{
 "currentVersion": 10.81,
 "serviceDescription": "2018 Tract-level Indicators of Potential Disadvantage for the DVRPC Region\n\nTitle VI of the Civil Rights Act and the Executive Order on Environmental Justice (#12898) do not provide specific guidance to evaluate EJ issues within a region's transportation planning process. Therefore, MPOs must devise their own methods for ensuring that EJ issues are investigated and evaluated in transportation decision-making. In 2001, DVRPC developed an EJ technical assessment to identify direct and disparate impacts of its plans, programs, and planning process on defined population groups in the Delaware Valley region. This assessment, called the Indicators of Potential Disadvantage Methodology, is utilized in a variety of DVRPC plans and programs. DVRPC currently assesses the following population groups, defined by the U.S. Census Bureau:\n\n    Youth\n\n    Older Adults\n\n    Female\n\n    Racial Minority\n\n    Ethnic Minority\n\n    Foreign-Born\n\n    Disabled\n\n    Limited English Proficiency\n\n    Low-Income\n\nCensus tables used to gather data from the 2014 -2018 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates\n\nUsing U.S. Census American Community Survey data, the population groups listed above are identified and located at the census tract level. Data is gathered at the regional level, combining populations from each of the nine counties, for either individuals or households, depending on the indicator. From there, the total number of persons in each demographic group is divided by the appropriate universe (either population or households) for the nine-county region, providing a regional average for that population group. Any census tract that meets or exceeds the regional average level, or threshold, is considered an EJ-sensitive tract for that group.\n\nCensus tables used to gather data from the 2014 - 2018 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.\n\nFor more information and for methodology, visit DVRPC's website:http://www.dvrpc.org/GetInvolved/TitleVI/\n\nSource of tract boundaries: US Census Bureau. The TIGER/Line Files\n\nNote: Tracts with null values should be symbolized as \"No Data\".\n\nField\n\t\n\nAlias\n\t\n\nDescription\n\nGEOID10\n\t\n\nGEOID10\n\t\n\nCensus tract identifier (text)\n\nSTATEFP10\n\t\n\nState FIPS\n\t\n\nFIPS Code for State\n\nCOUNTYFP10\n\t\n\nCounty FIPS\n\t\n\nFIPS Code for County\n\nNAME10\n\t\n\nTract Number\n\t\n\nTract Number\n\ngeoidNum\n\t\n\nGEOID10 Numeric\n\t\n\nCensus tract identifier (numeric)\n\nY_CntEst\n\t\n\nYouth Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of youth population (under 18 years)\n\nY_CntMOE\n\t\n\nYouth Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of youth population\n\nY_PctEst\n\t\n\nYouth Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of youth population (under 18 years)\n\nY_PctMOE\n\t\n\nYouth Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of youth population\n\nY_Pctile\n\t\n\nYouth Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage youth\n\nY_Class\n\t\n\nYouth Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's youth percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nY_Score\n\t\n\nYouth Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's youth classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nOA_CntEst\n\t\n\nOlder Adult Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of older adult population (65 years or older)\n\nOA_CntMOE\n\t\n\nOlder Adult Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of older adult population\n\nOA_PctEst\n\t\n\nOlder Adult Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of older adult population (65 years or older)\n\nOA_PctMOE\n\t\n\nOlder Adult Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of older adult population\n\nOA_Pctile\n\t\n\nOlder Adult Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage older adult\n\nOA_Class\n\t\n\nOlder Adult Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's older adult percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nOA_Score\n\t\n\nOlder Adult Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's older adult classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nF_CntEst\n\t\n\nFemale Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of female population\n\nF_CntMOE\n\t\n\nFemale Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of female population\n\nF_PctEst\n\t\n\nFemale Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of female population\n\nF_PctMOE\n\t\n\nFemale Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of female population\n\nF_Pctile\n\t\n\nFemale Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage female\n\nF_Class\n\t\n\nFemale Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's female percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nF_Score\n\t\n\nFemale Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's female classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nRM_CntEst\n\t\n\nRacial Minority Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of non-white population\n\nRM_CntMOE\n\t\n\nRacial Minority Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of non-white