News Ticker

4 Key State Documents Identifying Structural Racism in Minnesota


The following are excerpts from key state documents identifying structural racism in Minnesota

Using statistical modeling to adjust for these demographic differences and others, the analysis found that while demographic differences are partly responsible for disparities by race and ethnicity, many disparities remained even when the influence of those demographic differences was removed.

In short, race and ethnicity – and not simply other demographic differences – are driving the racial disparities we see in our region.

Diving Deeper Summary: Understanding the Twin Cities Region’s Racial and Ethnic Disparities. Metropolitan Council, April 2016


Structural racism — the normalization of historical, cultural, institutional and interpersonal dynamics that routinely advantage white people while producing cumulative and chronic adverse outcomes for people of color and American Indians — is rarely talked about. Revealing where structural racism is operating and where its effects are being felt is essential for figuring out where policies and programs can make the greatest improvements.

Advancing Health Equity in Minnesota: Report to the Legislature. Minnesota Department of Health February 2014


Differential access to opportunity and structural racism—back through generations and up to the present—have contributed to these and other widely disparate economic outcomes by race. We know with certainty that wide inequities in nearly all measures of well-being exist between groups in Minnesota. However, often the data are gathered and presented by broad racial classifications only. While accurate, those statistics can be deeply unsatisfying for anyone who wishes to know more about how to attack the underlying problems with culturally tailored solutions.

The Economic Status of Minnesotans A Chartbook With Data For 17 Cultural Groups. Minnesota State Demographer. JANUARY 2016


Over the study period for Admin, among M/WBE firms, Hispanic Americans and African Americans were substantially underutilized from 2002 to 2007, resulting in a disparity index for all years of 0.96 and 31.16, respectively. Based on construction and construction-related prime payments, firms owned by Asian Americans, Native Americans, and nonminority women resulted in overall overutilization resulting in disparity indices of 141.64, 170.59, and 127.32, respectively.

Based on the study period, all awarded M/WBE groups, except for Disparity Analysis Page 4-4 firms owned by Asian Americans, were underutilized for construction subcontractor awards. Firms owned by African Americans and nonminority women were substantially underutilized with a disparity index of 0.86 and 5.08, respectively. Firms owned by Hispanic Americans and Native Americans were not awarded any dollars, based on available data reviewed for the study period.

Overall, M/WBE firms were underutilized as professional services consultants during the study period. Firms owned by Hispanic Americans, Asian Americans, and Native Americans were substantially underutilized. M/WBE disparity indices were as follows: 0.38 for Hispanic Americans, 0.99 for Asian Americans, and 37.91 for Native Americans. Overall, nonminority women were underutilized at a disparity index of 98.73. Overall, African Americans firms were overutilized at a disparity index of 885.49.

State of Minnesota Joint Availability and Disparity Study Minnesota Department of Administration FINAL REPORT. 2009, revised 2010.