11c. Attachment 01

Equity Motion and Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Ass

Item Number: 11c_attach 1
Meeting Date: Jan 4, 2022



Port of Seattle Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion
Organizational Assessment 2021 


Port of Seattle
Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (OEDI)


January 2022


1

Contents
Welcome Letter from Bookda Gheisar, OEDI Senior Director                   3
Acknowledgments                                                 4
Executive Summary                                                    5
Introduction and Overview                                               12
Key Issues and Recommended Actions                                   20
Focus Area: Workplace Culture                                           21
Focus Area: Operations and Processes                                    35
Focus Area: Employment                                             45
Focus Area: Equity Capacity Building                                        55
Focus Area: Engaging WMBEs and Small Businesses                       60
Focus Area: Engaging Impacted Communities                             65
Appendices                                                         71







2

Welcome Letter
Dear Friends,
In 2019, the Port of Seattle became the first port authority in the country to establish an office
of equity. In doing so, our organization made an initial commitment of time and resources to
embed equity, diversity, and inclusion into the fabric of the organization. Also, by creating the
Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (OEDI), the Port acknowledged that for too long it has
benefited from white-dominant culture and comfortably operated in an unjust, racist society.
By failing to acknowledge these inequities, the organization realized that it was playing a role in
perpetuating them.
We are committed to doing better for our organization and for the communities we serve. We
are committed to becoming an equitable, anti-racist organization. The Port aspires to be an
organization that mirrors  throughout its breadth of operations and services and within its
leadership structure  the diversity of our community, instills principles of equity in its culture,
and ensures a fair and intentional distribution of opportunities with the goal of expanding
economic development and quality of life for all. There is much work ahead of us to truly realize
this goal. There will continue to be successes and setbacks, and we are in it for the long haul.
This report, and the recommended actions for change that it includes, is a step towards this
goal. In the pages that follow, you will read over a year's worth of work to actively advance
equity within the Port while building a strong foundation for sustainable change. This report
draws on our employees' perceptions and experiences as it relates to our culture, policies, and
practices. We have many strengths to build on and many achievements to celebrate. We also
have many opportunities for growth and progress.
To address the patterns of disparities and inequities identified by employees, this report puts
forward a set of robust recommendations that are both prescriptive and aspirational. Our
recommendations include gathering more data and analysis in some cases to identify the
specific potential disparities. Any one recommendation by itself may seem insufficient - one
piece of a giant puzzle. But together, they complete a picture - a vision for transformational
change. Through these recommendations, we will foster a culture of belonging and inclusion;
we will build authentic, meaningful relationships with the communities we serve; and we will
set a national standard for what a racially equitable government can truly be.
Creating an anti-racist, equitable Port requires commitment and perseverance. We need
everyone, Port leadership and staff, community partners, and contractors, to work together to
improve our practices and generate lasting, transformative change. Together we will succeed.
In Unity,

Bookda Gheisar, Senior Director, Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion

3

Acknowledgments
A debt of gratitude is owed to all who contributed to this assessment and report. Equally
important is a special thanks to all Port employees who are - in big and small ways - advancing
racial equity in our organization, creating a culture of inclusion and belonging, and building
bridges with one another in the name of transformational progress.
With the understanding that the full list of acknowledgments and thanks is too long for this
report alone, the following individuals and departments deserve specific mention.
Blacks in Government
Business Intelligence team: Michael Drollinger and Bettina Friese 
Central Procurement Office: Nora Huey and Sofia Mayo 
Consultant to OEDI on this project: Trang Tu 
The Change Team (see Appendix B)
Diversity in Contracting team: Mian Rice and Lawrence Coleman 
External Relations team: Sally del Fierro, Andy Gregory, Ilays Aden, and Peaches Thomas
Human Resources team: Katie Gerard, Kim DesMarais, Tracy Patterson, Ericka Singh, and
Cynthia Alvarez
Legal: Pete Ramels and Ryan Stamper
Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion team: Alison Beason, Jay Doran, Carl Hugle, Luis
Navarro, William Walker, Bushra Zaman, and Morayo Kamson 
Port of Seattle leadership: Steve Metruck and Commissioner Sam Cho 
Strategic Initiatives team: Marin Burnett and Pennie Saum






4

Executive Summary 
The Port of Seattle is committed to working both regionally and nationally to achieve equity
and justice for all. The Port recognizes our essential role in building a socially just institution by
dismantling the structural barriers that have prevented the full participation of our most
marginalized communities.
Since 2017, the Port has stepped up efforts to integrate equity into its work including by
creating a standalone Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (OEDI) in 2019. OEDI's mission is
to build capacity across the organization to address institutional oppression and to transform
Port policies, practices, and processes. OEDI has used the three-pronged framework outlined in
the Port's Equity Strategic Plan to 1) normalize, 2) organize, and 3) operationalize equity Portwide.
Already, OEDI has made major progress in its first few years of existence, from trainings and
assessments focused on improving equity within the Port to shaping the implementation of
externally facing efforts like the South King County Fund and the development of the Port's
Equity Index. However, there is clearly more work to be done, and so, on October 13, 2020, the
Port of Seattle Commission adopted Motion 2020-19, known as the Racial Bias & Equity
Motion, "[t]o direct the Executive Director to examine Port operations and policies for sources
of racial bias and discrimination and to develop programs and policies eliminating inequity in all
aspects of the organization." This document reports back on the tasks contained in the Motion.
The findings and recommendations contained in this report draw on input gathered from
several employee engagement efforts  ranging from Port-wide initiatives, such as the 2021
Equity Survey, to focused gatherings to solicit feedback from specific groups of employees, like
EDI Assessment Listening Sessions. Each of these efforts is described, along with a summary of
the results, in the report and its appendices. OEDI also utilized employee feedback to vet and
finalize this report document, ensuring that it accurately reflected the inputs received.
The results of this effort are fifteen key issues grouped into six focus areas.
Workplace Culture
Operations and Processes
Employment
Equity Capacity Building
Engaging WMBEs and Small Businesses
Engaging Impacted Communities
Each of these focus areas represent an opportunity to address concerns and make progress in
key areas of Port-wide equity. Furthermore, to ensure that the Port turns issues into action, this
report lists 50 clear, tangible next steps that can be implemented beginning in 2022, beyond
the steps already taken on each of these fronts. The full report contains additional details on
each of these recommended actions, including further discussion of the issues and concerns
5

raised by Port employees on each topic as well as existing progress to date on the issues
identified.
Finally, it is critical to note that this report reflects a synthesis of input and key issues expressed
by all employees and drawing from multiple sources of evidence as described above. However,
the data also indicate that individual experiences of equity, diversity, and inclusion across the
Port vary widely.
Specifically, issues and concerns often fall along racial and gender lines, with some employees
indicating satisfaction with the status quo and/or less concern, while others face greater
barriers, have comparatively greater concerns, and/or are more negatively impacted by racism
and other inequities. The latter groups include Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC),
women, and represented employees. As one employee noted, "It's a tale of two Ports."
Black, Indigenous and People of Color. A recurrent pattern was that BIPOC employees,
especially Black/African American workers, expressed greater concerns about racism
and other inequities, across almost all topical issues, whether hiring or compensation or
workplace culture. This was especially evidenced in the qualitative data of the Equity
Survey.
Women, with a focus on women of color. Women employees also shared gender-based
concerns across several of the employee engagement activities. In the Equity Survey, for
example, respondents called for consideration of other aspects of equity besides race,
with gender equity mentioned most often.
Represented and off-shift workers. This group of employees expressed unique
challenges, including lack of access to professional development opportunities,
inadequate support for participation in equity activities from their supervisors, and
often not being included in or provided meaningful access to Port-wide equity or
professional development activities.
Additionally, intersectionality compounds inequities. For example, women of color, or
Black represented workers, expressed even greater barriers and inequities.
Informed by the experiences of these specific groups, this report intentionally strives to
recognize these inequities and take a proactive, racial equity centered approach. In the
report, this is done by spotlighting perspectives from these groups, and integrating
Recommended Actions specific to these groups throughout the Recommendations.



6

Table of Issues and Recommendations
Fifteen key issues were identified from the various sources of input previously described. These are grouped into six focus areas:
Workplace Culture, Operations and Processes, Employment, Equity Capacity Building, Engaging WMBEs and Small Businesses, and
Engaging Impacted Communities. These are shown below along with a Summary of Recommended Actions for each issue.
Table 1. Equity Assessment Focus Areas, Key Issues and Summary of Recommended Actions
Focus Areas                  Key Issues                           Summary of Recommended Actions
1.     Ongoing racial equity training and development for Port of
Seattle's leadership.
1. Inconsistencies in Port-wide
2. Policy Directive to codify equity
vision for and commitment to
3. Continue communication efforts to make information accessible
equity
4. OEDI on-site presence at SEA Airport Office Building (AOB) and
maritime locations
5. OEDI continues EDI learning opportunities (e.g., book clubs,
caucusing, etc.) to normalize racial equity, including accessible
training opportunities for represented and shift employees.
6. Language and Meaning Initiative on how to use language that is
equitable and inclusive.
Workplace Culture      2. Lack of open dialogue about
7. Uplift examples of supervisors and employees who are advancing
equity and racism
racial equity.
8. Targeted caucuses.
9. Strengthen the Change Team's impact.
10. Identify and address equity and anti-racism as central to the
Port's Special initiative to address anti-black racism.
11. Each year, ERGs, D&D Council, Change Team, and OEDI review
and coordinate annual work plans and priorities including
3. Lack of BIPOC representation
budgeting needs. 
and voice in decision making
12. Develop organizational policies, practices, and mechanisms for
participation in decision making tailored to specific groups.
7

Table 1. Equity Assessment Focus Areas, Key Issues and Summary of Recommended Actions
Focus Areas                  Key Issues                           Summary of Recommended Actions
13. Town Hall briefing for new Commissioners to discuss potential
collaboration and partnership.
14. Set baseline for, track progress on, and publish data on racial and
gender diversity in senior level positions and higher.
15. Curriculum and training for supervisors that increases
supervisors' comfort with addressing issues of race and gender.
4. Lack of safety and a fear of
16. Training to increase supervisors' awareness of what constitutes
retaliation when reporting
retaliation.
racism and discrimination
17. Human Resources to offer training on the fair and consistent
application of HR-18 and Code of Conduct policy.
18. Workplace Responsibility and Employee Relations continue
process improvement and report back in 2022.
19. Increase communication and clarity about how Workplace
Responsibility and Employee Relations processes work.
20. Workplace Responsibility and Employee Relations will publish an
annual report.
Operations and        5. Unclear discrimination         21. Title VI reporting issues will be clarified by OEDI, Legal, and
Processes                 reporting process                 Employee Relations.
22. Develop a process for consultants and contractors to report
issues of discrimination.
23. Additional training for represented workers on reporting
discrimination.
24. Port-wide dialogue about reporting discrimination and manager
accountability.


8

Table 1. Equity Assessment Focus Areas, Key Issues and Summary of Recommended Actions
Focus Areas                  Key Issues                           Summary of Recommended Actions
25. Executive Director, Commission, Executive Leadership Team lead
by example.
26. Consistent and on-going messaging from Port leadership to all
supervisors about the importance of leaders' accountability to
6. Gaps in critical role of
Port values and EDI.
supervisors1 
27. Foundational EDI training for all new supervisors and additional
advanced racial equity training for all supervisors.
28. Develop EDI performance goals, competency, and evaluation
best practices for all supervisors.
29. Trainings and technical assistance on how to integrate equity
7. Inconsistent integration of          into department budgeting processes.
equity in key Port-wide         30. Training and working group to develop skills, expertise, and
processes                        capacity on using data with an equity lens.
31. Starting in 2022, all departments set annual EDI goals.
32. Integrate equity considerations more deeply into the interview
8. Inequities in recruitment,           and hiring process.
hiring, and qualifications        33. Develop system to track equity indicators in hiring processes.
34. Increase BIPOC representation in leadership positions.
Employment                                     35. Make salary information more accessible and easier to find.
36. Additional work on compensation equity: complete Port-wide
9. Inequities in compensation         analysis, establish a definition and philosophy for pay equity,
determine potential remediation, and implement a new pay
program.

1 In this report, "supervisors" includes employees with at least one direct report.
9

Table 1. Equity Assessment Focus Areas, Key Issues and Summary of Recommended Actions
Focus Areas                  Key Issues                           Summary of Recommended Actions
37. Performance Link goal for all supervisors to provide training and
development opportunities to all employees interested in
advancing.
38. Assess if certain formal education or credentials are needed to
10. Barriers to advancement for        perform the essential functions of open jobs.
internal candidates             39. Develop system to track promotion of internal candidates.
40. Increase staff awareness about the Port's internal mentorship
program.
41. Improved supervisor training on how to use coaching and
mentoring as a management practice.
42. Expand equity-related training activities.
43. Explore the need to create dedicated funding to support
Equity Capacity         11. Barriers to participation           employee participation in EDI efforts, especially for represented
Building                    resources and resistance           workers.
44. Explore development of a policy to allow and support employee
participation in equity learning activities.
45. Assessment of barriers for small businesses and WMBEs to
12. Barriers for WMBEs and small      contract with the Port.
businesses                    46. Strengthen internal communication and training about
contracting processes with WMBEs and small businesses.
Engaging WMBEs and                                47. For all new contracts, add provisions for language services, anti-
Small Businesses                                             harassment language, and integrate anti-bias video review and
13. Barriers in procurement            discussion in contract evaluation panels.
processes                     48. Support community partnerships by reducing paperwork,
expediting contracts, and creating feedback loops and a
dedicated CPO team for CBO engagement.

10

Table 1. Equity Assessment Focus Areas, Key Issues and Summary of Recommended Actions
Focus Areas                  Key Issues                           Summary of Recommended Actions
49. Continue work to stand up and operationalize the Community
Equity Board.
50. Create processes and best practices for how the Port engages
14. Lack of empowered and
communities.
meaningful ways for external
51. Ongoing training and support to develop employees' skills to
stakeholders to engage with
navigate power dynamics, build authentic relationships, and
Engaging Impacted        the Port
engage communities in inclusive, meaningful ways.
Communities
52. Create dedicated funding to support and remove barriers for
community engagement.
15. Challenging processes for
community-based            53. Continue process and system improvements in Port's community
organizations to contract with      investment programs.
the Port






11

Introduction and Overview 

1. History and Background 
The Port of Seattle is committed to working both regionally and nationally to achieve equity
and justice for all. The Port recognizes our essential role in building a socially just institution
by dismantling the structural barriers that have prevented the full participation of our most
marginalized communities.
Since 2017, the Port has stepped up efforts to integrate equity into its work including, in
2019, creating its first Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (OEDI). OEDI's mission is to
build capacity across the organization to address institutional oppression and to transform
Port policies, practices, and processes. To date, OEDI has led major initiatives to advance
equity within the Port of Seattle. Notable accomplishments are highlighted below,
organized by the three-pronged framework of the Port's Equity Strategic Plan: normalize,
organize, and operationalize equity.
Normalizing Equity
Deepened employees' understanding about equity and anti-racism through
trainings, workshops, and speaker events
Joined the Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE), a national network of
governments working to achieve racial equity
Participated in and organized local and national racial equity efforts, including
coordinating an ongoing West Coast Port Partners Meeting to discuss equitable
strategies pertaining to COVID-19, budgeting tools, and best practices for advancing
equity
Supported Port employees during the 2020 Black Lives Matter movement and civil
unrest, organizing opportunities and providing resources for employees to increase
awareness of racial justice and engage in equity work
Organizing for Equity
Developed the Port's first Equity Strategic Plan in 2020, and updated it in 2021
Developed and implemented Port-wide policies to integrate equity systemically,
including mandatory equity trainings for supervisors and all employees
In 2020-21, conducted a series of trainings including Change Team Foundational
Training, Staff Racial Equity Orientation, and Supervisor Racial Equity Training, with
participation by 975 Port employees

12

Undertaking or partnering with other departments to conduct major assessments of
equity, diversity, and inclusion at the Port, including an EDI Assessment, and Port
Police Assessment, Women of Color Assessment
Laid the groundwork for formation of a first-time Port Community Equity Board to
ensure community stakeholders can influence Port decision-making that impacts
communities and hold the Port accountable to the public
Operationalizing Equity
Updated the Port's Century Agenda by adding a goal for the Port to "Become a
Model for Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion." Through this goal, the Port of Seattle will
ensure that equity is at the core of all our work and the principles the Port embodies
Supported the Port Commission to establish the Equity and Workforce Development
(EWFD) Standing Committee in 2020
Formed a Port-wide Change Team, an all-departmental cross-functional team of
employees to lead equity work across the Port
Supported creation of the Port's Workforce Development department to lead the
Port's efforts to improve wage equity and career development in Port-related
industries for port-impacted communities, communities of color, and low-income
communities
Created and implemented of the South King County Fund Economic Recovery
Program and the Opportunity Youth Initiative  two Port programs that are leading
an equitable economic recovery in our region, particularly in South Seattle
Developed core principles for the Port's COVID-19 economic recovery framework to
account for how some in our community have borne a much more difficult burden
during the pandemic as the Port is actively working to include those most impacted
in its recovery efforts
Developed the Port's first Equity Index  as a tool for the Port to understand the
degree to which different communities experience pollution burdens and social
inequities and use that information to direct resources towards the areas of greatest
need




13

2. Purpose and Scope of Report
Port of Seattle Commission Motion. On October 13, 2020, the Port of Seattle Commission
adopted Motion 2020-19, known as the Racial Bias & Equity Motion, "To direct the
Executive Director to examine Port operations and policies for sources of racial bias and
discrimination and to develop programs and policies eliminating inequity in all aspects of
the organization."2 
The Motion directed the Port to take: "additional steps beyond what the OEDI Strategic
Plan has set out to achieve by directing the Port to align those policies and procedures
which will result in the development of a comprehensive policy. This will establish the Port,
locally and nationally, as a leader in this work, illustrating our commitment to act, learn, and
progress as an organization that values and centers EDI, accountability, and transparency." 3 
Provisions in the Motion directed the Port's Executive Director, or designee, to complete
and report on several key tasks by October 30, 2021. Below is a summary of those tasks. See
Appendix A for the full Motion.
1. Convene Port employees and offer learnings and deeper analysis of anti-Black
racism.
2. Develop, require, and conduct racial equity and unconscious bias training for
Commissioners, the Executive Director, the Executive Leadership Team, supervisors,
and employees.
3. Establish an internal Change Team with representatives from each division and
department within the Port to assess the current state of equity, diversity, and
inclusion for all teams. Conduct and report on assessment.
4. In addition to the Port-wide assessment conducted by the Change Team, OEDI will
review the policies and issuesidentified by Port employees as the most challenging
barriers to fairly accessing resources and opportunities at the Port: employee
development, promotion and compensation; recruitment, hiring, retention, and
promotion of Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) Port-wide; policies and
practices impacting BIPOC contractors and WMBEs, with a particular focus on firms
owned by Black descendants; contracting and procurement policies and practices
impacting community organizations' and contractors' access to Port resources; and
other areas identified through OEDI employee engagement.
5. Create a Community Advisory Board to ensure the Port is accountable to the public in
the integration of equity principles into the Port's work. 4 

2 Motion 2020-19. Port of Seattle Commission. October 13, 2020.
3 Motion 2020-19. Port of Seattle Commission. October 13, 2020.
4 Motion 2020-19. Port of Seattle Commission. October 13, 2020.
14

Scope of Report. This document reports back on the tasks contained in the Motion. The rest
of this Introduction section includes a description of the methodology by which the tasks
were completed, issues analyzed, and recommendations developed. It also spotlights three
key employee populations that face disproportionate inequities. The main section of the
report presents fifteen Key Issues that emerged from the organizational assessment, along
with Recommended Actions to address each.
Implementation. Once approved by Port leadership, the Recommended Actions in this
report will be translated into implementation actions with associated progress milestones.
These will be integrated into OEDI's 2022 Strategic Plan. OEDI will manage and coordinate
implementation by various departments, with an aim to report back to the Port Commission
at the end of 2022.

3. Process and Methodology
Stakeholder Input. The findings and recommendations contained in this report drew on
input gathered from several employee engagement efforts. These ranged from Port-wide
initiatives, such as the Equity Survey, which reached out to all employees, to focused
gatherings to solicit feedback from specific groups of employees whose voices have often
been under-represented and/or who face unique or additional barriers that warrant
intentional targeted outreach. The table below lists all the source reports and documents
reviewed. The full report for each is included in the Appendices.
Table 2. Employee Input  Source Reports and Documents
Source and # of Employees Engaged                      Focus of Input
Equity Survey  Quantitative Results           Survey Goal: Examine key aspects of the
organization that are relevant to advancing
1,306 respondents Port-wide (61 percent of diversity, inclusion, and racial equity.
all Port employees)
Survey topics:
Work Culture
Operations and Processes
Community Engagement
Hiring, Promotions, Compensation and
Employee Development
Contracting and Use of WMBEs
Personal Experiences and Satisfaction
Equity Survey  Qualitative Results             Qualitative data came from open-ended
questions within Equity Survey on each survey
Sub-set of 505 survey respondents           topic.