population\n\nRM_PctEst\n\t\n\nRacial Minority Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of non-white population\n\nRM_PctMOE\n\t\n\nRacial Minority Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of non-white population\n\nRM_Pctile\n\t\n\nRacial Minority Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage non-white\n\nRM_Class\n\t\n\nRacial Minority Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's non-white percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nRM_Score\n\t\n\nRacial Minority Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's non-white classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nEM_CntEst\n\t\n\nEthnic Minority Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of Hispanic/Latino population\n\nEM_CntMOE\n\t\n\nEthnic Minority Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of Hispanic/Latino population\n\nEM_PctEst\n\t\n\nEthnic Minority Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of Hispanic/Latino population\n\nEM_PctMOE\n\t\n\nEthnic Minority Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of Hispanic/Latino population\n\nEM_Pctile\n\t\n\nEthnic Minority Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage Hispanic/Latino\n\nEM_Class\n\t\n\nEthnic Minority Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's Hispanic/Latino percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nEM_Score\n\t\n\nEthnic Minority Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's Hispanic/Latino classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nFB_CntEst\n\t\n\nForeign Born Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of foreign born population\n\nFB_CntMOE\n\t\n\nForeign Born Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of foreign born population\n\nFB_PctEst\n\t\n\nForeign Born Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of foreign born population\n\nFB_PctMOE\n\t\n\nForeign Born Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of foreign born population\n\nFB_Pctile\n\t\n\nForeign Born Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage foreign born\n\nFB_Class\n\t\n\nForeign Born Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's foreign born percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nFB_Score\n\t\n\nForeign Born Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's foreign born classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nLEP_CntEst\n\t\n\nLimited English Proficiency Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of limited english proficiency population\n\nLEP_CntMoe\n\t\n\nLimited English Proficiency Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of limited english proficiency population\n\nLEP_PctEst\n\t\n\nLimited English Proficiency Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of limited english proficiency population\n\nLEP_PctMOE\n\t\n\nLimited English Proficiency Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of limited english proficiency population\n\nLEP_Pctile\n\t\n\nLimited English Proficiency Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage limited english proficiency\n\nLEP_Class\n\t\n\nLimited English Proficiency Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's limited english proficiency percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nLEP_Score\n\t\n\nLimited English Proficiency Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's limited english proficiency classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nD_CntEst\n\t\n\nDisabled Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of disabled population\n\nD_CntMOE\n\t\n\nDisabled Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of disabled population\n\nD_PctEst\n\t\n\nDisabled Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of disabled population\n\nD_PctMOE\n\t\n\nDisabled Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of disabled population\n\nD_Pctile\n\t\n\nDisabled Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage disabled\n\nD_Class\n\t\n\nDisabled Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's disabled percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nD_Score\n\t\n\nDisabled Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's disabled classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nLI_CntEst\n\t\n\nLow Income Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of low income (below 200% of poverty level) population\n\nLI_CntMOE\n\t\n\nLow Income Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of low income population\n\nLI_PctEst\n\t\n\nLow Income Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of low income (below 200% of poverty level) population\n\nLI_PctMOE\n\t\n\nLow Income Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of low income population\n\nLI_Pctile\n\t\n\nLow Income Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage low income\n\nLI_Class\n\t\n\nLow Income Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's low income percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nLI_Score\n\t\n\nLow Income Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's low income classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nU_TPopEst\n\t\n\nTotal Population Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated