, process,
or method does not constitute an implied or expressed recommendation
or endorsement of it. The Sponsors and their contractors have made
every eort to provide accurate information about copyright owners
and related matters. Information contained in this document, such
as web page addresses, is current at the time of publication.
New York State
Energy Research and
Development Authority
17 Columbia Circle
Albany, NY 12203-6399
toll free: 866-NYSERDA
local: 518-862-1090
fax: 518-862-1091
nyserda.ny.gov
NYSERDA
New York
Power Authority
Department of
Environmental
Conservation
State of New York
Kathy Hochul, Governor
New York State Energy Research and Development Authority
Richard L. Kauman, Chair | Doreen M. Harris, President and CEO
New York State Power Authority
John R. Koelmel, Chair | Justin E. Driscoll, Interim President and CEO
New York State Energy Department of Environmental Conservation
Basil Seggos, Commissioner