15

Table 2. Employee Input  Source Reports and Documents
Source and # of Employees Engaged                      Focus of Input
1,230 total comments
EDI Assessment Listening Sessions             Participants examined specific findings from
Equity Survey to identify root causes and
18 sessions from 7/20/21-9/17/21            brainstorm solutions
283 participants, duplicated 
155 participants, unduplicated (49 from
Aviation, 17 from Maritime, 85 from
Central Services, 8 from EDD) 
Change Team Formation and Self-Assessment  Ongoing work to create organizational
infrastructure for infusing equity into Port-wide
122 Change Team members (47 sponsors,   operations
75 Core members)
Equity in Budgeting Department Survey        Survey asking each department if and how they
are integrating equity into budgeting processes.
Completed by 20 departments in Corporate
Division, 24 departments in Aviation
Division and 13 departments in Maritime
and Economic Development Divisions.
Represented Workers Task Force Report       Focused conversations about specific barriers
experienced by represented and off-shift workers. 
Input from 2 sources:
Responses to Equity Survey from 393
represented employees responded
Meetings with represented employees
hosted by OEDI and Strategic Initiatives
Blacks in Government Input and               Input and recommendations from convening of
Recommendations                         Blacks in Government Employee Group.
Port of Seattle 2020-21 Racial Equity Trainings Write-up of participation in, outputs of and
Final Report                                   learning outcomes from racial equity trainings in
2020-21
Change Team Foundational Training: 67
participants, 4 training sessions, 8 training
hours, 2 groups

16

Table 2. Employee Input  Source Reports and Documents
Source and # of Employees Engaged                      Focus of Input
Staff Racial Equity Orientation: 431
participants, 1 orientation session, 3
orientation hours, 5 groups
Supervisor Racial Equity Training: 384
participants, 3 training sessions, 8 training
hours, 5 groups
Black Lives Matter Caucusing Series            A series of caucus events in the aftermath of the
killing of George Floyd, Ahmaud Arbery and
7 events from 6/5/2020  8/7/2020          Breonna Taylor, to offer a space for employees to
gather, process, reflect and recommit to fighting
1,045 participants (duplicated); 344
racism. This report draws on a summary of
participants (unduplicated)
participation in and outcomes of these sessions,
79 participants completed survey            including results of post-session evaluations.
Port of Seattle South King County Fund 2020:   A report from consultants who supported the
Economic Recovery Grants Program Cycle 1    process of launching the first cycle of the South
Report and Recommendations from          King County Fund. The report summarizes the
Consultants                                 implementation of the Fund's first cycle and
provides recommendations for improvements.
This report also includes surveys and
communication with organizations who attended
Q&A sessions to learn more about the Fund.
Non-Represented Employees Compensation   Several documents describing the Human
Program Review                          Resources Department's Non-Represented
Employees Compensation process and timeline:
Over 900 survey responses (90% response
rate)                                               Employee Survey Summary (Sept 2021)
17 focus groups attended by close to 200       Focus Group and Employee Survey Comment
employees                               Themes (Sept 2021)
Group interview/focus group with Port         Comp Project Employee Survey and Focus
Executive Leadership Team                    Groups Results Summary (10/1/2021)
Comp Program Review Recommendations
(ELT Meeting  10/29/21)
Comp Project Pre-Read  Consultant
Recommendations (10/29/21)

17

OEDI analysis of input and development of recommendations. After gathering employee
input from the sources listed above, OEDI undertook an analysis of each source of input to
surface key themes, issues, and suggestions for potential solutions or actions. OEDI engaged
and worked with external consultant Trang Tu to complete an "analysis of analyses,"
reviewing across all sources to identify the most prevalent themes, issues and
recommendations, and reviewed in concert with the requirements of Motion 2020-19.
In developing the recommendations in this report, OEDI also engaged Port employees and
colleagues in several ways. First, OEDI hosted two meetings with Change Team members in
early November 2021 and met with two Employee Resource Groups (ERGs)  Blacks in
Government, and the Native American Committee  to solicit their review and feedback.
Over 200 employees attended sessions and gave input towards the recommendations in
this assessment. Second, OEDI consulted with senior employees in key departments
including Human Resources, Legal, Diversity in Contracting and the Office of Workplace
Responsibility, to share the experience and concerns of Port employees, share draft
recommendations developed informed by employees' experiences, and solicit their
feedback. The content of this report reflects the results of both the meta-analysis and
consultation with internal stakeholders.
OEDI and Strategic Initiatives' Collaboration. EDI and Continuous Process Improvement
(CPI), which is led by the Strategic Initiatives department, are two of the most important
executive priorities for the organization. Throughout the past year, OEDI and Strategic
Initiatives have partnered closely to implement the elements of the Racial Bias and Equity
Motion, especially the Equity Survey, EDI Assessment Listening Sessions, Change Team, and
Represented Workers Task Force.
The advancement of EDI and CPI are critical to the success of the Port. Both efforts align
with and contribute to the goals of the Port's Century agenda, especially Goal 5 (Become a
Model of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion) and Goal 6 (Become a Highly Effective Public
Agency). Additionally, when we center and invest in EDI and CPI, we create and sustain a
culture of inclusion, belonging, and learning. All levels of the organization  from individual
contributors and frontline workers to supervisors to the ELT and Commission  gain more
clarity, direction, and purpose. Through EDI and CPI, we can address specific concerns
voiced by employees through recent assessments and survey, especially reports of BIPOC
employees being undervalued, departments failing to evaluate their work in terms of
equity, employees lacking the knowledge and understanding of how EDI and CPI are
relevant to their work, and the challenge of fully integrating represented and shift workers
into the programming and culture of the organization. The goals and visions for EDI and CPI
are similar and intersecting. Integrating these efforts will enable the Port of Seattle to
create a diverse culture of equity, inclusion and problem solving.
With this in mind, OEDI and Strategic Initiatives will continue to partner and collaborate to
advance EDI and CPI within the organization, and these two departments will work closely
to support the implementation of the Recommended Actions detailed in this report.

18

4. Spotlight: Barriers and Inequities for Specific Groups
This report reflects a synthesis of input and key issues expressed by all employees, drawing
from multiple sources of evidence as described in the previous section. However, the data
also indicate that individual experiences of equity, diversity and inclusion vary widely.
Specifically, concerns often fall along racial and gender lines, with some employees being
less concerned or satisfied with the status quo, while others have greater concerns, and/or
are more negatively impacted by racism and other inequities. The latter include BIPOC,
female and represented employees. As one employee noted, "It's a tale of two Ports."
Black, Indigenous and People of Color (BIPOC). A recurrent pattern was that BIPOC
employees, especially Black/African American workers, expressed greater concerns
about racial and other inequities, across almost all topical issues, whether hiring or
compensation or workplace culture. This was especially evidenced in comments to the
Equity Survey. Through an effort of Blacks in Government, Black employees in particular
shared feedback and recommendations about pay equity, training and development,
barriers in access to contracting for Black businesses, Port policies and procedures,
accountability for equity and inclusion, and issues of representation.
Women, with a focus on women of color. Female employees also shared gender-based
concerns. In the Equity Survey, for example, respondents called for consideration of
other aspects of equity besides race, with gender equity mentioned most often. This
was also more likely to be voiced by female respondents compared to male
respondents, which was also the case for many other issues in the survey.
Represented and off-shift workers. A third group with additional barriers is represented
and off-shift workers. Both the Equity Survey and OEDI Listening Sessions I heard this
group of employees express unique challenges including lack of access to professional
development, inadequate support from supervisors for participation in equity activities,
and often not being included in or provided meaningful access to Port-wide equity or
professional development activities. Their recommendations included: organizing
meeting opportunities with accessible locations and times, expanding equity training
requirements for all represented workers, and holding their supervisors more
accountable for supporting their participation in equity activities.
Additionally, intersectionality compounds inequities. For example, women of color, or black
represented workers, face even greater barriers. This is part of the motivation for a Women
of Color assessment OEDI is currently undertaking to examine some of these intersectional
patterns of disparity. To date, 131 female employees of color, accounting for nearly half of
all female employees of color at the Port, have registered to be part of the assessment.
Informed by learning from these specific groups, this report intentionally strives to
recognize these inequities, avoid being race-blind or gender-blind, and takes a pro-active,
pro-equity approach. In the report, this is done by spotlighting perspectives from these
groups, and integrating Recommended Actions specific to these groups. 
19

Key Issues and Recommended Actions
Fifteen key issues were identified from the input previously described, grouped into six areas: Workplace Culture, Operations and
Processes, Employment, Equity Capacity Building, Engaging WMBEs and Small Businesses, and Engaging Impacted Communities.
Table 3. Equity Assessment Focus Areas and Key Issues
Focus Areas                                                 Key Issues
1.  Inconsistencies in Port-wide vision for and commitment to equity
2.  Lack of open dialogue about equity and racism
Workplace Culture
3.  Lack of BIPOC representation and voice in decision making
4.  Lack of safety and a fear of retaliation when reporting racism and discrimination
5.  Unclear discrimination reporting process
Operations and Processes        6. Gaps in critical role of supervisors5 
7.  Inconsistent integration of equity in key Port-wide processes
8.  Inequities in recruitment, hiring, and qualifications
Employment                 9. Inequities in compensation
10. Barriers to advancement for internal candidates
Equity Capacity Building          11.  Barriers to participation  resources and resistance
Engaging WMBEs and Small      12.  Barriers for WMBEs and small businesses
Businesses                      13.  Barriers in procurement processes
14.  Lack of empowered and meaningful ways for external stakeholders to engage with the Port
Engaging Impacted Communities
15.  Challenging processes for community-based organizations to contract with the Port
For each of the fifteen Key Issues, the following section reports on and summarizes: 1. Key Concerns and Input, 2. Progress to Date,
and 3. Recommended Actions. Throughout, the report also highlights intersections with race and gender where there are unique
concerns, disproportionate impacts, and/or need for targeted solutions.

5 In this report, "supervisors" includes employees with at least one direct report.
20

Focus Area: Workplace Culture 
Issue 1. Inconsistencies in Port-wide vision for and commitment to equity
Key Concerns and Input
Employees responding to the Port's 2021 Equity Survey shared a range of views on the Port's overall commitment to equity.
Among those who added comments, nearly 80 characterized the Port's work on equity in positive terms, while an additional 90
gave a more mixed view, recognizing efforts while also acknowledging more work needs to be done. A smaller number of
comments said that inequities persist at the Port, especially due to an entrenched white male power structure. 6
Comments about Port leadership championing equity were also mixed. Employees cited Port leaders communicating openly,
setting examples, focusing on systemic changes, and creating space for employees to be involved. Others expressed needs for
leadership to continue voicing commitments, encouraging employee participation, and ensuring dialogue leads to actual
results.7
Employees voiced similar comments from the Port's Black Lives Matter Caucusing series, where participants said the Port's
goals and vision for EDI are inspiring and ambitious, that leadership support for advancing equity has been critical to creating
momentum and energy for change, and that this needs to be sustained.8
Integration of equity into day-to-day operations across Port departments remains a work in progress. Most respondents to
the Equity Survey who commented on this issue affirmed this need, with a prevailing theme that there are variations across
departments in how much EDI is prioritized. Factors cited include lack of information and knowledge on how to integrate
equity into the work, attitude, and willingness of supervisor(s) and/or other team members, and for some employees, the


6 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for the Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
7 Ibid.
8 Summary Report on Black Lives Matter Caucusing Series. Hosted by the Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June - August 2020.
21

belief that equity considerations are not relevant for their areas of work. Several comments also said it is important to translate
dialogue, language, and policy into concrete actions and changes.9 
Additionally, only 30.9 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that their work-related projects and/or assignments
are periodically evaluated in terms of their impact on racial equity. Employees cited numerous reasons for this, including
budgeting and resources, fear, lack of BIPOC representation in leadership, organizational structure, and lack of training and
skills.10
Finally, EDI Assessment Listening Sessions, hosted by OEDI from July through September 2021, surfaced other input related to
transparency and the need to better publicize EDI efforts, department EDI goals, and all Port employee's salary information.11 
Progress to Date
Building leadership and champions for racial equity. Recognizing the long-term effort required to integrate equity into all
aspects of Port operations, OEDI has put in significant and sustained effort to create a strong foundation for this work. Over the
past year, OEDI led the creation of a Port-wide Change Team, in collaboration with all Port departments.
Mandated in September 2020 by the Port Commission's Racial Bias and Equity Motion, the Change Team is a Port-wide cohort
of employees from all departments, teams, and leadership levels. Their mission is to engage all levels of the Port in using an
equity framework in their daily work and decisions. The Change Team is working to fulfill this mission by working with
leadership to develop Port-wide equity goals and working within their respective teams to develop Department-specific equity
goals.
Members of the Change Team include sponsors who are directors from each department who provide institutional sponsorship
and accountability, and Core Members, who are nominated by Department directors to serve on the team. Members learn to
use a systemic and structural lens to inform creative changes to policies and procedures; develop a shared understanding and

9 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Quantitative Data. Prepared by Business Intelligence Unit for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June 2021.
10 EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. July - September 2021. Port of Seattle Equity Survey
Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
11 EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. July - September 2021.
22

vision of equity at the Port and champion that vision; and have the responsibility to continue to deepen their learning and the
learning of their department/team around issues of equity, racism, and social justice.
During the first six months of the Change Team, Core Members participated in monthly, in-depth racial equity trainings that
taught them foundational terminology and concepts, root cause analysis skills, and tools to evaluate the effectiveness of
programs in terms of racial equity impact. After completing their training, Core Members were asked to evaluate their ability to
advance racial equity. Results (below) indicate positive impact in their knowledge and capacity to lead integration of equity
Port-wide.
Summary of Change Team Self-Assessment Results 
Core Members are growing and pushing themselves to become racial equity champions within the organization.
Core Members recognize that racial equity is a process and learning is ongoing.
Core Members are developing abilities to address racism at both interpersonal and institutional levels.
Core Members are developing abilities to identify patterns of racial disparities (i.e., racial inequities).
The trainings provided to Core Members have been effective at growing their skills, analysis, and confidence to do racial
equity work. 12 
For additional details about the progress of the Change Team's work, see Appendix F.
Strengthening skills and knowledge about racial equity. 882 Port employees participated in racial equity training during the
past year, gaining greater knowledge and skills about how to integrate equity into daily operations. In post-training evaluations,
participants said that they:
Gained specific strategies to address racial bias,
Connected to ideas for individual application of racial equity concepts, and

12 Change Team Formation and Self-Assessment Report. OEDI. September 2021. Change Team Self-Assessment Data. Compiled by OEDI. March 2021.
23

Wished to seek greater institutional and structural changes.13 
Additional Progress. During 2020 and 2021, the Port also accomplished the following: established Juneteenth as a Port-paid
holiday; refreshed organizational values to include anti-racism and equity; updated the Port's Century Agenda to include a goal
to "Become a Model of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion"; passed a Racial Bias and Equity Motion directing OEDI to conduct a
Port-wide EDI Assessment; instituted an Indigenous land acknowledgment at the beginning of all public Commission meetings;
and produced consistent and ongoing equity-focused communication (internal and external) from the highest levels of the
organization (Executive Director and Commission).
With regards to communication about EDI efforts, the Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion implements multiple tools
including sharing information on the OEDI webpage and Compass, sending monthly updates internally to employees and
externally to community stakeholders, publishing annual reports and conducting annual planning, and hosting quarterly OEDI
Town Halls.
Building a sustainable commitment to racial equity. In 2021, multiple existing policies were revised with the support of OEDI
and Port employee input. Among these were: HR policies for recruitment, hiring, and code of conduct; Port-wide processes for
annual budgeting; and Title VI reporting and planning.
In 2021, new policies were passed to require an assessment of all Port policing practices, and an Equity motion was passed,
mandating this organizational assessment and requiring an annual report in future years from all departments.
Recommended Actions
1. Commit to ongoing racial equity training and development for Port of Seattle's leadership. (Lead: ELT)
2. Port Commission adopts first time Policy Directive to codify equity in every aspect of the organization and to build long
term sustainable efforts towards organizational transformation. (Lead: Commission and OEDI)

13 Port of Seattle 2020-21 Racial Equity Trainings Report. Equity Matters. October 2021.
24

3.  Continue communication efforts to make information accessible to all stakeholders, including responding to information
needs of specific groups like represented and off-shift workers and people without computers (ongoing). OEDI develops
new communication materials for employees around the Port to use (such as posters, calendars, placards). (Lead: OEDI)
4. OEDI institutes a consistent on-site presence at SEA Airport Office Building (AOB) and maritime locations to meet with
employees, build relationships with departments in Aviation and Maritime, and improve communication about the Port's
EDI efforts. (Lead: OEDI)










25

Focus Area: Workplace Culture
Issue 2. Lack of open dialogue about equity and racism
Key Concerns and Input
On the topic of workplace culture, employee feedback surfaced needs for improvement in encouraging safe space for open
dialogue about equity and racism. The Port Equity Survey data showed that: 71.8 percent of respondents agreed or strongly
agreed that BIPOC identities and expressions are respected through words and actions; 66.8 percent of respondents agreed or
strongly agreed that leaders encourage and facilitate open dialogue about racial/ethnic issues; and 57.6 percent of respondents
agreed or strongly agreed that they feel comfortable talking openly about issues related to diversity, equity, and inclusion at the
Port of Seattle.14 
Over 285 survey comments about workplace culture provided additional insight, especially from employees of color, who
expressed specific concerns including:
Fear of backlash and discomfort discussing a sensitive topic like race, and
The work environment is not welcoming to all cultures, including employees of color, who reported experiencing disrespect
and racism.15 
Progress to Date 
The Port's ERGs have focused their events more on systems change by offering learning opportunities, presentations, and
panel discussions on racial equity.


14 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Quantitative Data. Prepared by Business Intelligence Unit for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June 2021.
15 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
26

OEDI has offered book clubs; podcast clubs; caucuses on racial equity; quarterly OEDI town halls; the creation and integration
of Equity Moments in team meetings across the organization; and other ongoing opportunities for employees to learn and
engage. In 2021, more than 1,110 employees (duplicate count) participated in OEDI's programming.
In the aftermath of the killings of George Floyd, Breonna Taylor, and Ahmaud Arbery, from June through August of 2020, OEDI
hosted a seven-part Black Lives Matter Caucusing Series. The purpose of this series was to support employees in processing,
reflecting, sharing feedback on, and brainstorming how the Port can combat racism in its own work. In 2021, OEDI received an
Award of Excellence from the American Association of Port Authorities for this work. Evaluation surveys from these sessions
indicated that participants gained:
o  More tools and language for talking about race and racism,
o  A better understanding of how participants could personally help combat and dismantle systemic racism, and
o  The opportunity to strategize with coworkers about how to transform the Port into an anti-racist organization.16 
In 2021, OEDI offered multiple racial equity trainings tailored to the Change Team, supervisors, and Port employees as a
whole. Outcomes of these trainings across all three groups of participants included:
o  "Deeper understanding of and connection to foundational racial equity concepts and tools,"
o  A greater "sense of hope and community" on racial equity, which was particularly voiced by employees of color, and
o  Stronger "connection to employee's individual responsibility to advance racial equity."17 
Throughout 2020 and 2021, the Port Executive Director began dedicating a portion of his Port-wide emails to "Equity
Resources," providing employees with reading materials, videos, and articles to help employees learn, expand their
understanding and analysis of impacts of COVID-19, and create more awareness about the importance of anti-racism and
equity.

16 Summary Report on Black Lives Matter Caucusing Series. Hosted by the Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June - August 2020.
17 Port of Seattle 2020-21 Racial Equity Trainings Report. Equity Matters. October 2021.
27

As a result of these collective activities, employees (especially white employees) are increasing their understanding of why we
lead our work with racial equity.
Recommended Actions
5.  Expand learning opportunities (e.g., book clubs, caucusing, etc.) for all employees to normalize racial equity and create a
culture of learning and belonging. OEDI and Strategic Initiatives will work closely with Aviation, Maritime, and the Change
Team to offer and facilitate accessible, inclusive EDI training and learning opportunities for represented and shift employees.
(Lead: OEDI)
6.  Create a Language and Meaning Initiative that will provide training on understanding the racial and historical context for
certain terminology and how to use language that is equitable and inclusive. Segments of this training will also be included in
trainings for all supervisors. (Lead: OEDI)
7.  OEDI and the Change Team identify and implement creative ways to uplift examples of supervisors and employees who are
advancing racial equity, modeling inclusiveness, and creating a culture of belonging and learning. (Lead: OEDI)
8.  OEDI leads targeted caucuses including:
An anti-racist white caucus designed for white employees to collectively learn and support one another in being effective
allies to employees of color in our efforts to create racial equity.
Multiracial and racial caucus spaces to strengthen racial equity analysis, unity, and community building emerging from
2020-21 trainings.18 (Lead: OEDI)
9.  Build on the success of the foundational year of the Change Team to strengthen the Change Team's impact on the
organization (Lead: OEDI). This could include:
Case study labs for Change Team members to learn more about institutional and structural racial equity change models

18 Port of Seattle 2020-21 Racial Equity Trainings Report. Equity Matters. October 2021.
28

Creating a Change Team committee to function as racial equity facilitators, coaches, and influencers
Roundtable sessions with the ELT to build awareness and understanding of equity and racism
Setting a goal to close the racialized gap for one specific workplace outcome, as detailed in a department equity plan19 
10.  Port leadership continues to identify and address equity and anti-racism as central to the Port's Special initiative to address
anti-black racism. (Lead: ELT) 









19 Port of Seattle 2020-21 Racial Equity Trainings Report. Equity Matters. October 2021.
29

Focus Area: Workplace Culture
Issue 3. Lack of BIPOC representation and voice in decision making
Key Concerns and Input
The need for greater racial and gender diversity within departments and across the Port was voiced in numerous employee
engagement efforts. In particular, the need for more BIPOC representation at the highest levels  in upper management,
executive leadership, and Port Commission roles  was a recurrent theme. This input came out of the Port's Equity Survey, EDI
Assessment Listening Sessions, and from Blacks in Government.20 
The lack of BIPOC voice in decision making was also a major concern raised across multiple sources. Only 58.6 percent of
respondents to the Port's Equity Survey agreed or strongly agreed that the opinions of BIPOC are sought out, valued, and fully
considered when making decisions.21 And almost all comments on this topic expressed concerns, including BIPOC employees'
input not being heard and/or valued, especially at the highest levels of decision making and particularly for people who are less
proficient in English; and when they do participate, being tokenized. Respondents of color had disproportionately more concerns
about this issue  both in the qualitative and quantitative data of the Equity Survey.22 
In the EDI Assessment Listening Sessions, employees underscored the need for the Executive Leadership Team to regularly hear
directly from BIPOC employees, and Black employees, through Blacks in Government, also expressed the need for Black and
Brown employees to have a voice in reviewing, creating, and deciding policies.23
Port employees identified some of the root causes of this including: lack of BIPOC representation in Port leadership; untrained,
apathetic, and/or unsupportive supervisors; lack of opportunities for input and advancement for BIPOC employees; racial bias;

20 Ibid. EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. July - September 2021. Port of Seattle Equity Survey
Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
21 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Quantitative Data. Prepared by Business Intelligence Unit for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June 2021.
22 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
23 "What do Blacks In Government need the Port of Seattle to focus on in combatting racial discriminations?" Session Notes. Blacks in Government Employee
Group. June 2021.
30

and structural barriers. These underscore the inter-related nature of many of the issues raised in this report and the need for
holistic actions to create long-term, lasting transformation.24structural barriers. These underscore the inter-related nature of
many of the issues raised in this report and the need for holistic actions to create long-term, lasting transformation.25 
Progress to Date 
ERGs have reported to OEDI that in recent years their ability to voice concerns, identify inequities, propose policy changes, and
celebrate diversity has been more impactful.
OEDI and steering committee of employees (predominantly women of color) began conducting an assessment of the
experiences, treatment, compensation, and advancement of women of color at the Port through a survey, individual
interviews, and focus group discussions. This one-of-kind assessment was commissioned by the Port's Executive Director after
Blacks in Government and Women's Initiative Network collaborated to host a panel event about intersectionality and the
experiences of women of color at the Port. The results of this assessment will be presented to Port leadership and staff in early
2022, and the recommendations from that assessment will be incorporated into the implementation plan of this report's
recommendations.
The Change Team is working with their respective departments to create department-specific EDI goals for 2022. Departmentspecific
EDI goals will be integrated into the annual business planning process.
Participants in the past year's racial equity trainings, in post-training evaluations, expressed that they felt:
o    More empowered to "speak up and do something,"
o    Connected to more "collective power to influence areas such as data analysis, contracting, relationship building,
management role and identifying root causes," and
o    A greater "sense of hope and community" about racial equity at the Port.26 