total population of tract (universe [or denominator] for youth, older adult, female, racial minoriry, ethnic minority, & foreign born)\n\nU_TPopMOE\n\t\n\nTotal Population MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated total population of tract\n\nU_Pop6+Est\n\t\n\nPopulation 6+ Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated population over five years of age (universe [or denominator] for limited english proficiency)\n\nU_Pop6+MOE\n\t\n\nPopulation 6+ MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated population over five years of age\n\nU_PPovEst\n\t\n\nPoverty Status Pop Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated population for whom poverty status is determined (universe [or denominator] for low income)\n\nU_PPovMOE\n\t\n\nPoverty Status Pop MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated population for whom poverty status is determined\n\nU_PNICEst\n\t\n\nNon-Institutional Civilian Pop Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated noninsitutional civilian population (universe [or denominator] for disabled)\n\nU_PNICMOE\n\t\n\nNon-Institutional Civilian Pop MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated noninstitutional civilian population\n\nIPD_Score\n\t\n\nComposite Score\n\t\n\nOverall score adding the classification scores across all nine variables\n\nIPD_Range\n\t\n\nComposite Score Range\n\t\n\nRange of composite scores that make up the composite classification as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average (for map symbolization purposes only)\n\nIPD_Class\n\t\n\nComposite Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of composite scores as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average (for map symbolization purposes only)\n\n",
 "mapName": "Layers",
 "description": "",
 "copyrightText": "DVRPC",
 "supportsDynamicLayers": true,
 "layers": [
  {
   "id": 0,
   "name": "IPD 2018",
   "parentLayerId": -1,
   "defaultVisibility": true,
   "subLayerIds": null,
   "minScale": 0,
   "maxScale": 0,
   "type": "Feature Layer",
   "geometryType": "esriGeometryPolygon"
  }
 ],
 "tables": [],
 "spatialReference": {
  "wkid": 26918,
  "latestWkid": 26918
 },
 "singleFusedMapCache": false,
 "initialExtent": {
  "xmin": 527505.2663645069,
  "ymin": 4469579.847846518,
  "xmax": 571214.5044776427,
  "ymax": 4497541.286734589,
  "spatialReference": {
   "wkid": 26918,
   "latestWkid": 26918
  }
 },
 "fullExtent": {
  "xmin": 531337.8033751537,
  "ymin": 4455769.221643438,
  "xmax": 567381.9674669958,
  "ymax": 4495552.140777867,
  "spatialReference": {
   "wkid": 26918,
   "latestWkid": 26918
  }
 },
 "minScale": 0,
 "maxScale": 0,
 "units": "esriMeters",
 "supportedImageFormatTypes": "PNG32,PNG24,PNG,JPG,DIB,TIFF,EMF,PS,PDF,GIF,SVG,SVGZ,BMP",
 "documentInfo": {
  "Title": "",
  "Author": "",
  "Comments": "2018 Tract-level Indicators of Potential Disadvantage for the DVRPC Region\n\nTitle VI of the Civil Rights Act and the Executive Order on Environmental Justice (#12898) do not provide specific guidance to evaluate EJ issues within a region's transportation planning process. Therefore, MPOs must devise their own methods for ensuring that EJ issues are investigated and evaluated in transportation decision-making. In 2001, DVRPC developed an EJ technical assessment to identify direct and disparate impacts of its plans, programs, and planning process on defined population groups in the Delaware Valley region. This assessment, called the Indicators of Potential Disadvantage Methodology, is utilized in a variety of DVRPC plans and programs. DVRPC currently assesses the following population groups, defined by the U.S. Census Bureau:\n\n    Youth\n\n    Older Adults\n\n    Female\n\n    Racial Minority\n\n    Ethnic Minority\n\n    Foreign-Born\n\n    Disabled\n\n    Limited English Proficiency\n\n    Low-Income\n\nCensus tables used to gather data from the 2014 -2018 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates\n\nUsing U.S. Census American Community Survey data, the population groups listed above are identified and located at the census tract level. Data is gathered at the regional level, combining populations from each of the nine counties, for either individuals or households, depending on the indicator. From there, the total number of persons in each demographic group is divided by the appropriate universe (either population or households) for the nine-county region, providing a regional average for that population group. Any census tract that meets or exceeds the regional average level, or threshold, is considered an EJ-sensitive tract for that group.\n\nCensus tables used to gather data from the 2014 - 2018 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.\n\nFor more information and for methodology, visit DVRPC's website:http://www.dvrpc.org/GetInvolved/TitleVI/\n\nSource of tract boundaries: US Census Bureau. The TIGER/Line Files\n\nNote: Tracts with null values should be symbolized as \"No Data\".