The State of Minority- and Women- Owned ... - Cleveland.com

Anecdotal Evidence of Disparities in the City of Cleveland’s Market Area
Table 8.6. Prevalence of Disparate Treatment Facing M/WBEs, by Type of Business Dealing
Business Dealings
Applying for commercial loans
Applying for surety bonds
Applying for commercial or
professional insurance
Hiring workers from union hiring
halls
Obtaining price quotes from
suppliers or subcontracts
Working or attempting to obtain
work on public sector prime
contracts
Working or attempting to obtain
work on public sector subcontracts
Working or attempting to obtain
work on private sector prime
contract
Working or attempting to obtain
work on private sector
subcontracts
Receiving timely payment for
work performed
Functioning without hindrance or
harassment on the work site
Joining or dealing with
construction trade associations
Having to do inappropriate or
extra work not required of
comparable non-M/WBEs
Having to meet quality, inspection,
or performance standards not
required of comparable non-
M/WBEs
In any one of the business dealings
listed above
Source: See Table 8.2.
African
American
Hispanic Asian
Native
American
Total
Minority
Nonminority
Female
Total
M/WBEs
44.6% 4.6% 0.0% 22.5% 29.7% 9.0% 11.9%
(4.71) (0.37) (0.00) (1.15) (4.08) (1.93) (2.99)
43.5% 15.8% 0.0% 21.3% 28.6% 2.7% 7.9%
(4.36) (1.11) (0.00) (1.30) (3.92) (0.74) (2.23)
11.5% 19.6% 26.8% 0.0% 13.6% 1.0% 4.0%
(2.44) (1.61) (1.79) (0.00) (2.98) (0.43) (1.75)
0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.1%
(0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (0.00) (1.88) (1.24) (1.85)
34.1% 4.9% 10.4% 0.0% 14.3% 1.6% 4.1%
(5.59) (1.05) (1.58) (0.00) (4.59) (1.18) (2.82)
23.7% -3.0% -4.7% 0.4% 13.5% -10.4% -0.9%
(2.94) (-0.26) (-0.44) (0.02) (2.16) (-2.02) (-0.19)
22.3% 1.1% -8.1% -4.7% 11.9% -10.0% -1.9%
(2.58) (0.09) (-0.66) (-0.25) (1.76) (-1.78) (-0.36)
42.2% 8.4% 17.3% 12.3% 29.6% 4.7% 11.1%
(4.79) (0.73) (1.26) (0.67) (4.31) (0.97) (2.61)
23.8% 7.9% 15.0% 10.1% 19.4% 3.3% 7.9%
(3.07) (0.70) (1.12) (0.56) (3.11) (0.69) (1.91)
29.7% -1.1% 11.5% 17.0% 19.2% -3.1% 3.8%
(3.60) (-0.09) (0.84) (0.87) (3.00) (-0.64) (0.86)
21.7% 16.0% 3.5% 0.0% 15.2% 8.1% 8.3%
(2.97) (1.22) (0.30) (0.00) (2.62) (2.02) (2.47)
0.7% 0.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0.1% 0.0% 0.0%
(1.26) (0.50) (0.00) (0.00) (0.66) (0.08) (0.34)
44.2% 14.0% 13.0% 33.3% 30.2% 7.6% 9.3%
(4.85) (1.29) (1.11) (1.70) (4.34) (2.18) (3.25)
12.6% 4.7% 5.4% 0.0% 7.9% 2.2% 2.7%
(3.22) (1.00) (0.98) (0.00) (2.88) (1.40) (2.21)
36.5% 9.1% -4.6% 0.2% 22.0% 3.7% 9.0%
(4.39) (0.68) (-0.32) (0.01) (3.31) (0.72) (1.91)
Note: Reported estimates are derivatives from Probit models with specification such as in Table 8.5, columns (2). T-statistics are
in parentheses. T-statistics of 1.96 (1.64) or larger indicate that the result is significant within a 95 (90) percent confidence
interval. Adverse results with T-statistics of 1.96 or higher are boldfaced. Adverse results with T-statistics of 1.64 or higher are
boldfaced italicized.
NERA Economic Consulting 276