24 EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. July - September 2021.
25 EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. July - September 2021.
26 Port of Seattle 2020-21 Racial Equity Trainings Report. Equity Matters. October 2021.
31

Recommended Actions
11.  Each year, ERGs, D&D Council, Change Team, and OEDI review and coordinate annual work plans and priorities including
budgeting needs. These groups then engage the ELT in an Annual RoundTable to discuss priorities, needs, and ELT
involvement. ELT and OEDI will explore additional opportunities to expand ERGs' involvement and voice in policy
development. (Lead: OEDI)
12. Develop organizational policies, practices, and mechanisms for participation in decision making tailored to specific groups 
including indigenous, employees of color and women of color.27 (Lead: OEDI, ELT)
13.  OEDI, Change Team, and ERGs offer a Town Hall briefing for new Commissioners to discuss potential collaboration and
partnership. (Lead: OEDI)
14.  Set baseline for increasing racial diversity in senior level positions and above beginning January of 2022. Human Resources
track progress through infographics with the ability to filter data through multiple filters (e.g., racial and gender diversity of
director-level positions) and publish this data quarterly. Include in this report the number of BIPOC employees promoted
internally and new BIPOC employees in leadership positions. Publish racial and gender diversity demographics of Port
employees by grade and organizational level. (Lead: HR)





27 Port of Seattle 2020-21 Racial Equity Trainings Report. Equity Matters. October 2021.
32

Focus Area: Workplace Culture
Issue 4. Lack of safety and a fear of retaliation when reporting racism and discrimination
Key Concerns and Input 
As identified in multiple sources, the culture of the Port is such that employees feel unsafe reporting racism and discrimination,
especially due to fear of retaliation. The Equity Survey showed that only 50.7 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed
that they are satisfied that any conflicts at the Port of Seattle related to diversity, equity and inclusion issues would be addressed
appropriately. Additionally, when employees were asked if they would communicate with their supervisor or a person in
leadership if they or someone else were experiencing racial/ethnic discrimination at the Port of Seattle, BIPOC employees,
especially Black and Native American employees, were significantly less likely to report discrimination than white employees.
Participants in the Black Lives Matter Caucusing Series shared that employees experience the process of reporting discrimination,
bias or inappropriate behavior as lacking transparency and follow-through.28 This suggests that BIPOC employees do not trust the
Port's ability to address discrimination and/or fear there will be negative consequences for reporting it.29 
The survey comments emphasized the concerns on this issue. Of 108 comments about it, 100 were negative. Prevalent thoughts
included: employees not feeling safe reporting discrimination, lack of confidence in the organization's ability to effectively address
concerns, and the difficulty of raising issues to supervisors in situations where the supervisor is the source of concern. Further, this
concern was disproportionately expressed by BIPOC and women employees.30 
Progress to Date
Anti-Racism and Equity values: In June, after an 8-month process following a retreat session for all ELT members which
included a full day of discussions about racial equity, the Port refreshed its organization-wide values to include Anti-Racism
and Equity as a core value. The organization describes this value as "We commit to dismantling institutional racism and
28 Summary Report on Black Lives Matter Caucusing Series. Hosted by the Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June - August 2020.
29 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Quantitative Data. Prepared by Business Intelligence Unit for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June 2021.
30 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
33

ensuring equitable opportunities for all." In the coming months after announcing the values refresh, several members of the
Executive Leadership Team communicated about the importance of the values, including why anti-racism and equity are
critical for them personally and for our organization. 
Increased communication and collaboration between OEDI, Workplace Responsibility, and Employee Relations to direct
concerns to the appropriate processes.
Recommended Actions 
15.  Build a curriculum and training for supervisors in 2022 that increases supervisors' comfort with addressing issues of race and
gender. (Lead: OEDI, HR)
16.  Deliver training to increase supervisors' awareness of what constitutes retaliation and how it is received by employees.
(Lead: HR and Legal)
17.  Human Resources to offer training on the fair and consistent application of HR-18 and Code of Conduct policy, get feedback
from equity champions in the organization, educate managers about their responsibility. (Lead: HR and Legal)






34

Focus Area: Operations and Processes 
Issue 5. Unclear discrimination reporting process
Key Concerns and Input
While the culture of the Port is such that employees feel a lack of safety and a fear of retaliation when reporting racism and
discrimination (as described above in Issue 4), there are also issues related to the discrimination reporting process itself.
As described in Issue 4, not only do employees feel unsafe using the Port's reporting process, but the data from the Equity Survey
illustrates that there is not widespread clarity and knowledge across the Port about how complaint investigation processes
work, including the role of supervisors in a complaint.31 There is also a lack of confidence in the organization's ability to effectively
handle issues related to racism and discrimination, and these sentiments are overwhelmingly represented by employees of color,
suggesting that the reporting process does not work as well for employees of color as it does for white employees.
Additionally, in the EDI Assessment Listening Sessions, employees called for fuller investigation of discrimination claims with
compensation for injured parties. Blacks in Government called for specific criteria when investigating complaints about racism.32 
Progress to Date
Workplace Responsibility and Employee Relations have been engaged with Strategic Initiatives to assess processes and consider
system and process improvements.
Recommended Actions


31 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
32 EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. July - September 2021. "What do Blacks In Government
need the Port of Seattle to focus on in combatting racial discriminations?" Session Notes. Blacks in Government Employee Group. June 2021.
35

18.  Workplace Responsibility and Employee Relations continue their process improvement and hold a Town Hall Report Back
about systems improvement to all Port employees in 2022. (Lead: Workplace Responsibility and Employee Relations) 
19. Increase internal communication and clarity about how Workplace Responsibility and Employee Relations processes work 
and increase employee knowledge about what the roles of each team are, how they operate, and possible outcomes. (Lead:
Workplace Responsibility and Employee Relations) 
20.  Workplace Responsibility and Employee Relations publish an annual report detailing the number of cases, outcomes, follow-
ups, demographics, etc. (Lead: Workplace Responsibility and Employee Relations) 
21.  Title VI reporting issues will be clarified in partnership among OEDI, Legal, and External Relations. (Lead: OEDI, Legal, and
External Relations)
22.  In collaboration with CPO, develop a process for consultants and contractors to report issues of discrimination. (Lead:
Workplace Responsibility and Employee Relations)
23.  Represented workers receive more training to understand when and where to report issues of discrimination to increase
accountability of all managers for following through. (Lead: Workplace Responsibility and Employee Relations)
24.  Increase deliberate dialogue Port-wide about the critical nature of reporting issues of discrimination and improving our
culture reflective of our values. (Lead: ELT, Workplace Responsibility, Employee Relations) 





36

Focus Area: Operations and Processes
Issue 6. Gaps in critical role of supervisors33 
Key Concerns and Input
Supervisors, which in this report are defined as employees with at least one direct report, play a critical and varied role in
advancing equity and anti-racism in the organization. Related to the issue of reporting discrimination, supervisors heavily
influence a culture where employees feel unsafe reporting instance of discrimination. Many respondents to the Equity Survey
said it is difficult to raise issues to supervisors in situations where the supervisor is the source of concern. Others noted the
important role of supervisors in determining whether departments' work is informed by EDI considerations. Some described
challenges of department leaders who do not believe in equity efforts, while others said they feel unable to voice concerns about
racism or discrimination, especially if the supervisor is the source of concern. Respondents of color and women had a
disproportionate share of comments compared to their overall participation in the survey. Additionally, some supervisors
expressed needs for more support, resources, information, and capacity building to advance equity in their teams.34 
OEDI held Listening Sessions on this topic, which also surfaced concerns including:
Lack of direction and guidelines for integrating EDI into work
Lack of support for EDI efforts from some supervisors
Lack of accountability and consequences when a supervisor says or does something problematic
Employees fear retaliation if they raise equity-related issues35 
Listening Session participants also brainstormed potential solutions:

33 In this report, "supervisors" includes employees with at least one direct report.
34 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
35 EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. July - September 2021.
37

Include EDI competency in job evaluations for all supervisors, and, in performance evaluations, define how progress is
measured.
In hiring new supervisors, require potential hires to demonstrate commitment to EDI by including EDI interview questions.
Hold quarterly orientations, with a panel of current supervisors training new supervisors on the role of EDI at the Port and
expectations for supervisors in advancing these efforts.
To ensure accountability of supervisors: continue to require EDI training annually; require EDI Performance Link goals for all
supervisors and include in Development, Behaviors, and Essential Functions; require EDI goals at the department-level and
hold supervisors accountable to meeting those goals.
Make department demographic data publicly visible to increase accountability for supervisors to diversify their teams.
Promote 360 performance evaluations for supervisors in order to receive deeper and broader evaluations of supervisors.
Provide more time and space for supervisors to develop skills, such as through a community of learning for supervisors.36 
Represented workers also expressed concerns about support from supervisors, especially the lack of encouraging open dialogue
about racial issues, participation in OEDI programming, and professional development.37 Blacks in Government also called for
more training for mid-level supervisors and expressed the need to stop protecting racist supervisors and employees.38 
Progress to Date
Eight hours of racial equity training mandated for all supervisors in 2021. Supervisors who took the training indicated in their
evaluations that they:
o  Gained specific strategies and approaches to address racial bias,

36 Ibid.
37 Employee Listening Session with Represented Workers. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
38 "What do Blacks In Government need the Port of Seattle to focus on in combatting racial discriminations?" Session Notes. Blacks in Government Employee
Group. June 2021.
38

o  "Connected to their role as supervisors in fostering a racial justice learning culture," and
o  Would like to gain more individual application ideas, including how to engage reluctant co-workers.39 
In June 2022, the Port refreshed its organization-wide values to include Anti-Racism and Equity as a core value. The
organization describes this value as, "We commit to dismantling institutional racism and ensuring equitable opportunities for
all." In the coming months after announcing the values refresh, several members of the Executive Leadership Team
communicated about the importance of the values, including why anti-racism and equity are critical for them personally and
for our organization.
Every quarter, the Executive Director hosts a town hall event for all employees to learn about ongoing organizational efforts
and to ask questions of the Executive Leadership Team. An update on the Port's EDI work is always included in these events
The Senior Director of OEDI is given time on the agenda to share about progress, upcoming events, and to answer questions.
Recommended Actions
25.  Executive Director, Commission, Executive Leadership Team lead by example in living the values of the Port. OEDI and Human
Resources highlight these examples. (Lead: Executive Director, Commission, ELT)
26.  Consistent and on-going messaging from Executive Director, Commission, Executive Leadership Team to all supervisors
about the importance of leader's accountability to Port values and Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion. (Lead: Executive Director,
Commission, ELT)
27.  Continue to offer the foundational 8-hour course for all new supervisors entering the Port in 2022. OEDI provides an
additional 8 to 10 hours of required advanced racial equity training for all supervisors. After completion of the training, OEDI
will host coaching and mentoring for supervisors to develop the skills learned in the training, and supervisors will be asked to
sign a commitment/pledge asserting that they have completed the training and will implement the newly learned skills. As
recommended from the 2021 supervisor training evaluations, specific topics or modules could include:

39 Port of Seattle 2020-21 Racial Equity Trainings Report. Equity Matters. October 2021.
39

Offering follow-up opportunities to engage reluctant co-workers
Designing supervisors' roles and responsibilities to support sense of belonging by and retention of employees of color
(informed by upcoming Women of Color Assessment)40 (Lead: OEDI)
28. OEDI and Human Resources develop the following (Lead: HR, OEDI): 
A measurable EDI Performance Link goal for all supervisors 
An EDI competency integrated into all supervisor job evaluations and job postings
Research best practices for evaluating supervisors for future implementation








40 Port of Seattle 2020-21 Racial Equity Trainings Report. Equity Matters. October 2021.
40

Focus Area: Operations and Processes
Issue 7. Inconsistent integration of equity in key Port-wide processes
Key Concerns and Input 
Fundamental to advancing equity across the Port is to integrate equity into Port-wide processes. Two key areas for this are 1)
budgeting and 2) research. Department budgeting processes is a priority for the Port's equity work, with ongoing efforts across
the organization, but there is much variation across departments in whether and how equity is budgeted for internally. A
September 2021 Port-wide survey on Equity in Budgeting found:
Seventy percent of Port departments (37 of 53) considered the impact on EDI of programs and activities in their 2022 baseline
budgets.
Sixty percent of Port departments (32 of 53) said there are specific areas or programs they would like to add to their 2022
budget to advance equity considerations.
Eighty-seven percent of Port departments (46 of 53) said their department would benefit from additional training in how to
include consideration of equity in their budgeting process.
For departments that use an equity lens in their budget, the most common activities center on equity in procurement, vending,
and contractors; equity in recruitment, hiring, and compensation policies and practices; employee training and education; work
with external stakeholders such as through outreach or grant funding; and day-to-day operations such as ensuring accessibility.
The survey also identified several challenges and areas for potential improvement:
Many departments expressed the need for training on budgeting with an equity lens, how to determine scope and budget for
equity activities of various size and complexity, and what questions to ask when budgeting for equity.


41

Some departments said they wish to continue increasing equity in current activities such as diversifying employees,
expanding linguistically and culturally competent outreach, increasing equitable grant funding, and engaging more WMBE
contractors.
Some departments do not feel they can use their baseline budget for work with external stakeholders or communities.
The second area, research, is a critical function frequently undertaken in service to Port operations, whether to assess needs,
formulate policies, or design programs, but is often not examined from an equity lens. Yet, white culture dominance is embedded
in much of traditional research, including in data collection, analytical methods, or reporting and presentation. As such, it
presents a significant opportunity to advance equity.
Examples of inequities in research methods that can lead to decentering, marginalizing or erasing populations of color include:
using majority responses where whites/white males are the dominant voice as the norm around which analysis of other groups is
centered, requiring minimum sample sizes, not disaggregating, not addressing intersectionality of identities, not contextualizing
for specific communities or cultures when inferring or making meaning of data, and inadequate threading of translated input into
the analysis process.
Conducting research with a pro-equity approach requires intentionality and reconciling equitable approaches with traditional
methods and/or deviating from the latter when rigid adherence to them perpetuates racial inequity.
Progress to Date
Equity in Budgeting: Among departments surveyed in 2021 below are examples of what has been done.
Training, Hiring, and Compensation. Training to develop a discrimination-free work environment, equitable access to the tools and
software needed, advertising to reach a broader diverse audience, conducting periodic salary equity reviews, funding for green
job development in near-Port communities, providing maritime career experiences to under-represented communities, promoting
job to diverse audience with an inclusive hiring panel.


42

External Outreach and Engagement. Duwamish Valley Community Equity program, Port 101, Boat Tours, Crisis Coordinator
supporting homelessness and mental health crisis, joint promotional projects with our airlines' partners, public outreach, and
water quality improvements to underserved communities, distribute funds to BIPOC tourism stakeholders.
Procurements & Contracts. Increase the percentage of dollars spent with WMBE and SBE firms, use WMBEs for goods and services
where possible
Operations. Accessibility for passengers with functional needs, wheelchair accessible vehicles, accessible languages, Interfaith
Prayer and Meditation Room41
Integrating equity into research:
OEDI encouraged key staff from the Port to sign up for and attend a course from Stanford Social Innovation Review on
applying an equity lens to data collection and reporting.
Human Resources, Strategic Initiatives, and OEDI are currently working with the Government Alliance for Racial Equity (GARE)
to host a training on data and equity in 2022.
OEDI reported on findings of the equity survey both from a quantitative and qualitative perspective and educated employees
and departments about the use of each method.
OEDI completed and launched the Port's new Equity Index. The Equity Index is a cutting-edge, interactive map that displays a
visual representation of social and environmental disparities in King County. Using 21 indicators within four categories, the
Equity Index illustrates the degree to which different communities experience pollution burdens and social inequities. The Port
is using the index as a tool to help us direct resources (e.g., South King County Fund) to the communities and areas of greatest
need. The tool is available to all Port staff and the public.
Recommended Actions

41 Equity in Budgeting Tool 2022 Survey Data. Port of Seattle. September 2021. Equity in Budgeting Survey Results PowerPoint Presentation. Prepared by
Meridith Fishkin, David Kleiber and Nancy Vuong. Port of Seattle. October 2021.
43

29.  OEDI and Budgeting Change Team will continue to grow and deepen budgeting with equity tools at the Port and provide
Port-wide trainings, 1-on-1 technical assistance, and cross-department information sharing on how to integrate equity into
budgeting. (Lead: OEDI and Budgeting Change Team)
30.  OEDI, HR, and Strategic Initiatives to offer training in 2022 on the use of data and equity and to host a working group for
staff who use data to increase skill, expertise, and capacity in using data with an equity lens. (Lead: OEDI and HR) 
31.  Ensure that the Port's mission, policies, and procedures reflect an ongoing commitment to an organizational culture of
inclusion and belonging. Starting in 2022, all departments, with support from OEDI and Change Team, set and work towards
annual department-specific EDI goals. The timing of these goals will be aligned with the budgeting process, ED priorities, and
other strategic planning efforts to align as much as possible all efforts. The goals and progress towards meeting them will be
shared in the annual report back to the Commission. (Lead: OEDI and Change Team)
In the first quarter of every year, the Change Team will lead their respective departments in an equity SWOT analysis. The
results of that analysis will inform department-specific EDI goals.
In the second quarter of every year, Change Team members will be involved in their department's annual business
planning process to ensure that EDI goals are set.






44

Focus Area: Employment 
Issue 8. Inequities in recruitment, hiring, and qualifications
Key Concerns and Input
Port employees shared perspectives and concerns about a range of issues connected to jobs and employment. One key issue is
about recruitment, hiring, and qualifications.
Regarding the role of racial equity in hiring decisions, 59.5 percent of respondents in the Port's Equity Survey agreed or strongly
agreed that in addition to hiring the best qualified candidates, racial equity should be considered in the hiring process. At the
same time, among 105 respondents who added comments about qualifications for hiring, 85 stated that hiring decisions should
be based primarily or solely on who is most qualified and/or performance, not race. A small number of comments said racial
considerations should be part of hiring decisions due to structural/systemic and historic inequities that have created
disadvantages for some groups.42 
Another significant issue in hiring is that candidates of color are disproportionately ineligible for certain jobs in comparison to
white candidates, because they do not meet the education requirement, even though the educational requirement may not be
essential to the functions of the job. A candidate's work or life experience may be more relevant than formal education to
perform the functions of the job. Because white people graduate from high school, college, and advanced programs at
disproportionately higher rates than BIPOC, this creates a pattern of disadvantage for BIPOC job seekers.43In general, comments
about racial inequities in recruitment and hiring were more likely to come from employees of color and women.


42 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Quantitative Data. Prepared by Business Intelligence Unit for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June 2021.
Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
43 Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion.
45

The Equity Survey found that 54 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are aware of efforts to share job
announcements with racially and ethnically diverse professional networks, while 62.4 percent of respondents agreed or strongly
agreed that they are aware of efforts to partner with Human Resources to advertise open jobs widely.44 
Additional comments about recruitment and hiring came through survey comments, the EDI Assessment Listening Sessions, the
Black Lives Matter Caucus Series, and Blacks in Government.45 Ideas for improving recruitment included:
Expanding and diversifying job candidate pools through mentorship programs specifically for BIPOC employees
Engaging with schools to ensure students know about job opportunities at the Port and in Port-related industries
Expanding outreach in BIPOC communities
Expanding the definition of "qualifications" to include relevant lived experience in addition to or in lieu of formal education
Posting new positions internally first and/or prioritizing internal hires and promotions
Working to eliminate racial biases in the hiring process by requiring racially diverse hiring panels and requiring hiring panels to
watch the bias video and conduct an in-depth discussion about it.




44 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Quantitative Data. Prepared by Business Intelligence Unit for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June 2021.
45 EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. July - September 2021. Port of Seattle Equity Survey
Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021. "What do Blacks in Government need the Port
of Seattle to focus on in combatting racial discriminations?" Session Notes. Blacks in Government Employee Group. June 2021. Summary Report on Black Lives
Matter Caucusing Series. Hosted by the Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June - August 2020.
46

Progress to Date
The Port's Human Resources Department began a three-year Program Review of non-represented Compensation that
involved a survey in 2021 completed by over 900 employees along with focus groups that included close to 200 participants.
This effort shaped HR's approach to addressing key concerns, which is guided by three concepts: Equity, Transparency, and
Simplicity, under which a guiding principle is to "Support building a culture of inclusion, belonging and equity."46 This project
will continue with an internal and external market research for each position in the next two years.
The Port's Human Resources Department currently takes steps to prioritize internal candidates for hiring by offering flexibility
on minimum qualifications, adding a development component to the job posting, and offering opportunities for interviews.
In 2021, for many backfill position requests, Human Resources examined and adjusted, as appropriate, position requirements
before posting. Human Resources also started adding in substitutes for educational requirements where appropriate.
Human Resources' Talent Acquisition Policy (HR-8) was updated in 2021 with broad engagement and socialization of the
policy with Port employees. This policy advances equity in the recruitment process by utilizing a variety of advertising
sources, partnering with Port-wide employee resource groups, community, and external resources, and requesting the direct
assistance of the hiring department to identify additional advertising outlets to create a pipeline of diverse applicants.
Recommended Actions
32. Human Resources Department, in collaboration with OEDI, integrate equity considerations more deeply into the interview
and hiring process (LEAD: HR):
Ensure racial and gender diversity on all interview panels, by including specific diversity targets with employee
engagement and share across the Port. 
All job announcements include a statement on diversity, equity, and inclusion and share Port Values.