\n\nField\n\t\n\nAlias\n\t\n\nDescription\n\nGEOID10\n\t\n\nGEOID10\n\t\n\nCensus tract identifier (text)\n\nSTATEFP10\n\t\n\nState FIPS\n\t\n\nFIPS Code for State\n\nCOUNTYFP10\n\t\n\nCounty FIPS\n\t\n\nFIPS Code for County\n\nNAME10\n\t\n\nTract Number\n\t\n\nTract Number\n\ngeoidNum\n\t\n\nGEOID10 Numeric\n\t\n\nCensus tract identifier (numeric)\n\nY_CntEst\n\t\n\nYouth Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of youth population (under 18 years)\n\nY_CntMOE\n\t\n\nYouth Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of youth population\n\nY_PctEst\n\t\n\nYouth Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of youth population (under 18 years)\n\nY_PctMOE\n\t\n\nYouth Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of youth population\n\nY_Pctile\n\t\n\nYouth Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage youth\n\nY_Class\n\t\n\nYouth Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's youth percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nY_Score\n\t\n\nYouth Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's youth classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nOA_CntEst\n\t\n\nOlder Adult Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of older adult population (65 years or older)\n\nOA_CntMOE\n\t\n\nOlder Adult Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of older adult population\n\nOA_PctEst\n\t\n\nOlder Adult Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of older adult population (65 years or older)\n\nOA_PctMOE\n\t\n\nOlder Adult Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of older adult population\n\nOA_Pctile\n\t\n\nOlder Adult Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage older adult\n\nOA_Class\n\t\n\nOlder Adult Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's older adult percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nOA_Score\n\t\n\nOlder Adult Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's older adult classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nF_CntEst\n\t\n\nFemale Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of female population\n\nF_CntMOE\n\t\n\nFemale Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of female population\n\nF_PctEst\n\t\n\nFemale Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of female population\n\nF_PctMOE\n\t\n\nFemale Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of female population\n\nF_Pctile\n\t\n\nFemale Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage female\n\nF_Class\n\t\n\nFemale Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's female percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nF_Score\n\t\n\nFemale Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's female classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nRM_CntEst\n\t\n\nRacial Minority Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of non-white population\n\nRM_CntMOE\n\t\n\nRacial Minority Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of non-white population\n\nRM_PctEst\n\t\n\nRacial Minority Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of non-white population\n\nRM_PctMOE\n\t\n\nRacial Minority Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of non-white population\n\nRM_Pctile\n\t\n\nRacial Minority Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage non-white\n\nRM_Class\n\t\n\nRacial Minority Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's non-white percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nRM_Score\n\t\n\nRacial Minority Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's non-white classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nEM_CntEst\n\t\n\nEthnic Minority Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of Hispanic/Latino population\n\nEM_CntMOE\n\t\n\nEthnic Minority Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of Hispanic/Latino population\n\nEM_PctEst\n\t\n\nEthnic Minority Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of Hispanic/Latino population\n\nEM_PctMOE\n\t\n\nEthnic Minority Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of Hispanic/Latino population\n\nEM_Pctile\n\t\n\nEthnic Minority Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage Hispanic/Latino\n\nEM_Class\n\t\n\nEthnic Minority Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's Hispanic/Latino percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nEM_Score\n\t\n\nEthnic Minority Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's Hispanic/Latino classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nFB_CntEst\n\t\n\nForeign Born Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of foreign born population\n\nFB_CntMOE\n\t\n\nForeign Born Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of foreign born population\n\nFB_PctEst\n\t\n\nForeign Born Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of foreign born population\n\nFB_PctMOE\n\t\n\nForeign Born Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of foreign born population\n\nFB_Pctile\n\t\n\nForeign Born Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage foreign born\n\nFB_Class\n\t\n\nForeign Born Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's foreign born percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nFB_Score\n\t\n\nForeign Born Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's foreign born classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nLEP_CntEst\n\t\n\nLimited