46 Compensation Program Review Recommendations to ELT. Port of Seattle Human Resources Department. October 29, 2021.
47

Enhance recruitment process to more effectively reach BIPOC candidates, address barriers, and reach beyond traditional
outlets and networks. Develop a top list of languages, ethnic communities, and media channels in communities of color to
do outreach to with the help of the ERGs, D&D Council, and OEDI. Consider using testimonials and videos to tell the stories
of current BIPOC employees.
Include at least one question about EDI in all interviews. The question should require the applicant to demonstrate their
understanding of EDI and its applicability to the job.
Require interview panels to watch anti-bias video, and, as an interview panel, engage in a discussion about the video.
Create a committee of D&D Council and Change Team to make themselves available to serve on hiring panels and offer
support in the hiring processes.
Replicate the successes and partnership between Human Resources and Maritime Division in 2021 across the Port:
Executive accountability, broader outreach for advertising postings for jobs, system to ensure diverse panels for all
interviews, tracking panelists anti-bias video viewing and learning, adding equity questions, systematically examining
educational requirements.
33. OEDI to work with the Change Team to develop and implement a system for tracking equity indicators implemented for all
hiring panels and processes in 2022. A final report to be presented to commission in December of 2022. (LEAD: OEDI, Change
Team)
34. Increase BIPOC representation in leadership positions. For leadership positions that become available and open in 2022,
revisit all competencies and requirements in job evaluations to ensure that the minimum qualifications accurately reflect the
skills and training needed for the position, barriers for BIPOC applicants are reviewed and assessed, and to ensure that EDI is
included in the job evaluation. (Lead: HR)



48

Focus Area: Employment
Issue 9. Inequities in compensation
Key Concerns and Input
Compensation equity is a significant issue of concern expressed by Port employees, particularly by employees of color and
women. Among respondents to the Equity Survey, only 51.5 percent agreed or strongly agreed that employee pay is fair and
equitable for people with the same or similar jobs who have the same or similar qualifications regardless of race/ethnicity, gender,
age, or other diversity characteristics. Employees of color, in comparison to white employees, do not agree that compensation is
fair and equitable. Overall, only 56.3 percent of employees agreed or strongly agreed that they understand the Port's
compensation structure.47 This theme was echoed in the Human Resources Department's recent Compensation Program Review,
which found that women and people of color believe that jobs held mostly by women are undervalued, that women must
continually prove themselves, and that women and women of color are underpaid.48 
Many survey comments expressed frustration about compensation inequities both within and across departments as well as by
race and gender. This view also emerged from the Port's Black Lives Matter Caucusing Series, where participants expressed a
strong perception that there are significant disparities in how people with the same position are paid, particularly BIPOC
employees.49 Other concerns related to pay equity included job classifications/evaluations being outdated, subjective, and not
matching pay levels; and pay being tied to seniority rather than performance.50 
Blacks in Government suggests promoting Black and Brown employees to similar locations on pay brackets and pay distributions
as their white counterparts, while participants in the EDI Assessment Listening Sessions called for more benefits for minimum/low

47 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Quantitative Data. Prepared by Business Intelligence Unit for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June 2021.
48 Non-represented Employees Compensation Program Review: Focus Group and Employee Survey Comment Themes. Port of Seattle Human Resources
Department. September 2021.
49 Summary Report on Black Lives Matter Caucusing Series. Hosted by the Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June - August 2020.
50 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
49

wage and frontline workers, and scholarships specifically for women of color, as well as daycare services.51 Respondents to the
Compensation Program Review asked for system changes that prevent pay inequities, and a pay equity analysis with results
shared transparently.52Compensation Program Review asked for system changes that prevent pay inequities, and a pay equity
analysis with results shared transparently.53 
Progress to Date 
As noted in the previous section, the Port's Human Resources department recently completed a Program Review of
Compensation that includes a survey completed by over 900 employees along with focus groups that included close to 200
participants. This effort marks a milestone in responding to employee concerns about compensation equity and builds a
foundation for further and deeper assessment of compensation in 2022. 54
OEDI collaborated with a Steering Committee to launch an assessment of the experiences and barriers of women of color at the
Port of Seattle. The findings of this assessment will be presented in February of 2022.
Recommended Actions
35.  Human Resources Department makes salary information accessible and transparent. (Lead: HR)
36.  Human Resources Department, informed by findings from its Compensation Program Review, implements the following Action
related to compensation equity:
Develop a pay equity definition and philosophy that reflects the Port's values 

51 "What do Blacks In Government need the Port of Seattle to focus on in combatting racial discriminations?" Session Notes. Blacks in Government Employee
Group. June 2021.
52 Non-represented Employees Compensation Program Review: Focus Group and Employee Survey Comment Themes. Port of Seattle Human Resources
Department. September 2021.
53 Non-represented Employees Compensation Program Review: Focus Group and Employee Survey Comment Themes. Port of Seattle Human Resources
Department. September 2021.
54 Compensation Program Review Recommendations to ELT. Port of Seattle Human Resources Department. October 29, 2021.
50

Design and complete a Port-wide pay equity analysis 
Determine potential remediation strategies, including special budget for equity adjustments55 
Human Resources Department will design and implement a new pay program based on the findings of the assessment
as well as the findings of the Women of Color assessment. (Lead: HR)










55 Compensation Program Review Recommendations to ELT. Port of Seattle Human Resources Department. October 29, 2021.
51

Focus Area: Employment
Issue 10. Barriers to advancement for internal candidates
Key Concerns and Input
Employees gave input on several issues related to job advancement. Comments from the Equity survey were almost all
expressions of concern (78 of 80 comments). The most frequent issue cited was favoritism of white males in promotion
decisions, including longstanding "good old boys' networks" that create barriers for employees of color outside of those networks.
Another issue noted was the perception that external hiring is often prioritized over internal promotions.56 
The EDI Assessment Listening Sessions and Black Lives Matter Caucus Series echoed similar sentiments: that in comparison to
women and employees of color, white men receive unfair and unearned advantages with regards to job advancement and
promotions. Session participants also identified root causes of this inequity including lack of accountability, cultural norms, and
white supremacy in the workplace.57
The Equity Survey found that 62.8 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that an internal talent pipeline with diverse
participants would help to increase BIPOC representation in leadership positions. Additionally, 55.7 percent of respondents
agreed or strongly agreed that in addition to focusing on the selection of the best qualified candidate, racial equity should be
involved in the promotion process to ensure diverse representation in leadership positions.58
Blacks in Government also cited the need to:
Focus on the advancement of Black employees

56 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
57 EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. July - September 2021. Summary Report on Black Lives
Matter Caucusing Series. Hosted by the Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June - August 2020.
58 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Quantitative Data. Prepared by Business Intelligence Unit for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June 2021.
52

Internally post budgeted, unfilled positions (and their job evaluations) that are not yet open but will be in the future so that
potential internal candidates can plan, prep, and set goals for advancement
Attach job evaluations to individual P-Links, because most employees do not have the original job evaluations for their
positions and do not know how to get a copy of it
Create employee and executive shadowing opportunities.59 
Respondents to the Compensation Program Review called for eliminating bias and favoritism in job performance evaluations and
annual pay increases, instead using objective, measurable factors to measure performance.60 
Related to advancement for internal candidates, a lack of time is a significant barrier for many employees' professional
development. The Equity Survey found that 76.0 percent of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are encouraged to
develop themselves professionally through trainings, PortAbility, or other learning opportunities, but only 51.5 percent of
respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they have time in their schedule to pursue professional development opportunities
that are of interest to them.61
The survey also illustrated that in comparison to non-represented employees, represented employees are less encouraged to
develop professionally. Among these comments, white respondents were a smaller share of these concerns compared with the
survey overall, while respondents of color from several racial groups and women were overrepresented.62 
Progress to Date
Human Resources currently takes steps to prioritize internal candidates by offering flexibility on minimum qualifications,
adding a development component to the job posting, and offering opportunities for interviews.

59 "What do Blacks In Government need the Port of Seattle to focus on in combating racial discriminations?" Session Notes. Blacks in Government Employee
Group. June 2021.
60 Non-represented Employees Compensation Program Review: Focus Group and Employee Survey Comment Themes. Port of Seattle Human Resources
Department. September 2021.
61Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Quantitative Data. Prepared by Business Intelligence Unit for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June 2021.
62 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
53

Human Resources operates an internal mentorship and internship program to develop the skills and professional experiences
of employees who are seeking to advance in the organization.
A team in Human Resources is currently analyzing data about internal promotions to better understand the patterns of who
applies and who advances within the organization.
Recommended Actions
37.  Develop a Performance Link goal for all supervisors to provide training and development opportunities to all employees
interested in advancing. (Lead: HR)
38.  To increase job accessibility, assess, before posting a position, if certain formal education or credentials are needed to
perform the essential functions of the jobs, and, when possible, include development language into the job requirements.
(Lead: HR)
39.  Human Resources to develop a system for tracking the promotion of internal candidates. The results will be shared widely in
internal and external communications, highlighting stories about employees who have been promoted. (Lead: OEDI, HR,
External Relations)
40.  Increase staff awareness about the Port's internal mentorship program. (Lead: HR)
41.  In 2022, Human Resources is improving its supervisor training to teach supervisors how to use coaching and mentoring as a
management practice. (Lead: HR)




54

Focus Area: Equity Capacity Building 
Issue 11. Barriers to participation - resources and resistance
Key Concerns and Input 
With the creation of the Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (OEDI) in 2018-19, the Port has significantly expanded its focus
on advancing equity across the organization. OEDI leads this work and continues to organize and host an array of activities and
initiatives to support the integration of equity into the Port's work. In this context, the Equity Survey found that 74.5 percent of
respondents agreed or strongly agreed that participation in OEDI programs to normalize racial equity (e.g., Book Clubs, Racial
Caucuses) is encouraged.63 Additionally, participants in the Black Lives Matter Caucusing Series said they view EDI work as
valuable and central to improving operations and culture at the Port.64 
At the same time, employees also provided feedback on how to further improve this work. Among Equity Survey respondents
who commented on this topic, the most prevalent issue was lack of time to participate in equity activities. Some survey takers
felt there is too much equity activity, while others said there is lack of support or encouragement from their department leaders
to participate. There were also numerous positive comments about equity efforts.65 
The issue of time constraints was also echoed in the EDI Assessment Listening Sessions, where participants reinforced the need to
continue efforts to train, educate, and normalize equity within the Port, while also asking that more time and funding for training
be made available for all employees to take EDI training and participate in EDI learning activities.66 
Similar sentiments were expressed in targeted meetings with represented workers, who voiced unique needs specific to the
nature of their work shifts and job demands. These issues included the need for more support from supervisors, effective

63 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Quantitative Data. Prepared by Business Intelligence Unit for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June 2021.
64 Summary Report on Black Lives Matter Caucusing Series. Hosted by the Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June - August 2020.
65 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
66 EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. July - September 2021.
55

advertising of activities, accessible scheduling of activities, and dedicated funding to enable their participation (specifically for shift
coverage and overtime).67
Represented workers shared recommendations for how to address these needs including adding requirements for EDI training
and engagement into collective bargaining agreements with labor unions, establishing mandatory equity goals for all
departments, and setting EDI goals for all employees, including supervisors.68 
Additionally, there are concerns from employees about the work itself. For example, the Equity Survey included a critical mass of
comments that the Port's emphasis on racial equity and people of color has created discomfort, marginalization, and at times,
claims of reverse discrimination against white employees. These comments were disproportionately expressed by white
respondents compared to their representation in the survey responses overall.
Some respondents also expressed the need to increase employee participation in equity activities to better reach those who have
been more reluctant or less willing to participate. Others suggested that the Port should focus on a "colorblind" approach of
treating all people equally, instead of a racial equity approach that seeks to address inequities for specific groups.69 With regards
to this suggestion, it should be noted that this is not a viable option, and more education needs to be done to help employees
understand why. The Port leads its equity work with a focus on race because colorblind approaches only further contribute to
patterns of racial disparity and reinforce discrimination and bias.
In particular, Blacks in Government and represented workers have recommended ensuring and/or expanding mandatory equity
training for all employees. Represented workers, in Aviation in particular, have also discussed bolstering equity by integrating it
into Continuous Process Improvement work, which many departments in Aviation are already familiar with and receive support
from Strategic Initiatives to implement.70
Progress to Date

67 Employee Listening Session with Represented Workers. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
68 Employee Listening Session with Represented Workers. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
69 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
70 "What do Blacks In Government need the Port of Seattle to focus on in combatting racial discriminations?" Session Notes. Blacks in Government Employee
Group. June 2021. Employee Listening Session with Represented Workers. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
56

Addressing the lack of willingness or resistance to participating in racial equity efforts will be long-term work. To date, OEDI and its
partners have tackled this in multiple ways.
With the creation of the Change Team, every department is required to have one Sponsor and at least one Core Member to
serve on the Change Team to lead their respective department in advancing and embedding equity into programs and day-today
operations.
OEDI and Strategic Initiatives have actively worked to identify creative ways to offer racial equity trainings and other
programming to represented and off shift workers.
OEDI and Human Resources offer coaching and support to leaders on how to manage diverse teams and create a culture of
belonging.
Executive Director town halls always included the Senior Director of OEDI to communicate about the progress and critical
nature of EDI work.
Executive Director email updates to all employees include an Equity Resources section to communicate the importance of EDI
for the Port's work.
All ELT members, Executive Director, and Commissioners attended 8 hours of mandatory racial equity trainings. This group
also engaged in a process of refreshing the Port's values, which now include anti-racism and equity.
Racial equity training has included:
o  Eight hours of racial equity training mandated for all supervisors in 2021. In the past year, 384 supervisors participated in
trainings across three sessions totaling eight hours. All participants found the trainings useful or very useful; 91 percent
met their goals, and 92 percent were satisfied or extremely satisfied.



57

o  Three hours of racial equity training mandated for all front-line workers and individual contributors. In the past year,
trainings included participation by 431 employees in a three-hour foundational training. Of these, 91 percent found the
training useful or very useful, 88 percent met their goals, and 90 percent were satisfied or extremely satisfied.71
Outcomes of the training as reported in post-training evaluations indicated some progress in addressing this issue. Participant
outcomes included:
o  Deeper understanding of foundational racial equity concepts and tools,
o  Greater sense of "individual responsibility to play a role in normalizing and impacting racial equity",
o  And desire to further deepen understanding and apply knowledge gained to their work and to advance structure and
institutional change at the Port. 72 
Recommended Actions
42.  Expand equity training activities. (Lead: OEDI)
Starting in 2022, OEDI will offer a four-hour foundational racial equity training for all Port employees (in 2021 this was a
mandatory three-hour course). OEDI and Labor Relations will gain support for represented workers to participate.
In 2022, OEDI will add capacity and presence in the Aviation Division and provide in-person trainings when and where
possible.
In 2022, OEDI will develop and facilitate: 1) train-the-trainers training for Change Team members so that they can cofacilitate
racial equity trainings and learning opportunities, 2) advanced supervisors training, and 3) opportunities for
mentoring for employees to learn together and receive more individualized support in practicing skills.
Implement recommendations from 2021 trainings to:

71 Port of Seattle 2020-21 Racial Equity Trainings Report. Equity Matters. October 2021.
72 Port of Seattle 2020-21 Racial Equity Trainings Report. Equity Matters. October 2021.
58

o  Deepen understanding of racial concepts, such as by adding sessions on settler colonization, anti-Blackness, and white
allyship 
o  Develop a standardized racial equity orientation curriculum and facilitator team 

43.  In 2022, explore the need to create dedicated funding (starting in 2023) to support employee participation in EDI efforts,
especially represented and shift workers. (Lead: OEDI) Funding should cover multiple needs:
Funding for overtime, especially for represented workers, to ensure work can still be done while they engage in EDI work.
Funding for necessary time/work (including dedicated work orders) and equipment to access and participate in EDI work.
Funding for OEDI, Strategic Initiatives, and other employee service-related departments to expand their abilities to serve
all shifts and employees.

44.  OEDI collaborate with HR to explore a policy that allows and supports employee participation in equity learning activities.
(Lead: OEDI) 






59

Focus Area: Engaging WMBEs and Small Businesses 
Issue 12. Barriers for WMBEs and small businesses
Key Concerns and Input
Both internal and external stakeholders affirmed the Port's efforts in contracting with small and Women and Minority-Owned
Businesses (WMBEs), but many have also expressed concerns and identified areas for improvement. Among Equity Survey
respondents who work on contracting and use of WMBEs, 64.8 percent agreed or strongly agreed that supplier racial equity and
diversity best practices have been implemented and 70.6 percent agreed or strongly agreed that they are aware of and can access
a list of WMBEs that can serve as potential business partners. Also, 66.7 percent agreed or strongly agreed that equity goals have
been set to assess the efficacy of working with minority and women-owned businesses and 68.4 percent agreed or strongly
agreed that a concerted effort is made to procure goods/services from underrepresented suppliers.73 
However, the survey also yielded 95 comments about contracting, two-thirds of which described areas needing improvement.
These included the need to: reduce barriers and create more streamlined processes for BIPOC contractors; address the lack of
WMBE availability for certain services; and expand outreach to a broader universe of vendors. Employees of color from some
racial groups as well as women were a greater share of comments that expressed concerns about contracting.74 
Employees who participated in both OEDI's Listening Sessions and Black Lives Matter Caucus Series shared similar concerns about
the need to reduce barriers and create a more accessible process by which WMBEs can compete and win Port contracts. They
cited some of the root causes of these barriers including unclear or poorly defined commitments regarding WMBEs and the lack of
a streamlined outreach process. Additionally, time pressures in contracting processes often create "incumbency bias", where lack
of time to onboard new firms leads to more frequent use of firms that have done work for the Port before and with whom
departments are more familiar. 
Listening Session participants identified actions to address these concerns that include:

73 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Quantitative Data. Prepared by Business Intelligence Unit for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June 2021.
74 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
60

Increasing support for WMBEs by educating WMBEs on Port practices, creating an onboarding process for new WMBEs, and
providing continuous lines of support for WMBEs
Diversifying firms and contracts by expanding outreach to WMBEs, incentivizing Prime contractors to select new WMBE
subcontractors, and researching existing BIPOC non-profits in the area and how the Port can support them
Increasing internal training and understanding of the contracting process by defining WMBEs' commitments and goals clearly
to make external communication effective and providing department trainings for WMBE outreach and services.75 
Blacks in Government also called for investing in resources to eliminate barriers for Black businesses to do business with the
Port, including funding and partnering with incubator agents and bridge resources.76 
Progress to Date
In 2018, the Port Commission passed a policy directive establishing the Port's Diversity in Contracting Department to advance
equity and address WMBE contracting disparities. The directive also set five-year (2018-2023) benchmark goals: to triple the
number of WMBEs doing business with the Port (118 to 354) and to increase to 15% the amount spent on WMBE contracts.
To help the Port fulfill these WMBE goals, Diversity in Contracting has developed and administered internal WMBE training for
Port employees and project managers, and external training and outreach to encourage and support WMBEs' ability to do
business with the Port (such as PortGen and WMBE & Small Businesses Accelerator). Since 2016, the Port's WMBE utilization - led
by Diversity in Contracting's efforts - has increased from 5.3% to 11.2% and from 118 firms to 281 firms.
Recommended Actions 


75 EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. July - September 2021. Summary Report on Black Lives
Matter Caucusing Series. Hosted by the Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June - August 2020.
76 "What do Blacks In Government need the Port of Seattle to focus on in combating racial discriminations?" Session Notes. Blacks in Government Employee
Group. June 2021.
61

45.  Diversity in Contracting to complete an assessment of barriers for WMBEs and small businesses to enter contracts with the
Port, as included in the Port Commission Equity Motion of 2020. Diversity in Contracting will report back about the findings
and recommendations of this assessment to the full Commission in 2022. (Lead: Diversity in Contracting)
46.  Diversity in Contracting will strengthen internal communication and training about the contracting and outreach processes
for WMBEs. (Lead: Diversity in Contracting)











62

Focus Area: Engaging WMBEs and Small Businesses
Issue 13. Barriers in procurement processes
Key Concerns and Input
In addition to addressing specific barriers faced by WMBEs and small businesses, as discussed above, many employees expressed
the need to improve the procurement process for all businesses and community-based organizations that contract with the Port. 
Listening Session participants brainstormed actions to address these concerns that include:
Increasing internal training and understanding of the contracting processes
Challenges for new organizations to understand the Port and to enter into contracts with the Port
Complex contracting process that is time consuming
Requiring anti-bias training for evaluation panels
Simplifying processes and paperwork.77 
Progress to Date
Central Procurement Office (CPO) has begun to address bias and discrimination with evaluation panels, similar to how Human
Resources has started a process with hiring panels.
CPO has taken steps to reduce contracting paperwork and improve the procurement process, including by hiring a Senior
Manager to lead a team focused on process improvement, strategic partnerships, and program analysis.

77 EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. July - September 2021. Summary Report on Black Lives
Matter Caucusing Series. Hosted by the Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June - August 2020.
63

CPO has created a dedicated group of staff who are receiving training and skills to specifically work with and address the
unique needs of small, community-based partners.
Recommended Actions
47.  Develop and include the following in new and future Port contracts and contracting processes. (Lead: CPO)
Businesses and contractors are asked to assess the need for translation and interpretation services in their pricing and
contract and when appropriate address this in their scope of work.
Similar to the Acceptable Workplace Agreement and Culture of Care language in service agreement contracts, CPO will
develop anti-harassment language and an accountability process to be included in future contracts.
Prior to reviewing, rating, and selecting proposals, all contract evaluation panels will be required to watch an anti-bias
video and engage in a discussion about how to identify biases and account for them. CPO will consider additional training
to recognize and address unconscious and implicit bias in contracting processes.
48.  Support for Community partnerships. CPO will work closely with OEDI and External Relations to help improve processes for
community-based organizations.
Continue the existing and ongoing work of South King County Fund in revising contract language and reducing paperwork
to make contracting more accessible and understandable. 
Expedite the execution of contracts and amendments. 
Develop an accessible way for Port employees and non-profit partners to provide feedback to CPO to identify
opportunities for process improvement. This may include an annual or semi-annual meeting with non-profit partners.
Continue the existing and ongoing work of creating a dedicated group of CPO employees who are trained regarding
specific needs for flexibility, timely response, and seeking mutual understanding when working with nonprofit
/community-based organizations. 


64

Focus Area: Engaging Impacted Communities 
Issue 14. Lack of empowered and meaningful ways for external stakeholders to engage with the Port
Key Concerns and Input
Port employees have mixed assessments on the inclusion and role of external stakeholders in the Port's work and decision-
making, particularly for communities of color and BIPOC-led organizations.
Positive aspects of this issue were reflected in the Equity Survey, in which 69.4 percent of respondents who engaged with
communities and external stakeholders agreed or strongly agreed that BIPOC-led organizations are treated with respect, dignity
and are encouraged to engage as full partners involved in decision-making processes when working on Port issues. Additionally,
75.6 percent agreed or strongly agreed that there is an interest in developing and maintaining strong, authentic, mutually
respectful relationships with BIPOC organizations in the region. However, only 54.3 percent of those respondents agreed or
strongly agreed that cultural and linguistic competency is a core component when they do outreach to external communities
and only 41.8 percent agreed or strongly agreed that money is allocated for community engagement items such as translations,
interpreters, space for community meetings, and compensation of community members for their time.78 
Survey comments cited the need for more equitable opportunities for all key Port stakeholders to engage meaningfully.79 Port
employees defined the problem as a lack of meaningful and impactful roles for external stakeholders, including the lack of
ability to vote or have formal authority in Port decision-making. Respondents also cited the need for clearer and more fully
developed policies and standards for community engagement and consistency across the Port. This was also reinforced in the
EDI Assessment Listening Sessions.80 


78 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Quantitative Data. Prepared by Business Intelligence Unit for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June 2021.
79 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Quantitative Data. Prepared by Business Intelligence Unit for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. June 2021.
Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
80 Port of Seattle Equity Survey Analysis of Qualitative Data. Prepared by Tu Consulting for Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. August 2021.
65

Employees who participated in the EDI Assessment Listening Sessions identified underlying causes of this gap including lack of
BIPOC representation in leadership, barriers for community partners, and lack of stakeholder analysis.81 
Progress to Date
OEDI is working to form a Community Equity Board as a formal space to ensure that communities can engage with the Port
with power and positionality, and with decision making roles. OEDI has developed a draft concept for the Community Equity
Board and hosted several meetings with community stakeholders to solicit their input in shaping the formation of a board.
Several community stakeholders have met with the Executive Director and Commission several times to give feedback to help
create a meaningful way for the community to have input at the Port.
Duwamish Valley Community Equity Program continues to grow and serves as models for inclusive, collaborative community
engagement and decision-making. A racial equity consultant who was hired to focus on the Duwamish Valley work concluded
a year of anti-racist training with the Port Community Action Team and provided recommendations for structural changes.
The Duwamish River Community Hub was opened to support the Port's Community Benefits Agreement (Resolution 3767) in
the areas of community capacity building, environmental health, and economic prosperity.
Recommended Actions
49.  Continue work to stand up and operationalize the Community Equity Board to create more opportunities and possibilities for
community input into decision-making for programmatic and policy decisions and community investments. (Lead: OEDI)
50.  OEDI, External Relations, and departments that conduct community engagement create processes and best practices for
how the Port engages communities. (Lead: OEDI and External Relations). These processes will help departments and teams to:
Identify and define the communities and people who are impacted by decisions, policies, and programs
Determine type and level of engagement for a given project (e.g., informing, consulting, collaborating, empowering, etc.)

81 EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. July - September 2021.
66

Identify and address barriers for meaningful community involvement and inclusion
51.  External Relations will offer support to develop Port employees' skills to navigate power dynamics, build authentic
relationships, and engage communities in inclusive, meaningful ways. (Lead: External Relations)
52.  Create dedicated funding to support and remove barriers for community engagement, including language assistance and
stipends for community advisors. (Lead: External Relations)










67

Focus Area: Engaging Impacted Communities
Issue 15. Challenging processes for community-based organizations to contract with the Port
Key Concerns and Input
In addition to the overall role and power of external stakeholders in the Port's work, employees also identified the need to
improve contracting with community-based organizations.
Employees noted that the Port's community investment programs, such as the South King County Fund, need improvements. As
a recent example, that Fund, which had its first funding cycle in 2020, surfaced several systemic barriers in implementation that
present opportunities for improvement. Key challenges include the following, which are further detailed in a separate report.82 
Port's statutory authority as a special-purpose government, as well as the need to demonstrate "benefit to the Port", create
direct tension with goals for equity-centered and community-centered work.
Applying existing procurement processes that were designed primarily for larger and/or for-profit companies, is not effective
for and responsive to community-based organizations seeking Port funding, especially smaller or newer organizations from
underserved communities that are often the stated priority for Port funding and partnerships.
The two issues above cascade into a myriad of specific barriers and issues in the implementation of funding opportunities like
the South King County Fund. These include very long periods of time between fund award and fund disbursement; difficult
access to funding information and process, especially by smaller organizations and/or those whose primary language of
operation is not English; and complicated steps and requirements in the application process.
Several commenters noted that their departments or units conduct community engagement with an intentional equity lens, citing
examples such as the Port's South King County Fund and Duwamish Valley Community Equity Program. Ideas for improvements
included slowing down processes to ensure sufficient time to meaningfully engage impacted communities, requiring project

82 Port of Seattle South King County Fund 2020: Economic Recovery Grants Program Cycle 1 Final Report. Aaliyah Gupta and Nanette Fok, South King County
Fund Consultants. April 2021.
68

managers to show evidence of their outreach to underrepresented and impacted communities for contracts, developing an
Employee Language Bank, and simplifying procurement processes for community partners, bringing community partners into
decision making, and continuing trainings on navigating power dynamics with community partnerships.83 
Progress to Date
South King County Fund completed its first funding cycle in 2020, economic recovery grants and environmental grants
supported twenty organizations with a total $1.5 million. Report from consultants includes recommendations for ongoing and
future work. This report includes a survey of all the potential applicants who attended Q&A sessions and made suggestions for
systems improvements at the Port.
The Maritime Sustainability Team, Maritime Environment and Sustainability Environmental Justice Workgroup, External
Relations Team, and Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion partnered to create a Community Engagement Playbook to guide
the implementation of the Northwest Ports Clean Air Strategy and the Maritime Climate and Air Action Plan. This playbook
outlines six steps that can be used at the beginning of a project to design an equitable engagement plan. The Port's Maritime
Environmental and Sustainability department is using this tool to help their department make equitable and inclusive decisions
about how, when, and who to engage on different projects.
External Relations and OEDI have incorporated a role for community advisors in the procurement and selection process for
community capacity building consultants and SKCF grant awards.
Starting in 2020, the Port began working with a team of multi-cultural community liaisons in support of the South King County
Fund Environmental Grants program. The team represents the rich diversity of cultures in South King County. Trusted
community members work with the Port team to develop application and outreach materials and conduct outreach with their
communities. This work has resulted in a 43% award rate to BIPOC groups in the first round of Environmental Grants.
Recommended Actions 

83 EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report. Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. July - September 2021.
69

53.  Continue process and system improvements in Port's community investment programs. Recommendations below are drawn
from the Report on the South King County Fund's First Funding Cycle:84 (Lead: OEDI and External Relations)
Empower community advisors in funding panels to have voting roles, not just advising roles.
Engage community stakeholders meaningfully throughout a processor to make improvements to existing processes by
capturing lessons learned, build long-term trust-based relationships, and put in place organizational infrastructure to
sustain that work over time.
Make all steps in the process more accessible for small organizations and businesses. These could include: modifying
funding structure to support smaller grants/scopes of work; offering multi-year funding; making all information and
communication tools more streamlined, easy to understand, and culturally and linguistically accessible; allowing technical
assistance to be offered to grant applicants; and improving VendorConnect.
Significantly reduce the amount of time to negotiate scopes of work/contracts and to disburse funds. Continue to identify
and address equity and anti-racism as central to the Port's Special initiative to address anti-black racism in all community
outreach efforts.





84 Port of Seattle South King County Fund 2020: Economic Recovery Grants Program Cycle 1 Final Report. Aaliyah Gupta and Nanette Fok, South King County
Fund Consultants. April 2021.
70

Appendices
Appendix A.  Port of Seattle Motion 2020-10, Racial Bias and Equity Motion
Appendix B.   Port of Seattle Change Team Members
Appendix C.   Equity Survey Quantitative Analysis Report
Appendix D.  Equity Survey Qualitative Analysis Report
Appendix E.   EDI Assessment Listening Sessions Report
Appendix F.   Change Team Formation and Self-Assessment Report
Appendix G.  Equity in Budgeting Department Survey Results and PowerPoint Summary
Appendix H.  Represented Workers Task Force Report
Appendix I.   Blacks in Government Input and Recommendations
Appendix J.   Port of Seattle 2020-21 Racial Equity Trainings Final Report
Appendix K.   Black Lives Matter Caucusing Series
Appendix L.   Port of Seattle South King County Fund 2020: Economic Recovery Grants
Program Cycle 1 Report and Recommendations from Consultants
Appendix M.  Non-represented Employees Compensation Program Review
Appendix N.  Definitions








71

Appendix A

MOTION 2020-19: 
A MOTION OF THE PORT OF SEATTLE COMMISSION 
To direct the Executive Director to examine Port operations
and policies for sources of racial bias and discrimination and
to develop programs and policies eliminating inequity in all
aspects of the organization. 

ADOPTED 
OCTOBER 13, 2020 
INTRODUCTION 
The mission of the Port of Seattle is to promote economic opportunities and quality of life in the
region by advancing trade, travel, commerce, and job creation in an equitable, accountable, and
environmentally responsible manner. The Port of Seattle's Century Agenda reaffirms our
commitment to creating opportunities and economic prosperity for all in the region by calling for
the Port to be a model for equity, diversity, and inclusion. 
The Port of Seattle Commission demonstrated its commitment to non-discrimination with the
passage of Motion 2018-06, which called for the Port to develop and implement an equity pilot
program in 2018 that would support the development of a portwide equity policy directive. With
that guidance, the Port established the Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (OEDI) in 2019.
OEDI's mission is  to build capacity across the organization to address institutional oppression
and to transform Port policies, practices, and processes. In 2020, to support this effort, OEDI
presented their 2019-2020 strategic plan and the Commission established the Equity and
Workforce Development (EWFD) Standing Committee. 
The Port has made progress and taken important steps to become a more equitable organization
and recognizes its shared responsibility and commitment to the fight against racism and
discrimination in our society. However, in recent months we have been reminded again about 
the difficult reality of the deep roots of racism in our culture. The tragic deaths of our Black
brothers and sisters around the country have demonstrated that we need to recommit with a
sense of urgency moving forward our racial equity work and to center the need to uproot anti-
Black racism. The Port will continue to urgently reflect on and tackle structural racism and
discrimination faced by our employees and communities. 
The Port's commitment to non-discrimination and equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) must be
supported by aligned policies and procedures throughout the institution. This motion takes
additional steps beyond what the OEDI Strategic Plan has set out to achieve by directing the Port
to align those policies and procedures which will result in the development of a comprehensive
policy. This will establish the Port, locally and nationally, as a leader in this work, illustrating our
commitment to act, learn, and progress as an organization that values and centers EDI,
accountability, and transparency. 

Motion 2020-19  Racial Bias and Discrimination                                                       Page 1 of 5

TEXT OF THE MOTION 
The Port of Seattle Executive Director and the Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion have 
responded to the recent national uprisings in a very intentional and impactful way that enabled
portwide unity, healing and positive institutional change. This motion is intended to support that
work while elevating the work for greater transparency, public accountability, and ensuring
Commission engagement and oversight. 
To support this work, starting January 2021 the Executive Director, or designee, shall, conduct
the following actions: 
1.  Support the efforts of the Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion to convene our
employees and offer learnings and deeper analysis of anti-Black racism. 
a.  Support and uplift the Black Lives Matter call to action and engage employees in this
work. 
2.  Require racial equity and unconscious bias training for Commissioners, the Executive
Director, the Executive Leadership Team, supervisors, managers, and employees. 
a.  Create curriculum for trainings, tailoring as needed based on different audiences. 
b.  Report to the Commission on staff participation, feedback, and learnings from
trainings in October 2021. 
3.  Establish  an  internal  Change  Team  with  representatives  from  each  division  and
department within the Port to assess the current state of equity, diversity, and inclusion 
for all teams. 
a.   Define the assessment through portwide engagement.   The assessment will be
conducted by the Change Team, who are internal stakeholders that represent each
division at the Port, as well as representatives from the Development and Diversity
Council and employee resource groups (ERG).
b.  Assessment as a baseline.  The assessment shall be the basis for a landscape equity
analysis of each division. That analysis would provide a quantitative and qualitative
baseline for Key Performance Indicators and equity metrics that each team will focus
on for the year ahead. 
c.   The assessment shall be completed by October 30, 2021. 
d.  Beginning January 2022, each department or division will submit an annual report to
OEDI who will then provide a consolidated report to the Commission on progress
made toward equity goals on an annual basis. 
4.  In addition to the portwide assessment conducted by the Change Team, OEDI will
consider the policies and issues that have been identified by Port employees as the most
challenging barriers to fairly accessing resources and opportunities at the Port. 
a.  The assessment shall include a review of: (1) employee development, promotion and
compensation; (2) recruitment, hiring, retention, and promotion of Black, Indigenous,
and people of color (BIPOC) portwide; (3) policies and practices impacting BIPOC
contractors and WMBEs, with a particular focus on firms owned by Black descendants 

Motion 2020-19  Racial Bias and Discrimination                                                       Page 2 of 5

of  slaves; (4)   contracting  and  procurement  policies  and  practices  impacting
community organizations' and contractors' access to Port resources; and (5) other
areas identified through OEDI employee engagement. 
b.  The assessment shall recommend a set of strategies and measurable outcomes that
will address identified barriers. 
c.   The assessment shall be completed by October 30, 2021. 
d.  The EWFD Committee shall use the assessments conducted by the Change Team and
OEDI to inform the development of an Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Policy Directive 
per Motion 2018-06. 
5.  Create a Community Advisory Board to ensure the Port is accountable to the public in the
integration of equity principles into the Port's work. The Community Advisory Board shall,
among other clear deliverables to be developed by OEDI: 
a.  Using the Equity Index, work with OEDI to inform the use of Port resources and
investments. 
b.  Inform the assessment process and provide policy recommendations to the Port on
addressing inequities. 
c.   Advise Port leadership (Port Commission and Leadership) on implementation of
internal and external Port equity efforts. 

STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE MOTION 
Systemic oppression and institutionalized racism have existed in our country since its founding.
Events on a national level propelled by the outrage of the killing of George Floyd by Minneapolis
police  one of the most recent murders in a long history of unjust taking of Black lives in our
country  and locally actions taken against those protesting against racism and inequality have
highlighted the long ignored structural bias and institutional discrimination that is present but
not visible to all in our institution. Throughout American history, Black, Indigenous, people of
color and immigrants have led the struggle for equity and social justice. From voting rights to civil
rights to LGBTQ rights, BIPOC and immigrant communities have fought for generations to
strengthen our nation and perfect our democracy. This moment builds upon the immeasurable
sacrifice and contributions of those communities while recognizing that we all benefit from the
eradication of social injustice.
Bias and oppression are embedded in our society, systems, and our organization. By failing to
acknowledge inequities, we play a role in perpetuating them. We can and must do better. It is
time for the Port of Seattle to look introspectively and do its part in tackling these systemic
inequities. To achieve equitable outcomes for all our communities, we must be accountable for
equitable policies that ensure racial, social, environmental, and economic justice are achieved in
principles, strategies, practices, and projects. One of the most important steps in becoming a
more equitable organization is to provide more opportunities and possibilities for communities
to provide input into programmatic, policy, and investment decisions. 

Motion 2020-19  Racial Bias and Discrimination                                                       Page 3 of 5



OEDI created an Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion strategic plan that includes a robust combination
of long-term, short-term, transactional, and transformational strategies. To create this plan, OEDI
held a series of six roundtable discussions in 2019 and 2020 with representatives from over 65
organizations. OEDI captured input from more than 800 Port staff. 
The Port of Seattle Executive Director and the OEDI  have begun to implement the
recommendations as outlined in the EDI 2019-2020 Strategic Plan by employing a framework
developed by the Government Alliance on Race and Equity (GARE)  Normalize, Organize, and
Operationalize: 
1.  Normalize: Foster discussions about race and equity at the Port by having leadership,
management, and all staff model behavior, hosting learning events, and setting the tone
for leadership and employee dialogues. 
2.  Organize: Build infrastructure and capacity to implement equity practices by creating
policy and completing an equity planning process. This process will include establishing
definitions, vision and values and creating staff capacity, and strengthening relationships
with community partners. 
3.  Operationalize: Develop all the elements that allow equity principles to be fully integrated
into  day-to-day  operations  including  budgeting  with  an  equity  lens,  creating
accountability mechanisms, and ensuring engagement by both Port staff and the public. 
This approach has positioned the Port to effectively respond to the recent national uprisings in a
very intentional and impactful way that enabled portwide unity, healing and positive institutional
change, and underscored the significant progress made toward becoming a more equitable and
inclusive organization. 
The direction of this motion builds upon the EDI Strategic Plan, the 2018 Equity Motion, and input
by Port staff, including the Port's Development and Diversity Council, Employee Resource
Groups, and external stakeholders. Additionally, ERGs, the Development and Diversity Council,
and employee caucusing groups have been instrumental in providing input and working to build
a culture of inclusion throughout the Port. 
This motion acknowledges that the fight against racism and oppression is a horizontal issue and
should be taken into account in all areas of our policies and practices. This motion also recalls
that all  employees and community members must  be entitled to protection from these
inequities, both as individuals and as a group, including positive measures for the promotion and
the full and equal enjoyment of their rights and benefits. 
Despite our current economic, health, and racial justice crises, the Port maintains its commitment 
to identifying and dismantling structural barriers to ensure that historically oppressed
communities, particularly communities of color, have access to the resources they need to thrive.
Together, we will get through these trying times; a nd if we center the needs of those most

Motion 2020-19  Racial Bias and Discrimination                                                       Page 4 of 5

impacted by these crises, we will emerge with a deeper understanding of why our social justice
efforts are so critical and with stronger conviction to keep them driving forward. 


















Motion 2020-19  Racial Bias and Discrimination                                                       Page 5 of 5

AVIATION            MARITIME        Econ Development             Corporate           Police Dept (Mike Villa)
1.  Hannah Minnehan (Acting Commander)
Aviation Security (Wendy Reiter)                                                                                          HR Talent Mgmt(Kim Desmarais)
Maritime Cruise (Michael McLaughlin)         Portfolio & Asset Mgmt(Melinda                                                       2.  Andrew Depolo (Acting Sargeant)
1.  Della Wynn (Supervisor, Av Sec)                                                                                      1.  Cathy Cameron (Sr Talen AcqRep)
1.  Marie Ellingson (Cruise                       Miller)                                                                     3.  Ashley Tobin (Officer)
2.  Janae Thomas (Full Emp Screener)           Operations &Business Devo Mgr)        1.  Alley Greymond (Sr Admin Asst)     H                                                    4.  Arman Barros (Officer)
2.  Brad Olsen (Sr MgrMaritime                                          R
Employee Relations (Cynthia Alvarez)
AVM (Stuart Matthews)                         Marketing)                                                                                                   Enviro Sustainability (To be filled)
Diversity in Contracting (Mian Rice)              1.  Anika Klix (Total Rewards Consult.)                                               E
1.  Brendalynn Taulelei (Sr MgrAVM                                                                                                                               1.  Joanna Florer (Sr Enviro Mgr)
1.  Josie Regan (Sr Admin Asst)             2.  Kristal Roberts (MgrOD & Biz Partners)                                             X
Asset&Logistic)                 Maritime Ops & Security (Kenny                                                                                         2.  Persia Duckworth (Contract Specialist)      E
2.  Beth Britz (AVM Mgr, CptlProj)                                                                                                                                                                   C
Lyles)                                                               Community Engmt(Sally del Fierro)
3.  Jennifer Shen Lee (MgrAVM Biz         1.  Anita Simmons (Sr Admin Asst)           Corporate Facilities (Nick Milos)                                                         AV Enviro Services (Arlyn Purcell)
1.  Keri Pravitz (East KC Govt Mgr)              1.  Adrian Down (Enviro Mgr)           O
Systems)                  2.  Earl Parker (Maritime Ops Mgr)         1.  Annabelle Goavec (Admin Asst)
2.  Rosie Courtney (Public Affairs Mgr)                                               P
3.  Jo Woods (Sr MgrRec Boating)                                                                                                                               P
Engineering Services (Tina Soike; Joanna       S
4.  Ray Giometti (Mgr, Harbor Busi         Real Estate & Econ Devo (Kyra Lise)              Government Relations (Nate Caminos)                 Hingle; Janice Zahn )
Aviation Cust Brand & Exp (Julie                        & Ops)                 Alley Greymond to rep Kyra's team too              1.  Eric ffitch (MgrState Govt Rel.)          1.  Helayne Wesson-Perkins (Labor Spec)
Collins)                     5.  Cymone Lee-Johnson (Harbor                                          E                                               2.  Megan O'Connor (Design Engineer)
Ops specialist)                                                R
1.  Anetria Green (AV Training                                                Tourism Development (Ron Peck)                 Communications (Kathy Roeder)            3.  Kevin Zayic (Survey Crew Manager)
Systems Analyst)                                                     1. Gail Muller (Tourism Project                 1.  Kate Hudson (AV Comms Mgr)
Maritime Project Mgmt(Anne Porter)                  Specialist)                         2.  Derek Edamura (Videographer)           Acct & Financial Reporting (Rudy Caluza;
Aviation Commercial (Dawn Hunter)         1.  Cassie Fritz (Mgr, Seaport PMG                                                                                                    Duane Hill)
1.  Khalia Moore (Sr. Bus Mgr, ADR)                   Program Ctrls)                                                        Re Transport & Cap Del (Clare Gallagher)       1.  Sharon McAllister (Sr Mgr, AFR Rev Svc)
Small team. Will work with rest of ER.             2.  Vickie Hardwell (Admin Asst)
Aviation Properties (James Jennings)           Maritime Maintenance (Delmas                                                                                                 3.  Peter Cho (Sr Acct)
1.  Ian Sharma (Air SrvcDevelopment                  Whittaker)                                                               Strategic Initiatives (Larry Ehl)                4.  Jonathan McCuistion (Acct)
Prog Mgr)                  1.  Jason Johanson (Sr Resource                                                   1.  Jared Thatcher (Process Imp. Mgr)          5.  Terrence Moody (Payroll Analyst)
Mgr)
Aviation PMG (Wayne Grotheer)                                                                                          Labor Relations (Dave Freiboth)
2.  Cassandra Pettway (MM Work                                                                                         AV Finance & Budget (Borgan Anderson)        F
1.  Sean Anderson (Capital Prgm                                                                                        1. Preston Tucker (Asst to Sr Director)                                                I
Order Intake Spec)                                                                                            1.  Linda Nelson (Sr Mgr, AV Fin & Budget)
Leader)                                                                                                                                                                            N
3.  Ramel Fuentez (Facility
2.  Ray Moreno (Capital Project Mgr)                                                                                             Legal (Pete Ramels)                 Business Intelligence (Michael Drollinger)       A
Maintenance Manager I)                                                                                                                                 N
1.  Tony Ramos (Sr MgrWorkplace Resp)        1.  John Richardson (BI Mgr-Analytics)
C
Av Fac Cap Prgms(Eileen Francisco)                                                                                                                                                                    E
1.  Nic Longo (AV Landside Planner)                                                                                                                                      ICT (Matt Breed)                                                          Internal Audit (Glen Fernandes)                                                  &
2.  Terri Palmer (Sr BldgPermit Crd)           Port of Seattle Change Team                 1.  MoraaOmwega (Internal Auditor)           1.  Dave Ruddick (Sr Tech PrgmMgr)        B
3.  Jess Olives (Sr. Admin Asst)                                                                                                                               2.  Rachel English (Sr Business Analyst)       U
D
2020-2021                        Commission (Barb Wilson)      3. Skip Tavakkolian (Sr System Architect)   G
Aviation Innovation (Dave Wilson)                                                                                       1. Erica Chung (Commission Specialist)                                                E
Risk Management (Jeff Hollingsworth)
1.  Andrew Khouw (Indoor Nav Prgm                                                                                                                                                                   T
pending
Mgr)                                                                                       E        Central Procurement Office (Nora Huey)
X
E          1. Melanie Wickliff-Small (Buyer II)                Info Security (Ron Jimerson)
Aviation Operations (Laurel Dunphy)       Port Fire Department (Randy Krause)                                          C      2. Shelly Williams (Contract Admin Constr)          1. Stephanie Warren (Info Sec Mgr)
1.  Paul Pelton (MgrAirfield           1.  Todd Starkey (Asst. Fire Chief)
Operations)                 2.  Ericka Ramos (Admin Sup.)                                            O
P        Port Construction Svc (Jermaine Murray)        Finance & Budget (Michael Tong; Elizabeth
2.  John Van Deinse (Landside Sup.)                                                                             P       1. Nancy Kitano (PCS Construction MgrIII)               Morrison; Kelly Zupan)
3.  Thais Miller (Sr Admin Asst)                                                                               S
1.  Brian Kao (Sr Port Budget Analyst)
4.  Allegra Rosler (Airport Dep Mgr)
2.  Ian Burke (Financial Analyst)
5.  Jaime Chaves (Landside Sup,                                                       Appendix B
3.  Dave Kleiber (Finance Mgr)
ATO)