English Proficiency Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of limited english proficiency population\n\nLEP_CntMoe\n\t\n\nLimited English Proficiency Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of limited english proficiency population\n\nLEP_PctEst\n\t\n\nLimited English Proficiency Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of limited english proficiency population\n\nLEP_PctMOE\n\t\n\nLimited English Proficiency Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of limited english proficiency population\n\nLEP_Pctile\n\t\n\nLimited English Proficiency Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage limited english proficiency\n\nLEP_Class\n\t\n\nLimited English Proficiency Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's limited english proficiency percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nLEP_Score\n\t\n\nLimited English Proficiency Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's limited english proficiency classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nD_CntEst\n\t\n\nDisabled Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of disabled population\n\nD_CntMOE\n\t\n\nDisabled Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of disabled population\n\nD_PctEst\n\t\n\nDisabled Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of disabled population\n\nD_PctMOE\n\t\n\nDisabled Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of disabled population\n\nD_Pctile\n\t\n\nDisabled Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage disabled\n\nD_Class\n\t\n\nDisabled Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's disabled percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nD_Score\n\t\n\nDisabled Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's disabled classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nLI_CntEst\n\t\n\nLow Income Count Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated count of low income (below 200% of poverty level) population\n\nLI_CntMOE\n\t\n\nLow Income Count MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated count of low income population\n\nLI_PctEst\n\t\n\nLow Income Percentage Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated percentage of low income (below 200% of poverty level) population\n\nLI_PctMOE\n\t\n\nLow Income Percentage MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for percentage of low income population\n\nLI_Pctile\n\t\n\nLow Income Percentile\n\t\n\nTract's regional percentile for percentage low income\n\nLI_Class\n\t\n\nLow Income Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of tract's low income percentage as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average\n\nLI_Score\n\t\n\nLow Income Score\n\t\n\nCorresponding numeric score for tract's low income classification: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4\n\nU_TPopEst\n\t\n\nTotal Population Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated total population of tract (universe [or denominator] for youth, older adult, female, racial minoriry, ethnic minority, & foreign born)\n\nU_TPopMOE\n\t\n\nTotal Population MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated total population of tract\n\nU_Pop6+Est\n\t\n\nPopulation 6+ Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated population over five years of age (universe [or denominator] for limited english proficiency)\n\nU_Pop6+MOE\n\t\n\nPopulation 6+ MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated population over five years of age\n\nU_PPovEst\n\t\n\nPoverty Status Pop Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated population for whom poverty status is determined (universe [or denominator] for low income)\n\nU_PPovMOE\n\t\n\nPoverty Status Pop MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated population for whom poverty status is determined\n\nU_PNICEst\n\t\n\nNon-Institutional Civilian Pop Estimate\n\t\n\nEstimated noninsitutional civilian population (universe [or denominator] for disabled)\n\nU_PNICMOE\n\t\n\nNon-Institutional Civilian Pop MOE\n\t\n\nMargin of error for estimated noninstitutional civilian population\n\nIPD_Score\n\t\n\nComposite Score\n\t\n\nOverall score adding the classification scores across all nine variables\n\nIPD_Range\n\t\n\nComposite Score Range\n\t\n\nRange of composite scores that make up the composite classification as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average (for map symbolization purposes only)\n\nIPD_Class\n\t\n\nComposite Classification\n\t\n\nClassification of composite scores as: well below average, below average, average, above average, or well above average (for map symbolization purposes only)\n\n",
  "Subject": " To be used for planning purposes.",
  "Category": "",
  "AntialiasingMode": "Fast",
  "TextAntialiasingMode": "Force",
  "Keywords": "Environmental Justice,Census Tract,DVRPC Region,Degrees of Disadvantage,2018]"
 },
 "capabilities": "Map,Query,Data",
 "supportedQueryFormats": "JSON, geoJSON",
 "exportTilesAllowed": false,
 "referenceScale": 0,
 "supportsDatumTransformation": true,
 "maxRecordCount": 1000,
 "maxImageHeight": 4096,
 "maxImageWidth": 4096,
 "supportedExtensions": ""
}