Appendix C




OEDI Survey 
June 2021 











Prepared for OEDI by Bettina Friese, Ph.D., Business Intelligence

Contents 
Executive summary..3 
Findings from regression analysis by question...28 
Findings from regression analysis by group (in alphabetical order).37 
Methodology42 
Respondent characteristics44 
Work culture...53 
Operations and processes..57 
Engagement with communities and external stakeholders...61 
Hiring.67 
Promotions70 
Compensation.74 
Staff development77 
Contracting and use of Women and Minority-Owned Businesses.80 
Personal experiences and satisfaction...85 









2

Executive Summary 
The survey was conducted between April 29  May 27, 2021. The purpose of this survey was to
learn about Port employees' perceptions concerning equity, diversity and inclusion related to
Port work culture, operations and processes, engagement with external stakeholders and
WMBE, hiring, promotion, compensation, staff development and personal experiences. The
survey consisted of structured questions for each of these topics, plus one open-ended
question per topic area that provided respondents an opportunity to share their thoughts. The
survey was developed by OEDI with input from Business Intelligence. Data collection, analysis
and reporting were completed by Business Intelligence. 
The survey was disseminated across the Port to be completed online using Qualtrics. For those
with limited computer access, paper surveys were provided. A total of 50 paper surveys were
completed and sent back to OEDI. Responses from the paper surveys were entered into
Qualtrics. Note: two of the paper surveys were received after the deadline. The open-ended
comments from these surveys were included in this report. However, as the quantitative
analysis had already begun, the quantitative data from these 2 surveys was not included in this
report. A total of 1,306 Port employees completed the survey at least partially (approx. 60%
response rate). 
Respondent characteristics 
When compared to overall Port employee characteristics, some groups are underrepresented
in this study: males, more recent hires (0  5 years), non-supervisors, and represented
individuals. 
What is your Division? 
Survey
Overall Port* 
Responses 
%        n             % 
Aviation                             51.4       586           52.4% 
Corporate/Central Services          33.2       379          34.8% 
Maritime                         12.8      146          11.5% 
Economic Development             2.6       30          1.3% 
*Note: numbers vary by day. 

3

What is your racial group? Check all that apply. 
Survey       Overall 
Responses         Port 
%          n           % 
American Indian/Alaskan Native**                        1.1         14            .9 
Asian American                                          9.8        128          10.3 
Black/African American                                   7.6          99           8.3 
Hispanic/Latinx                                              3.4          44            5.6 
MENA- Middle Eastern North African**                     .8         11          n/a 
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander                      2.5          32           2.5 
White                                                49.3        644         51.4 
Not reported                                            19.3        253          16.6 
Multi-racial                                                    6.1           80            4.3 
Other*,**                                               .08           1          n/a 
*Whenever possible "other" were recoded into the above categories. 
**These groups were too small for further analysis. 
What is your gender identity? 
Survey      Overall 
Responses         Port 
%        n           % 
Male                            57.4      643         67.1 
Female                          37.4      419         32.9 
Non-binary                         1.4      16*            -- 
Other                              3.8     42**            -- 
*Respondents who identified as non-binary were excluded from further analyses as the number was too
small. 
**Respondents who identified as other were excluded from further analyses as this group represents
primarily individuals who did not want to answer this question. 



4

Do you identify as transgender?* 
Survey 
Responses 
%        n 
Yes                                    .6         7 
No                              92.9     1056 
Prefer not to answer                 6.5        74 
*The number of respondents who identified as transgender is too small for further analysis. 

How long have you worked at the Port? 
Survey    Overall
Responses       Port 
%         n         % 
0  5 years                   40.8        466        47.1 
6  10 years                 17.9        205       16.8 
11  15 years                15.4        176       12.9 
16  20 years                10.0        114       10.4 
More than 20 years         15.9       182       12.7 

Do you manage or supervise people? 
Survey    Overall
Responses       Port 
%         n         % 
Yes                          36.6        418       17.0 
No                       63.4       725      83.0 

Are you? 
Survey    Overall
Responses       Port 
%        n*         % 
Full-time                     99.0       1134        95.7 
Part-time                     1.0         11        4.3 
*Note: The number of respondents who reported working part-time is too small for further analysis. 
5

Are you? 
Survey    Overall
Responses       Port 
%        n*         % 
Represented               30.1       155       47.0 
Non-represented           69.9       360       53.0 
*Note: only 515 respondents provided a response. 
Are you? 
%         n 
Off-shift                        1.9          25 
*Note: The number of respondents who reported working off-shift is too small for further analysis. 

Analysis 
All responses (except demographics and personal characteristics) were measured on a scale of
strongly disagree (1), somewhat disagree (2), neither agree nor disagree (3), somewhat agree
(4) and strongly agree (5). Thus, scores range from 1  5, with higher scores indicating greater
agreement with the question item. 
T-tests and one-way ANOVAs were conducted to assess whether the differences in mean scores
between groups were statistically significant. These tests were conducted to assess differences
between racial groups, males and females, supervisors and non-supervisors, represented and
non-represented employees, employees in different divisions, and based on employees' length
of time with the Port. These tests tell us whether there are statistically significant differences
between groups. For example, differences in mean scores between males and females,
differences between racial/ethnic groups, and differences between supervisors and nonsupervisors.
The short-coming of t-tests and one-way ANOVAs is that they only consider one variable at a
time, such as gender. What these tests do not consider is how other variables interact with
each other. For example, if we find a difference between males and females, we do not know
whether this is due solely due to gender or whether the make-up of the two groups (males and
females) played a significant role. For example, if there are a large number of represented
employees among the men, but only a few represented employees among the women, then it 
could be that differences between males and females may not be due to gender but due to
represented status. 
6

To answer the question which variables, after controlling for other factors, are statistically
significant, we need to conduct regression analysis. R egression analysis identifies which
variables have the greatest impact on a question of interest. Regression tells us whether there
is a positive or negative correlation between the independent variables (race, gender, time at
Port, representation and other factors that we hypothesize have an impact on our dependent
variable) and the dependent variable (the main factor that we are trying to understand or
predict) when all independent variables are considered at the same time. 
The independent variables that were included in the analysis were gender, race,
representation, supervisor status, and length of time employed at the Port. 
Note: Representation differs significantly by division with a very small number of represented
employees in Corporate/Central Services and Economic Development. As a result, division was
dropped as an independent variable from the regression models. 
Findings below show the following: 
1)  Percentage of respondents who agreed or strongly agreed with the survey question. 
2)  Statistically significant differences between groups based on t-tests and ANOVAs. 
3)  Statistically significant findings from the regression analysis that controlled for gender,
race, representation, supervisor status, and length of time employed at the Port. 








7

Scores range from 1  5, with higher scores indicating greater agreement with the question
item. Only statistically significant differences (p value <.05) are reported.

Work culture: 

71.8% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that Black, Indigenous and
People of Color cultural (BIPOC) identities and expressions are respected
through words and actions. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Asians Americans agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (3.8 vs. 3.4; p=.002). 
Multi-racial respondents agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (3.9 vs. 3.4; p=.001) and Native
Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders (3.9 vs. 3.4; p=.031). 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
Asian Americans (4.3 vs. 3.8; p<.001), African Americans (4.3 vs. 3.4;
p<.001), Hispanic/Latinx (4.3 vs. 3.7; p<.001), Native Hawaiians/Pacific
Islanders (4.3 vs. 3.4; p=.001) and multi-racial respondents (4.3 vs. 3.9;
p=.002). 
Males agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
females (4.2 vs. 3.9; p<.001). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.2 vs. 4.0;
p=.025). 
Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.4 vs. 4.0;
p=.031). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans, Hispanic/Latinx and Asian Americans, compared to
whites, disagreed more strongly with this statement. 
Males, compared to females, agreed more strongly. 

8

58.6% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that the opinions of BIPOC are
sought out, valued and fully considered when making decisions. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Asian Americans agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (3.5 vs. 3.1; p=.004). 
Multi-racial respondents agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (3.6 vs. 3.1; p=.003). 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
Asian Americans (4.0 vs. 3.5; p<.001), African Americans (4.0 vs. 3.1;
p<.001), Hispanic/Latinx (4.0 vs. 3.4; p<.001), Native Hawaiians/Pacific
Islanders (4.0 vs. 3.3; p=.001), and multi-racial respondents (4.0 vs. 3.6;
p=.002). 
Males agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
females (3.9 vs. 3.6; p<.001). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans and Asian Americans, compared to whites, disagreed
more strongly. 
Males, compared to females, agreed more strongly. 

66.8% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that leaders encourage and
facilitate open dialogue about racial/ethnic issues. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Asian Americans agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (3.8 vs. 3.1; p<.001). 
Hispanic/Latinx agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (3.6 vs. 3.1; p=.040). 
Multi-racial respondents agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (3.6 vs. 3.1; p=.007). 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
Asian Americans (4.1 vs. 3.8; p=.004), African Americans (4.1 vs. 3.1;

9

p<.001), Hispanics/Latinos (4.0 vs. 3.6; p=.006), Native Hawaiians/Pacific
Islanders (4.1 vs. 3.3; p<.001), and multi-racial respondents (4.1 vs. 3.6;
p<.001). 
Supervisors agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
non-supervisors (4.0 vs. 3.8; p=.048). 
Non-represented employees agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to represented employees (3.9 vs. 3.6; p=.007). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.1 vs. 3.7;
p<.001). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans, compared to whites, disagreed more strongly. 
Males, compared to females, agreed more strongly. 
Represented employees, compared to non-represented employees,
disagreed more strongly. 

Operations and processes: 
74.5% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that participation in Office of
Equity, Diversity and Inclusion programs to normalize racial equity (e.g., Book
Clubs, Racial Caucuses) is encouraged. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Asian Americans agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to Native Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders (4.1 vs. 3.5; p=.008). 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
Asian Americans (4.3 vs. 4.1; p=.012), African Americans (4.3 vs. 3.9;
p<.001), Hispanic/Latinx (4.3 vs. 3.9; p=.007), Native Hawaiians/Pacific
Islanders (4.3 vs. 3.5; p<.001), and multi-racial respondents (4.3 vs. 3.9;
p<.001). 
Females agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
males (4.3 vs. 4.1; p=.007). 

10

Non-represented employees agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to represented employees (4.4 vs. 3.7; p<.001). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.5 vs. 4.0;
p<.001) and Maritime (4.5 vs. 4.2; p=.012). 
Respondents from Maritime agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.2 vs. 4.0; p=.004). 
Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.4 vs. 4.0;
p=.012). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans, compared to whites, disagreed more strongly. 
Represented employees, compared to non-represented employees,
disagreed more strongly. 

30.9% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that their work-related projects
and/or assignments are periodically evaluated in terms of their impact on racial
equity. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
African Americans (3.2 vs. 2.7; p=.001) and multi-racial respondents (3.2
vs. 2.8; p=.006). 
Non-represented employees agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to represented employees (3.1 vs. 2.8; p=.030). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (3.3 vs. 2.9;
p<.001) and Maritime (3.3 vs. 2.9; p=.004). 
Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (3.7 vs. 2.9;
p=.002) and Maritime (3.7 vs. 2.9; p=.004). 


11

Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
Represented employees, compared to non-represented employees,
disagreed more strongly. 

Engagement with communities and external stakeholders: 
55.3% of respondents engaged with communities and external stakeholders. 
75.6% of respondents who engaged with communities and external
stakeholders agreed or strongly agreed that there is an interest in developing
and maintaining strong, authentic, mutually respectful relationships with Black,
Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) organizations in the region. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Asian Americans agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (4.2 vs. 3.5; p<.001). 
Hispanic/Latinx agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (4.1 vs. 3.5; p=.004). 
Multi-racial respondents agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (3.9 vs. 3.5; p=.033). 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
African Americans (4.4 vs. 3.5; p<.001), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders
(4.4 vs. 3.9; p=.034) and multi-racial respondents (4.4 vs. 3.9; p<.001). 
Supervisors agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
non-supervisors (4.3 vs. 4.1; p=.028). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.4 vs. 4.1;
p<.001) and Maritime (4.4 vs. 4.1; p=.027). 
Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.6 vs. 4.1;
p=.027) and Maritime (4.6 vs. 4.1; p=.046). 

12

Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans and multi-racial respondents, compared to whites,
disagreed more strongly. 

69.4% of respondents who engaged with communities and external
stakeholders agreed or strongly agreed that BIPOC-led organizations are treated
with respect, dignity and are encouraged to engage as full partners involved in
decision-making processes when working on Port issues. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Asian Americans agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (3.8 vs. 3.2; p=.002). 
Hispanic/Latinx agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (4.0 vs. 3.2; p=.002). 
Multi-racial respondents agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (3.9 vs. 3.2; p=.001). 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
Asian Americans (4.3 vs. 3.8; p<.001), African Americans (4.3 vs. 3.2;
p<.001), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders (4.3 vs. 3.6; p=.006) and multiracial
respondents (4.3 vs. 3.9; p=.005). 
Males agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
females (4.2 vs. 3.9; p=.006). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans, Asian Americans and multi-racial respondents,
compared to whites, disagreed more strongly. 
Males, compared to females, agreed more strongly. 



13

54.3% of respondents who engaged with communities and external
stakeholders agreed or strongly agreed that cultural and linguistic competency
is a core component when they do outreach to external communities. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Asian Americans agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (4.0 vs. 3.5; p=.011) and multi-racial
respondents (4.0 vs. 3.5; p=.028). 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
African Americans (4.0 vs. 3.5; p<.001) and multi-racial respondents (4.0
vs. 3.5; p=.005). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans and multi-racial respondents, compared to whites,
disagreed more strongly. 

41.8% of respondents who engaged with communities and external
stakeholders agreed or strongly agreed that money is allocated to engage with
racially diverse communities (i.e., translations, interpreters, space for
community meetings, compensation of community members for their time). 
Statistically significant differences: 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
African Americans (3.9 vs. 3.2; p<.001), Hispanic/Latinx (3.9 vs. 3.3;
p=.031), Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islanders (3.9 vs. 3.1; p=.020) and multiracial
respondents (3.9 vs. 3.2; p<.001). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (3.8 vs. 3.5;
p=.001). 
Respondents from Maritime agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to respondents from Aviation (3.8 vs. 3.5; p=.043). 

14

Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.0 vs. 3.5;
p=.032). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans, compared to whites, disagreed more strongly. 

Hiring: 

62.4% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are aware of efforts
to partner with HR to advertise open jobs widely. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
African Americans (3.9 vs. 3.5; p<.001) and multi-racial respondents (3.9
vs. 3.6; p=.019). 
Supervisors agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
non-supervisors (4.0 vs. 3.7; p<.001). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
Supervisors, compared to non-supervisors, agreed more strongly. 

54.0% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are aware of efforts
to share job announcements with racially and ethnically diverse professional
networks. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
African Americans (3.8 vs. 3.5; p=.027) and multi-racial respondents (3.8
vs. 3.4; p=.007). 

15

Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
Supervisors, compared to non-supervisors, agreed more strongly. 

59.5% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that in addition to hiring the
best qualified candidates, racial equity should be considered in the hiring
process. 
Statistically significant differences: 
African Americans agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to Asian Americans (4.2 vs. 3.8; p=.024) and whites (4.2 vs. 3.7;
p=.002). 
Females agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
males (4.1 vs. 3.6; p<.001). 
Non-represented employees agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to represented employees (4.0 vs. 3.2; p<.001). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (3.9 vs. 3.5;
p<.001). 
Respondents from Maritime agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to respondents from Aviation (3.9 vs. 3.5; p<.001). 
Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.3 vs. 3.5;
p<.001). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans, compared to whites, agreed more strongly. 
Males, compared to females, disagreed more strongly. 
Supervisors, compared to non-supervisors, agreed more strongly. 
Represented employees, compared to non-represented employees,
disagreed more strongly. 

16

Promotions: 
62.8% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that an internal talent pipeline
with diverse participants would help to increase Black, Indigenous and People of
Color representation in leadership positions. 
Statistically significant differences: 
African Americans agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to whites (4.3 vs. 4.0; p=.018). 
Females agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
males (4.2 vs. 3.9; p<.001). 
Non-represented employees agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to represented employees (4.2 vs. 3.5; p<.001). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.2 vs. 3.8;
p<.001). 
Respondents from Maritime agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.0 vs. 3.8; p=.041). 
Respondents who had been at the Port between 0  5 years agreed more
strongly with this statement when compared to respondents who had
been with the Port between 16  20 years (4.0 vs. 3.7; p=.003). 
Respondents who had been at the Port between 6  10 years agreed
more strongly with this statement when compared to respondents who
had been with the Port between 16  20 years (4.0 vs. 3.7; p=.028). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans, compared to whites, agreed more strongly. 
Represented employees, compared to non-represented employees,
disagreed more strongly. 
Longer employment at the Port is related to stronger disagreement on
this issue. 


17

55.7% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that in addition to focusing on
the selection of the best qualified candidate, racial equity should be involved in
the promotion process to ensure diverse representation in leadership positions. 
Statistically significant differences: 
African Americans agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to whites (4.2 vs. 3.7; p<.001). 
Females agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
males (4.0 vs. 3.6; p<.001). 
Non-represented employees agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to represented employees (3.9 vs. 3.2; p<.001). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (3.9 vs. 3.5;
p<.001). 
Respondents from Maritime agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to respondents from Aviation (3.8 vs. 3.5; p=.004). 
Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.1 vs. 3.5;
p=.010). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans, compared to whites, agreed more strongly. 
Represented employees, compared to non-represented employees, 
disagreed more strongly. 






18

Compensation: 
51.5% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that employee pay is fair and
equitable for people with the same or similar jobs who have the same or similar
qualifications regardless of race/ethnicity, gender, age or other diversity
characteristics. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
Asian Americans (3.9 vs. 3.3; p<.001), African Americans (3.9 vs. 3.0;
p<.001), Hispanic/Latinx (3.9 vs. 3.2; p=.002), Native Hawaiians/Pacific
Islanders (3.9 vs. 3.3; p=.027), and multi-racial respondents (3.9 vs. 3.0;
p<.001). 
Males agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
females (4.0 vs. 3.1; p<.001). 
Represented employees agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to non-represented employees (4.4 vs. 3.3; p<.001). 
Respondents from Aviation agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to respondents from Corporate/Central Services (3.7 vs.
3.5; p=.004) and Maritime (3.7 vs. 3.3; p=.007). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans, compared to whites, disagreed more strongly. 
Males, compared to females, agreed more strongly. 
Represented employees, compared to non-represented employees,
agreed more strongly. 





19

56.3% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they understand the Port's
compensation structure. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
Asian Americans (3.7 vs. 3.5; p=.045), Native Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders
(3.7 vs. 3.0; p=.009), and multi-racial respondents (3.7 vs. 3.3; p=.003). 
Hispanic/Latinx agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to Native Hawaiians/Pacific Islanders (3.9 vs. 3.0; p=.004), and
multi-racial respondents (3.9 vs. 3.3; p=.009). 
Males agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
females (3.8 vs. 3.3; p<.001). 
Supervisors agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
non-supervisors (3.7 vs. 3.5; p=.013). 
Represented employees agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to non-represented employees (3.7 vs. 3.5; p=.044). 
Respondents who had been at the Port between 16 - 20 years agreed
more strongly with this statement when compared to respondents who
had been with the Port between 0  5 years (3.8 vs. 3.5; p=.028). 
Respondents who had been at the Port more than 20 years agreed more
strongly with this statement when compared to respondents who had
been with the Port between 0  5 years (3.8 vs. 3.6; p=.013) and 6  10
years (3.8 vs. 3.5; p=.049). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
Males, compared to females, agreed more strongly. 





20

Staff Development: 
76.0% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are encouraged to
develop themselves professionally through trainings, PortAbility, or other
learning opportunities. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
African Americans (4.2 vs. 4.0; p=.032), and multi-racial respondents (4.2
vs. 3.9; p=.002). 
Supervisors agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
non-supervisors (4.2 vs. 4.1; p=.034). 
Non-represented employees agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to represented employees (4.2 vs. 3.8; p<.001). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.2 vs. 4.0;
p=.003). 
Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.6 vs. 4.0;
p=.004). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
Represented employees, compared to non-represented employees,
disagreed more strongly. 






21

51.5% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they have time in their
schedule to pursue professional development opportunities that are of interest
to them. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Males agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
females (3.5 vs. 3.3; p=.020). 
Non-supervisors agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to supervisors (3.5 vs. 3.2; p<.001). 
Non-represented employees agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to represented employees (3.1 vs. 3.3; p=.045). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
Supervisors, compared to non-supervisors, disagreed more strongly. 

Contracting and use of Women and Minority-Owned Businesses: 

29.6% of respondents worked on contracting and use of Women and Minority-
Owned Businesses. 
64.8% of respondents who work on contracting and use of Women and
Minority-Owned Businesses agreed or strongly agreed that supplier racial equity
and diversity best practices have been implemented. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
African Americans (4.0 vs. 3.1; p<.001). 
Asian Americans agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (3.7 vs. 3.1; p=.028). 
Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.4 vs. 3.9;
p=.038) and Maritime (4.4 vs. 3.5; p=.002). 

22

Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Maritime (3.9 vs.
3.5; p=.016). 
Respondents from Aviation agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to respondents from Maritime (3.9 vs. 3.5; p=.047). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest 
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans, compared to whites, disagreed more strongly. 

70.6% of respondents who work on contracting and use of Women and
Minority-Owned Businesses agreed or strongly agreed that they are aware of
and can access a list of minority and women-owned businesses that can serve as
potential business partners. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.5 vs. 3.9;
p=.034) and Maritime (4.5 vs. 3.6; p=.007). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Maritime (4.1 vs.
3.6; p=.008). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
Asian Americans, compared to whites, disagreed more strongly. 
Represented employees, compared to non-represented employees,
disagreed more strongly. 



23

66.7% of respondents who work on contracting and use of Women and
Minority-Owned Businesses agreed or strongly agreed that equity goals have
been set to assess the efficacy of working with minority and women-owned
businesses. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
African Americans (4.2 vs. 3.6; p=.022) and Asian Americans (4.2 vs. 3.7;
p=.009). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.3 vs. 3.8;
p<.001) and Maritime (4.3 vs. 3.6; p<.001). 
Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.5 vs. 3.8;
p<.001) and Maritime (4.5 vs. 3.6; p=.005). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
Represented employees, compared to non-represented employees,
disagreed more strongly. 

68.4% of respondents who work on contracting and use of Women and
Minority-Owned Businesses agreed or strongly agreed that a concerted effort is
made to procure goods/services from underrepresented suppliers. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
African Americans (4.2 vs. 3.1; p<.001), Asian Americans (4.2 vs. 3.7;
p=.011) and multi-racial respondents (4.2 vs. 3.7; p=.020). 
Asian Americans agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (3.7 vs. 3.1; p=.041). 
Hispanic/Latinx agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans 4.3 vs. 3.1; p=.003). 
Respondents from Aviation agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to respondents from Maritime (4.0 vs. 3.5; p=.014). 
24

Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.5 vs. 4.0;
p=.043) and Maritime (4.5 vs. 3.5; p<.001). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Maritime (4.2 vs.
3.5; p<.001). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans, compared to whites, disagreed more strongly. 

Personal experiences and satisfaction: 

57.6% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they feel comfortable
talking openly about issues related to diversity, equity and inclusion at the Port
of Seattle. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
multi-racial respondents (3.6 vs. 3.3; p=.021). 
Females agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
males (3.7 vs. 3.5; p=.030). 
Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.3 vs. 3.3;
p<.001), Corporate/Central Services (4.3 vs. 3.7; p=.015) and Maritime
(4.3 vs. 3.6; p=.014). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (3.7 vs. 3.3;
p<.001). 
Respondents from Maritime agreed more strongly with this statement
when compared to respondents from Aviation (3.6 vs. 3.3; p=.020). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
25

African Americans and Asian Americans, compared to whites, disagreed
more strongly. 
Supervisors, compared to non-supervisors, agreed more strongly. 
Represented employees, compared to non-represented employees,
disagreed more strongly. 

50.7% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they are satisfied that any
conflicts at the Port of Seattle related to diversity, equity and inclusion issues
would be addressed appropriately. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
African Americans (3.6 vs. 3.0; p<.001) and multi-racial respondents (3.6
vs. 3.1; p=.002). 
Asian Americans agreed more strongly with this statement when
compared to African Americans (3.5 vs. 3.0; p=.003). 
Males agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
females (3.6 vs. 3.3; p=.007). 
Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.2 vs. 3.3;
p<.001), Corporate/Central Services (4.2 vs. 3.5; p=.004) and Maritime
(4.2 vs. 3.3; p<.001). 
Respondents who had been at the Port 0  5 years agreed more strongly
with this statement when compared to respondents who had been with
the Port between 11  15 years (3.6 vs. 3.3; p=.013) and 16  20 years
(3.6 vs. 3.2; p=.018). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans, compared to whites, disagreed more strongly. 
Males, compared to females, agreed more strongly. 
Longer employment at the Port is related to stronger disagreement on
this issue. 

26

80.0% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that if they or someone else
were experiencing racial/ethnic discrimination at the Port of Seattle, they would
communicate to their supervisor or a person in leadership. 
Statistically significant differences: 
Whites agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
Asian Americans (4.5 vs. 4.1; p<.001), African Americans (4.5 vs. 3.9;
p<.001), Hispanic/Latinx (4.5 vs. 4.1; p=.037), Native Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander (4.5 vs. 3.9; p=.004) and multi-racial respondents (4.5 vs. 3.9;
p<.001). 
Supervisors agreed more strongly with this statement when compared to
non-supervisors (4.4 vs. 4.2; p=.002). 
Non-represented employees more strongly agreed with this statement
when compared to represented employees (4.3 vs. 4.1; p=.023). 
Respondents from Economic Development agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.7 vs. 4.1;
p=.010). 
Respondents from Corporate/Central Services agreed more strongly with
this statement when compared to respondents from Aviation (4.4 vs. 4.1;
p=.001). 
Regression analysis indicates that the following variables have the strongest
impact on this question after controlling for other independent variables in the
model: 
African Americans and Asians, compared to whites, disagreed more
strongly. 
Supervisors, compared to non-supervisors, agreed more strongly. 
Represented employees, compared to non-represented employees,
disagreed more strongly. 




27

Findings from regression analysis by question 
Work Culture        Black, Indigenous    The opinions of      Leaders encourage
and People of Color  BIPOC are sought    and facilitate open
indicates stronger       cultural (BIPOC)      out, valued and      dialogue about
agreement               identities and       fully considered     racial/ethnic issues. 
indicates stronger       expressions are      when making
disagreement             respected through   decisions. 
(compared to reference    words and actions. 
group) 
Asian American                                              
African American                                                                    
Hispanic/Latinx                           
Native Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander 
White (reference group) 
Multi-Racial 
Male                                                                         
Female (reference group) 
Supervisor 
Non-Supervisor (reference
group) 
Represented                                                                       
Non-Represented
(reference group) 
More years at Port 







28

Operations and Processes      Participation in Office of    Work-related projects
Equity, Diversity and         and/or assignments are
indicates stronger agreement    Inclusion programs to       periodically evaluated in
indicates stronger               normalize racial equity      terms of their impact on
disagreement                     (e.g., Book Clubs, Racial     racial equity. 
(compared to reference group)     Caucuses) is encouraged. 
Asian American 
African American                                    
Hispanic/Latinx 
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 
White (reference group) 
Multi-Racial 
Male 
Female (reference group) 
Supervisor 
Non-Supervisor (reference group) 
Represented                                                                  
Non-Represented (reference group) 
More years at Port 










29

There is an         BIPOC-led            Cultural and    Money is allocated
Engagement with   interest in         organizations are    linguistic      to engage with
communities and   developing and    treated with        competency   racially diverse
external        maintaining        respect, dignity and  is a core        communities (i.e.,
stakeholders      strong, authentic,  are encouraged to    component     translations,
mutually          engage as full        when they do  interpreters, space
indicates          respectful          partners involved in  outreach to    for community
stronger agreement   relationships with  decision-making      external       meetings,
indicates          Black,             processes when      communities.   compensation of
stronger             Indigenous, and    working on Port                     community
disagreement         people of color     issues.                              members for their
(compared to        (BIPOC)                                             time). 
reference group)      organizations in
the region. 
Asian American                                         
African American                                                                             
Hispanic/Latinx 
Native
Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander 
White (reference
group) 
Multi-Racial                                                                   
Male                                                
Female (reference
group) 
Supervisor 
Non-Supervisor
(reference group) 
Represented 
Non-Represented
(reference group) 
More years at Port 




30

Hiring             Aware of efforts    Aware of efforts to     In addition to
to partner with     share job               hiring the best
indicates stronger       HR to advertise     announcements with   qualified
agreement               open jobs widely.   racially and ethnically  candidates, racial
indicates stronger                           diverse professional    equity should be
disagreement                                networks.             considered in the
(compared to reference                                             hiring process. 
group) 
Asian American 
African American                                                                       
Hispanic/Latinx 
Native Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander 
White (reference group) 
Multi-Racial 
Male                                                                             
Female (reference group) 
Supervisor                                                                            
Non-Supervisor (reference
group) 
Represented                                                                       
Non-Represented
(reference group) 
More years at Port 







31

An internal talent pipeline   In addition to focusing on
Promotions            with diverse participants    the selection of the best
would help to increase      qualified candidate, racial
indicates stronger agreement    Black, Indigenous and       equity should be involved
indicates stronger               People of Color             in the promotion process
disagreement                    representation in           to ensure diverse
(compared to reference group)     leadership positions.        representation in
leadership positions. 
Asian American 
African American                                                                 
Hispanic/Latinx 
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 
White (reference group) 
Multi-Racial 
Male 
Female (reference group) 
Supervisor 
Non-Supervisor (reference group) 
Represented                                                                  
Non-Represented (reference group) 
More years at Port                                    









32

Employee pay is fair and     Understand the Port's
equitable for people with    compensation structure. 
Compensation 
the same or similar jobs
who have the same or
indicates stronger agreement 
similar qualifications
indicates stronger
regardless of
disagreement 
race/ethnicity, gender, age
(compared to reference group) 
or other diversity
characteristics. 
Asian American 
African American                                    
Hispanic/Latinx 
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 
White (reference group) 
Multi-Racial 
Male                                                                        
Female (reference group) 
Supervisor 
Non-Supervisor (reference group) 
Represented                                      
Non-Represented (reference group) 
More years at Port 








33

Staff Development         Encouraged to develop      Have time in their
themselves professionally   schedule to pursue
indicates stronger agreement    through trainings,           professional development
indicates stronger               PortAbility, or other         opportunities that are of
disagreement                     learning opportunities.      interest to them. 
(compared to reference group) 
Asian American 
African American 
Hispanic/Latinx 
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander 
White (reference group) 
Multi-Racial 
Male 
Female (reference group) 
Supervisor                                                                            
Non-Supervisor (reference group) 
Represented                                      
Non-Represented (reference group) 
More years at Port 










34

Contracting and    Supplier racial    Aware of and  Equity goals     A concerted effort
use of Women and  equity and       can access a   have been set   is made to
Minority-Owned   diversity best    list of         to assess the    procure
Businesses       practices have    minority and   efficacy of       goods/services
been           women-      working with   from
indicates         implemented.     owned        minority and    underrepresented
stronger                              businesses     women-owned  suppliers. 
agreement                          that can       businesses. 
indicates                          serve as
stronger                              potential
disagreement                        business
(compared to                       partners. 
reference group) 
Asian American                                  
African American                                                                      
Hispanic/Latinx 
Native
Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander 
White (reference
group) 
Multi-Racial 
Male 
Female (reference
group) 
Supervisor 
Non-Supervisor
(reference group) 
Represented                                                   
Non-Represented
(reference group) 
More years at Port 




35

Feel comfortable    Are satisfied that     If they or someone
Personal experiences    talking openly       any conflicts at the   else were
about issues         Port of Seattle        experiencing
and satisfaction 
related to            related to diversity,   racial/ethnic
diversity, equity      equity and inclusion   discrimination at
indicates stronger      and inclusion at      issues would be       the Port of Seattle,
agreement               the Port of Seattle.   addressed           they would
indicates stronger                           appropriately.         communicate to
disagreement                                                     their supervisor or a
(compared to reference                                            person in
group)                                                               leadership. 
Asian American                                                                     
African American                                                                   
Hispanic/Latinx 
Native Hawaiian/Pacific
Islander 
White (reference group) 
Multi-Racial 
Male                                                      
Female (reference group) 
Supervisor                                                                             
Non-Supervisor (reference
group) 
Represented                                                                     
Non-Represented
(reference group) 
More years at Port                                              





36

Findings from regression analysis by group (in alphabetical order) 

African Americans (compared to whites) 
More strongly disagreed that BIPOC identities and expressions are respected through
words and actions. 
More strongly disagreed that opinions of BIPOC are sought out, valued and fully
considered when making decisions. 
More strongly disagreed that leaders encourage and facilitate open dialogue about
racial/ethnic issues. 
More strongly disagreed that participation in Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
programs to normalize racial equity is encouraged. 
More strongly disagreed that there is an interest in developing and maintaining strong,
authentic, mutually respectful relationships with BIPOC organizations in the region. 
More strongly disagreed that BIPOC-led organizations are treated with respect, dignity
and encouraged to engage as full partners involved in decision-making processes when
working on Port issues. 
More strongly disagreed that cultural and linguistic competency is a core component
when they do outreach to external communities. 
More strongly disagreed that money is allocated to engage with racially diverse
communities. 
More strongly agreed that in addition to hiring the best qualified candidates, racial
equity should be considered in the hiring process. 
More strongly agreed that an internal talent pipeline with diverse participants would
help to increase BIPOC representation in leadership positions. 
More strongly agreed that in addition to focusing on the selection of the best qualified
candidate, racial equity should be involved in the promotion process to ensure diverse
representation in leadership positions. 
More strongly disagreed that employee pay is fair and equitable for people with the
same or similar jobs who have the same or similar qualifications regardless of
race/ethnicity, gender, age, or other diversity characteristics. 
More strongly disagreed that supplier racial equity and diversity best practices have
been implemented. 

37

More strongly disagreed that a concerted effort has been made to procure
goods/services from underrepresented suppliers. 
More strongly disagreed that they feel comfortable talking openly about issues related
to diversity, equity and inclusion at the Port of Seattle. 
More strongly disagreed that they are satisfied that any conflicts at the Port of Seattle
related to diversity, equity and inclusion issues would be addressed appropriately. 
More strongly disagreed that if they or someone else were experiencing racial/ethnic
discrimination at the Port of Seattle, they would communicate to their supervisor or a
person in leadership. 

Asian Americans (compared to whites) 
More strongly disagreed that BIPOC identities and expressions are respected through
words and actions. 
More strongly disagreed that opinions of BIPOC are sought out, valued and fully
considered when making decisions. 
More strongly disagreed that BIPOC-led organizations are treated with respect, dignity
and encouraged to engage as full partners involved in decision-making processes when
working on Port issues. 
More strongly disagreed that they are aware of and can access a list of minority and
women-owned businesses that can serve as potential business partners. 
More strongly disagreed that they feel comfortable talking openly about issues related
to diversity, equity and inclusion at the Port of Seattle. 
More strongly disagreed that if they or someone else were experiencing racial/ethnic
discrimination at the Port of Seattle, they would communicate to their supervisor or a
person in leadership. 

Hispanic/Latinx (compared to whites) 
More strongly disagreed that BIPOC identities and expressions are respected through
words and actions. 


38

Males (compared to females) 
More strongly agreed that BIPOC identities and expressions are respected through
words and actions. 
More strongly agreed that opinions of BIPOC are sought out, valued and fully considered
when making decisions. 
More strongly agreed that leaders encourage and facilitate open dialogue about
racial/ethnic issues. 
More strongly agreed that BIPOC-led organizations are treated with respect, dignity and
encouraged to engage as full partners involved in decision-making processes when
working on Port issues. 
More strongly disagreed that in addition to hiring the best qualified candidates, racial
equity should be considered in the hiring process. 
More strongly agreed that employee pay is fair and equitable for people with the same
or similar jobs who have the same or similar qualifications regardless of race/ethnicity,
gender, age, or other diversity characteristics. 
More strongly agreed that they understand the Port's compensation structure. 
More strongly agreed that they are satisfied that any conflicts at the Port of Seattle
related to diversity, equity and inclusion issues would be addressed appropriately. 

Represented employees (compared to non-represented employees) 
More strongly disagreed that leaders encourage and facilitate open dialogue about
racial/ethnic issues. 
More strongly disagreed that participation in Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
programs to normalize racial equity is encouraged. 
More strongly disagreed that work-related projects and/or assignments are periodically
evaluated in terms of their impact on racial equity. 
More strongly disagreed that in addition to hiring the best qualified candidates, racial
equity should be considered in the hiring process. 
More strongly disagreed that an internal talent pipeline with diverse participants would
help to increase BIPOC representation in leadership positions. 

39

More strongly disagreed that in addition to focusing on the selection of the best
qualified candidate, racial equity should be involved in the promotion process to ensure
diverse representation in leadership positions. 
More strongly agreed that employee pay is fair and equitable for people with the same
or similar jobs who have the same or similar qualifications regardless of race/ethnicity,
gender, age, or other diversity characteristics. 
More strongly disagreed that they are encouraged to develop themselves professionally
through trainings, PortAbility or other learning opportunities. 
More strongly disagreed that they are aware of and can access a list of minority and
women-owned businesses that can serve as potential business partners. 
More strongly disagreed that equity goals have been set to assess the efficacy of
working with minority and women-owned businesses. 
More strongly disagreed that they feel comfortable talking openly about issues related
to diversity, equity and inclusion at the Port of Seattle. 
More strongly disagreed that if they or someone else were experiencing racial/ethnic
discrimination at the Port of Seattle, they would communicate to their supervisor or a
person in leadership. 

Supervisors (compared to non-supervisors) 
More strongly agreed that they are aware of efforts to partner with HR to advertise
open jobs widely. 
More strongly agreed that they are aware of efforts to share job announcements with
racially and ethnically diverse professional networks. 
More strongly agreed that in addition to hiring the best qualified candidates, racial
equity should be considered in the hiring process. 
More strongly disagreed that they have time in their schedule to pursue professional
development opportunities that are of interest to them. 
More strongly agreed that they feel comfortable talking openly about issues related to
diversity, equity and inclusion at the Port of Seattle. 
More strongly agreed that if they or someone else were experiencing racial/ethnic
discrimination at the Port of Seattle, they would communicate to their supervisor or a
person in leadership. 

40

Years at the Port of Seattle 
Disagreement that an internal talent pipeline with diverse participants would help to
increase BIPOC representation in leadership positions increases with years at the Port. 
Disagreement that they are satisfied that any conflicts at the Port of Seattle related to
diversity, equity and inclusion issues would be addressed appropriately increases with
years at the Port. 














41

Methodology 

The survey was conducted between April 29  May 27th, 2021. The purpose of this survey was
to learn about Port employees' perceptions concerning equity, diversity and inclusion related to
Port work culture, operations and processes, engagement with external stakeholders and
WMBE, hiring, promotion, compensation, staff development and personal experiences. The
survey was developed by OEDI with feedback from Business Intelligence. 
The survey was disseminated across the Port to be completed online using Qualtrics and, for
those with limited computer access, as a paper survey. A total of 50 paper surveys were
completed and sent back to OEDI. Responses from the paper surveys were entered into
Qualtrics. Note: Two of the paper surveys were received after the deadline. The open-ended
comments from these surveys were included in this report. However, as the quantitative
analysis had already begun, the quantitative data from these two surveys was not included in
this report. 
A total of 1,306 Port employees completed the survey at least partially (approx. 60% response
rate). 
Analysis 
All responses were measured on a scale of strongly disagree (1), somewhat disagree (2), neither
agree nor disagree (3), somewhat agree (4) and strongly agree (5). Thus, scores range from 1  
5, with higher scores indicating greater agreement with the question. 
T-tests and one-way ANOVAs were conducted to assess whether the differences in mean scores
between groups were statistically significant. These tests were conducted to assess differences
between racial groups, males and females, supervisors and non-supervisors, represented and
non-represented employees, employees in different divisions, and based on employees' years
at the Port. 
Regression analysis was conducted to examine which variables have the greatest impact on
questions of interest. The independent variables that were included in the analysis were
gender, race, representation, supervisor, and years at the Port. 
Limitations 
One of the limitations of the study is that, even though the study achieved a 60% response rate,
the respondents may not be representative of Port employees. Employees with more favorable
views of diversity, equity and inclusion and the topic and purpose of the survey may have been
42

more likely to take the survey or complete the survey in its entirety. When compared to overall
Port employee characteristics, the following groups are underrepresented in this study: males,
more recent hires (0  5 years), non-supervisors, and represented individuals. 
It is also noteworthy that there was attrition when it came to the completion of questions
about demographics and personal characteristics at the end of the survey. A total of 1,296
respondents answered the first set of survey questions about work culture, compared to 1,120
who reported their gender, and 1,053 who reported their race/ethnicity. One potential
explanation may be that respondents dropped out of the survey prior to getting to these
questions or they perceived these questions to be sensitive and did not want to respond. 
Some groups were too small for in-depth analysis, including off-shift employees, part-time
employees, and employees who identified as non-binary (gender), Middle Eastern/North
African, and American Indian/Alaskan Native. 












43

Respondent Characteristics 
What is your Division? 
Survey
Overall Port* 
Responses 
%        n             % 
Aviation                             51.4       586           52.4% 
Corporate/Central Services          33.2       379          34.8% 
Maritime                         12.8      146          11.5% 
Economic Development             2.6       30          1.3% 
*Note: numbers vary by day. 
What is your racial group? Check all that apply. 
Note: Out of 1,306 respondents, 1053 reported on their race. 
Survey       Overall 
Responses         Port 
%          n           % 
American Indian/Alaskan Native**                        1.1         14            .9 
Asian American                                          9.8        128          10.3 
Black/African American                                   7.6          99           8.3 
Hispanic/Latinx                                              3.4          44            5.6 
MENA- Middle Eastern North African**                     .8         11          n/a 
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander                      2.5          32           2.5 
White                                                49.3        644         51.4 
Not reported                                            19.3        253          16.6 
Multi-racial                                                    6.1           80            4.3 
Other*,**                                               .08           1          n/a 
*Whenever possible "other" were recoded into the above categories. 
**These groups were too small for further analysis. 



44

What is your gender identity? 
Survey      Overall 
Responses         Port 
%        n           % 
Male                            57.4      643         67.1 
Female                          37.4      419         32.9 
Non-binary                         1.4      16*            -- 
Other                              3.8     42**            -- 
*Respondents who identified as non-binary were excluded from further analyses as the number was too
small. 
**Respondents who identified as other were excluded from further analyses as this group represents
primarily individuals who did not want to answer this question. 
Other included: 
Cis Gender Male 
Does it matter? or my color? Don't judge. 
Doesn't matter (n=3) 
Gender Fluid They/She 
Human 
In transition M to F 
It shouldn't matter 
n/a 
None 
Not germane (n=2) 
Not your business, stop asking. 
Please stop asking. 
Prefer not to answer (n=3) 
Unspecified 
Vaccinated 
What difference does it make? 
You are born either male or female. That is how God made us. 




45

Do you identify as transgender?* 
Survey 
Responses 
%        n 
Yes                                    .6         7 
No                              92.9     1056 
Prefer not to answer                 6.5        74 
*The number of respondents who identified as transgender is too small for further analysis. 

Are there any other ways that you identify that you would like to share? 
Human male 
50 years old 
60 years of age and a Vet. 
A human being 
African American 
Again, I cannot believe you are asking this transgender question. Do you realize out of
326,000,000 Million Americans only 1.2 million of them claim to be transgender in 2020? Why
are even asking when 99.997% of Americans DO NOT have this Transgender designation? 
Age 
Age and position seem to matter a little too much at the Port for a public agency. 
American 
AMERICAN!!!!! 
Another unimportant inquiry 
As an American slave descendant. 
Bisexual 
Bisexual. Non Neurotypical. 
Cat Mom. 
Child-free by choice 
Christian and Baby Boomer 
Cisgender - LGBTQ Ally 
Disabled 
Disabled veteran (n=2) 
Equitable compensations and equal opportunities to get promoted to the leadership positions.
People of color faced skepticism, retaliation, and harassment from the manager(s). HR needs to
prevent these bad behaviors, resolve conflicts, and support the people of color. In the past,
they gave up fighting for their rights and justice. It's time to change. 
Father, Provider, Veteran, 
First generation 
46

Gay (n=2) 
Gay with kids 
Gay, first generation Asian-American, child of refugees. 
Gay, white, cis male 
Generally, surveys at the Port of the Seattle take way to long for post survey feedback/follow
up. If you want to affect change get information to groups quicker. After this survey is over get
information to groups within one month or you will start to lose your audience. Participants will
forget how they answered, what this was even about, or doubt management really cares. 
Hard worker, underrepresented, unspoken majority, silenced by work. 
Hetero Male and LGBTQIA+ 
History has been written by conquerors not the conquered, refusing to acknowledge an entire
people of their hereditary rights only adds to further discrimination against people. Drawing
lines in the sand only creates division. We Are All Human 
Human 
Human with red blood. Nice to most people. 
Human, I don't believe in labeling. We are all human. Everyone should be treated equal
regardless of their race, color, religious beliefs, gender or how they identify. Pay should be
based strictly on that individual's performance, nothing else. 
Human, plain and simple . . . 
Human, religious, caring, honest, fair, equitable, realistic, objective 
I am a disabled gay man 
I am a female, and find the gender pronoun sharing to be a very egregious and uncomfortable
practice. For some this is a religious issue and I would not want to see this a mandatory practice.
Please ensure that it remains voluntary. 
I am a human being. 
I AM A PERSON THAT WORKS WELL AND PROFESSIONAL WITH EACH OTHERS.. 
I am an enrolled member of the Yakama Nation; however, from outward appearances, I look like
your average Caucasian male. My struggle is real. 
I am human, a spouse, a parent, a family member, and a friend...these are my most important
identities. 
I am part of the LGBTQ community and I don't see a lot of representation around that in the
Port. 
I believe in biology. There are only two genders: Male and Female. I respect, accept and am
willing to work alongside with those that choose otherwise but I cannot accept them as a gender
other than previously stated. 
I do not share my gender, race, or sexual identity because I think it further fuels the checklist
approach to diversity the Port is investing in. 
I don't want to be labeled using arbitrary physical or mental characteristics. 
I find it disturbing how much emphasis is placed on skin color. Most of the Port employees I
know believe that places people into caucuses and segregating people based on skin color only
servers to perpetuate the problem. Can someone explain to me what it means to be Black or
47

Indigenous or be a Person of Color? There is no pure black race or indigenous race. There is
one race--the human race. 
I identify as an American with disabilities. 
I like how you have African American, Asian, and so on but then just "white" no Caucasian or
indigenous European or Anglo Saxon? Shows something to me. 
I prefer privacy. 
I think it is a tough time and rage bating on social media and the press are making it worse. The
best way forward is not to participate in either. Cooler heads usually get things done and not
listening because you disagree helps no one. 
I was undocumented most of my life, I only became a citizen last year. When I graduated high
school, I was accepted to 5 universities, and was awarded a full ride scholarship to the school I
wanted to attend. The university took it away when they found out I was undocumented, I was
crushed and could not afford school. I have no college degree.  Being able to reach those better
positions is so much harder for us. Taking into consideration equity, diversity, and inclusion to
hiring roles and pay is crucial to this organization's success. 
I would like to identify as a human being on the planet earth with the hope that when we see
we are all one we will do the work to build a sustainable future. 
I'd suggest considering immigration/refugee status, since it is another label that often gets
attached to people. 
I'm good, appreciate the preservation of anonymity in the survey. 
I'm not offering statistics about my identity because I don't want my comments to be potentially
discounted because I belong to a select group of people. 
I'm old. 57 
I'm proud of my Anglo-Saxon heritage and it should be celebrated here at the Port like any other
heritage. Or celebrate no heritages at all. 
Identity is socially negotiated and infinitely complex. The identify that matters most at work is
your professional identity, how you treat your colleagues, the substance of your work, your
ideas and how you share them, etc. I don't walk around wondering what I am or whether I'd be
more comfortable or powerful if I was known as an X. I find that kind of thinking an indication of
neurosis and deeply seated narcissism. 
It's clear where the issues are when you look at the food chain at the Port. A white gay man can
still be prejudged when it comes to woman and non-white people. Hiring a white gay woman
and not interviewing a black man for a job that he had in the past for over 2 decades... and HR
says nothing. That's the same problem we have always had. Managers that are not held
accountable to any of their actions and HR (another white male) not doing anything.  Look into
WHO applied and WHO was interviewed for the NOISE INSULATION MANAGER position that was
just posted THIS FEB!! 
Jewish 
LBGTQ (n=2) 
Lesbian 
LGBT 
48

LGBTQ, Veteran 
Military Veteran 
Mixed race marriage with mixed race children, multiple protected classes. Multiple cultural
backgrounds, college educated, At least 15 foreign country experiences at the lower economic
scale, as well as upper scales. I have slept on dirt floors in many countries as well as 5 star
hotels. Son of hard-working divorced parents. I have seen the good and bad in the world. I
have worked as a Nurse in nursing homes and as an EMT and Firefighter, I have seen people at
their worst and their best. Lately I have seen a lot of the worst. 
Most of these questions are private and have NOTHING to do with work. 
Muslim 
My Name. 
Old timer - 28 yrs at the Port - we have lots of baggage to offload and not hinder our experience. 
Over 20+ years of working at the Port. 
Over 60, passed over on emergency schedule of 2020 putting 3 probationary employees on the
schedule and effectively using up all 12 weeks of FMLA in 3 months that had to last for a full
year. Being asked repeatedly "when are you retire ring?" After 9+ years working here I'm looking
at where my next job will be. 
Pansexual/non-monogamous 
Person of color w/handicap. 
Pronoun "per" 
Queer 
Queer Woman 
Queer, Jewish, invisibly disabled 
Really Old 
Russian 
She/Her 
She/Her but gender non-conforming. I present masculine of center and frequently people are
confused as to my gender. Which makes for uncomfortable interactions with some and outright
discrimination from a few. 
Small woman owned business who is contracted with port. 
Some port-wide initiatives don't necessarily reach departmental level, past compass and
surveys. 
Stop asking dumb questions. 
Thank you for allowing us to comment and share our opinions. 
The "white" box doesn't really say anything. And so many people nowadays don't know their
background. example is white German? is it Swedish? I think we should all say "human" 
There is no such thing as race. There is only the human species. Race is a fictional idea used to
divide the specie. Only by having mixed children can we destroy racism. Anything else is a
band-aid. Time to date someone of another color. Anything else is lip-service. Blacks marry
Asians, Asians marry Whites, Whites marry Blacks. Only when all features and skin tones
become universal, will we be free of this. Signed   The Mulatto Guy. 
49

There is ONLY 2 Genders by the bible....Male and Female. To even ask the transgender question
is astonishing. You are trying to create change for 0.6% of the united states. Yes Only 1 million of
the 320,000,00 million Americans identified as Transgender in 2020.   WHY DO YOU FORCE
THIS ON US? 
There is only two genders per genetics and the bible. 
There's no room for a conservative Black man to state his opinion without getting cancelled. It's
just not safe. 
There're people with degrees and people without degrees, (educated, uneducated) there's rich
people and poor people - do we identify them? Seems we are breaking down people too much. 
This is not a college campus. We facilitate air and sea operations. Anything else is background 
noise that should be ignored to maintain focus on our mission. 
US Veteran 
Verbal Picasso 
Veteran 
White, heterosexual, male 
With the Port for 15+ years. Been there, done that, seen that and nothing has changed for the
better for BIPOC's employees. The Port talks a really good talk but in practice is severely lacking.
The Port uses images of BIPOC's to brag about diversity however, the true transparent images
would show how much work the port needs to do in order to really accomplish its EDI goals and
it starts internally. 
Working in what used to be a man's field, but over the years more women are CDL holders.
There is still discrimination in recognizing experience level. I have experienced leadership
seeking a male driver's opinion about professional driving issues who has a couple years of
driving experience, yet I've held a CDL for bus driving for over 30 years. I felt like the
assumption was because it was a man, he knew more than me as a woman about the
equipment and road experience. Just saying...... 
Yes, tons. But no, not right now. 
Yes. I identify as an individual, and not as a 'this, that, or any other.' This is a workplace
environment. For me, it is not an appropriate place to express my 'personal' anything. That is
for me. I respect others' views and perspectives and they are entitled to them. 
n/a (n=3) 
No (n=15) 





50

How long have you worked at the Port? 
Survey    Overall
Responses       Port 
%         n         % 
0  5 years                   40.8        466        47.1 
6  10 years                 17.9        205       16.8 
11  15 years                15.4        176       12.9 
16  20 years                10.0        114       10.4 
More than 20 years         15.9       182       12.7 

Do you manage or supervise people? 
Survey    Overall
Responses       Port 
%         n         % 
Yes                          36.6        418       17.0 
No                       63.4       725      83.0 

Are you? 
Survey    Overall
Responses       Port 
%        n*         % 
Full-time                     99.0       1134        95.7 
Part-time                     1.0         11        4.3 
*Note: The number of respondents who reported working part-time is too small for further analysis. 

Are you? 
Survey    Overall
Responses       Port 
%        n*         % 
Represented               30.1       155       47.0 
Non-represented           69.9       360       53.0 
*Note: only 515 respondents provided a response. 
51

Are you? 
%         n 
Off-shift                        1.9          25 
*Note: The number of respondents who reported working off-shift is too small for further analysis. 

176 respondents provided their name/email address at the end of the survey. 
















52

Work Culture 
Thinking about where you work at the Port, how strongly do you agree or disagree with the following
statements? 
Neither
agree
Strongly  Somewhat        nor  Somewhat  Strongly
disagree     disagree   disagree        agree     agree      Don't    Overall
(1)            (2)           (3)            (4)         (5)     know*       mean 
Black, Indigenous and People of
Color cultural (BIPOC) identities
4.5%        6.2%      13.7%       27.7%     44.1%      3.9%        4.1 
and expressions are respected
through words and actions. 
The opinions of BIPOC are
sought out, valued and fully
5.2%        9.0%      20.5%       24.4%     34.2%      6.7%        3.8 
considered when making
decisions. 
Leaders encourage and facilitate
open dialogue about                 7.0%        7.9%      16.5%       26.4%     40.4%      1.8%        3.9 
racial/ethnic issues. 
*Don't know responses were excluded from the mean. 

Work culture by Division 
Corporate/ 
Central                      Economic
Aviation        Services      Maritime    Development 
Mean 
Black, Indigenous and People of Color cultural
(BIPOC) identities and expressions are respected             4.0            4.2            4.0              4.4 
through words and actions. 
The opinions of BIPOC are sought out, valued and
3.8             3.8             3.8                4.0 
fully considered when making decisions. 
Leaders encourage and facilitate open dialogue
3.7             4.1             3.9                4.1 
about racial/ethnic issues. 



53

Work culture by race* 
Native
Middle  Hawaiian/ 
American               Black/            Eastern      Other
Indian/Alaskan      Asian     African   Hispanic    North      Pacific          Multi-
Native   American   American     Latinx   African     Islander   White   Racial 
Mean 
Black,
Indigenous
and People
of Color
cultural
(BIPOC)
identities
4.1          3.8          3.4         3.7        4.0           3.4      4.3      3.9 
and
expressions
are
respected
through
words and
actions. 
The
opinions of
BIPOC are
sought out,
valued and
3.8          3.5          3.1         3.4        3.3           3.3      4.0      3.6 
fully
considered
when
making
decisions. 
Leaders
encourage
and
facilitate
open                 3.8       3.8       3.1       3.6      3.5        3.3     4.1     3.6 
dialogue
about
racial/ethnic
issues. 
*The "other" category consisted of 1 respondent after recoding and was not included in the analysis. 

54

Work culture by gender 
Male     Female 
Mean 
Black, Indigenous and People of Color cultural (BIPOC) identities and
4.2           3.9 
expressions are respected through words and actions. 
The opinions of BIPOC are sought out, valued and fully considered when
3.9           3.6 
making decisions. 
Leaders encourage and facilitate open dialogue about racial/ethnic issues.              3.9          3.9 

Work culture by years at Port 
More
0  5     6  10    11  15    16  20     than 20
years      years      years      years        years 
Mean 
Black, Indigenous and People of Color
cultural (BIPOC) identities and expressions            4.0         4.1         4.1         4.2          3.9 
are respected through words and actions. 
The opinions of BIPOC are sought out, valued
3.8         3.9         3.9         3.9          3.6 
and fully considered when making decisions. 
Leaders encourage and facilitate open
3.9         3.9         3.9         3.8          3.9 
dialogue about racial/ethnic issues. 

Work culture by supervisory status 
Non-
Supervisor    Supervisor 
Mean 
Black, Indigenous and People of Color cultural (BIPOC) identities and
4.1            4.0 
expressions are respected through words and actions. 
The opinions of BIPOC are sought out, valued and fully considered when
3.9            3.8 
making decisions. 
Leaders encourage and facilitate open dialogue about racial/ethnic issues.            4.0           3.8 



55

Work culture by representation 
Non-
Represented    Represented 
Mean 
Black, Indigenous and People of Color cultural (BIPOC) identities and
4.1                4.1 
expressions are respected through words and actions. 
The opinions of BIPOC are sought out, valued and fully considered
3.8                3.8 
when making decisions. 
Leaders encourage and facilitate open dialogue about racial/ethnic
3.6                3.9 
issues. 















56

Operations and Processes 
Thinking about where you work at the Port, how strongly do you agree or disagree with the following
statements? 
Neither
agree
Strongly  Somewhat       nor  Somewhat  Strongly
disagree     disagree  disagree        agree     agree    Don't
(1)            (2)          (3)            (4)         (5)   know*   Mean 
Participation in Office of
Equity, Diversity and
Inclusion programs to
3.7%        3.7%     15.1%       23.9%     50.6%    3.1%     4.3 
normalize racial equity
(e.g., Book Clubs, Racial
Caucuses) is encouraged. 
My work-related projects
and/or assignments are
periodically evaluated in      14.5%         9.3%     32.7%        15.0%     15.9%    12.6%      3.8 
terms of their impact on
racial equity. 
*Don't know responses were excluded from the mean. 

Operations and processes by Division 
Corporate/ 
Central                     Economic
Aviation       Services      Maritime   Development 
Mean 
Participation in Office of Equity, Diversity
and Inclusion programs to normalize racial
4.0             4.5             4.2               4.4 
equity (e.g., Book Clubs, Racial Caucuses)
is encouraged. 
My work-related projects and/or
assignments are periodically evaluated in             2.9            3.3            2.9              3.7 
terms of their impact on racial equity. 




57

Operations and processes by race* 
Native
Middle  Hawaiian/ 
American               Black/            Eastern      Other
Indian/Alaskan      Asian     African   Hispanic    North      Pacific          Multi-
Native   American   American     Latinx   African     Islander   White   Racial 
Mean 
Participation
in Office of
Equity,
Diversity 
and
Inclusion
programs to             4.3        4.1        3.9       3.9       4.4         3.5     4.3     3.9 
normalize
racial equity
(e.g., Book
Clubs, Racial
Caucuses) is
encouraged. 
My workrelated
projects
and/or
assignments
are
3.7          3.0          2.7         3.0        3.2           2.8      3.2      2.8 
periodically
evaluated in
terms of
their impact
on racial
equity. 
*The "other" category consisted of 1 respondent after recoding and was not included in the analysis. 




58

Operations and processes by gender 
Male      Female 
Mean 
Participation in Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion programs to
4.1            4.3 
normalize racial equity (e.g., Book Clubs, Racial Caucuses) is encouraged. 
My work-related projects and/or assignments are periodically evaluated
3.1            3.1 
in terms of their impact on racial equity. 

Operations and processes by years at Port 
More
0  5      6  10     11  15     16  20    than 20
years       years       years       years       years 
Mean 
Participation in Office of Equity, Diversity 
and Inclusion programs to normalize
4.2          4.2          4.3          4.2          4.1 
racial equity (e.g., Book Clubs, Racial
Caucuses) is encouraged. 
My work-related projects and/or
assignments are periodically evaluated in         3.2         3.2         3.0         3.0         3.0 
terms of their impact on racial equity. 

Operations and processes by supervisory status 
Non-
Supervisor    Supervisor 
Mean 
Participation in Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion programs to
normalize racial equity (e.g., Book Clubs, Racial Caucuses) is                         4.3            4.2 
encouraged. 
My work-related projects and/or assignments are periodically
3.1             3.1 
evaluated in terms of their impact on racial equity. 




59

Operations and processes by representation 
Non-
Represented   represented 
Mean 
Participation in Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion programs to
normalize racial equity (e.g., Book Clubs, Racial Caucuses) is                         3.7             4.4 
encouraged. 
My work-related projects and/or assignments are periodically
2.8             3.1 
evaluated in terms of their impact on racial equity. 















60

Engagement with Communities and External Stakeholders 
As part of your work, do you engage with communities and external stakeholders? 
%          n 
Yes                55.3         685 
No*             44.7        553 
*Respondents who answered 'no' skipped to the next section of the questionnaire. 

Thinking about where you work at the Port, how strongly do you agree or disagree with the following
statements? 
Neither
agree 
Strongly  Somewhat       nor  Somewhat  Strongly
disagree     disagree  disagree        agree     agree    Don't
(1)            (2)          (3)            (4)         (5)   know*   Mean 
There is an interest in
developing and
maintaining strong,
authentic, mutually
respectful relationships         3.7%         2.5%     13.9%        26.0%     49.6%     4.3%      4.2 
with Black, Indigenous,
and people of color
(BIPOC) organizations in
the region. 
BIPOC-led organizations
are treated with respect,
dignity and are
encouraged to engage as
4.0%        3.6%     15.7%       26.1%     43.3%    7.4%     4.1 
full partners involved in
decision-making
processes when working
on Port issues. 
Cultural and linguistic
competency is a core
component when we do      3.7%       5.1%     20.5%      24.4%    29.9%   16.4%     3.9 
outreach to external
communities. 
Money is allocated to
4.8%        4.9%     23.7%       19.7%     22.1%   24.8%     3.7 
engage with racially
61

diverse communities (i.e.,
translations, interpreters,
space for community
meetings, compensation
of community members
for their time). 
*Don't know responses were excluded from the mean. 

Engagement with communities and external stakeholders by Division 
Corporate/ 
Central                     Economic
Aviation       Services      Maritime   Development 
Mean 
There is an interest in developing and
maintaining strong, authentic, mutually
respectful relationships with Black,                    4.1             4.4             4.1               4.6 
Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC)
organizations in the region. 
BIPOC-led organizations are treated with
respect, dignity and are encouraged to
engage as full partners involved in                     4.0            4.2            4.0               4.3 
decision-making processes when working
on Port issues. 
Cultural and linguistic competency is a
core component when we do outreach to            3.8           4.0           3.7             4.0 
external communities. 
Money is allocated to engage with racially
diverse communities (i.e., translations,
interpreters, space for community                    3.5            3.8            3.8              4.0 
meetings, compensation of community
members for their time). 





62

Engagement with communities and external stakeholders by race* 
Native
American                                Middle  Hawaiian/ 
Indian                   Black/              Eastern       Other
/Alaskan      Asian    African   Hispanic    North      Pacific           Multi-
Native   American   American     Latinx   African     Islander   White    Racial 
Mean 
There is an
interest in
developing and
maintaining
strong, authentic,
mutually
respectful
4.3          4.2          3.5         4.1        4.6           3.9      4.4       3.9 
relationships
with Black,
Indigenous, and
people of color
(BIPOC)
organizations in
the region. 
BIPOC-led
organizations are
treated with
respect, dignity
and are
encouraged to
4.3          3.8          3.2         4.0        4.4           3.6      4.3       3.9 
engage as full
partners involved
in decisionmaking
processes
when working on
Port issues. 
Cultural and
linguistic
competency is a
core component
4.7          4.0          3.5         3.8        4.0           3.7      4.0       3.5 
when we do
outreach to
external
communities. 

63

Money is
allocated to
engage with
racially diverse
communities
(i.e., translations,
interpreters,
4.0          3.5          3.2         3.3        4.3           3.1      3.9       3.2 
space for
community
meetings,
compensation of
community
members for
their time). 
*The "other" category consisted of 1 respondent after recoding and was not included in the analysis. 

Engagement with communities and external stakeholders by gender 
Male       Female 
Mean 
There is an interest in developing and maintaining strong, authentic,
mutually respectful relationships with Black, Indigenous, and people of             4.2            4.2 
color (BIPOC) organizations in the region. 
BIPOC-led organizations are treated with respect, dignity and are
encouraged to engage as full partners involved in decision-making                  4.2            3.9 
processes when working on Port issues. 
Cultural and linguistic competency is a core component when we do
3.9             3.8 
outreach to external communities. 
Money is allocated to engage with racially diverse communities (i.e.,
translations, interpreters, space for community meetings,                          3.6            3.6 
compensation of community members for their time). 




64

Engagement with communities and external stakeholders by years at Port 
More
0  5      6  10    11  15    16  20    than 20
years       years       years       years       years 
Mean 
There is an interest in developing and
maintaining strong, authentic, mutually
respectful relationships with Black,                  4.2         4.2         4.4         4.0         4.2 
Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC)
organizations in the region. 
BIPOC-led organizations are treated with
respect, dignity and are encouraged to
engage as full partners involved in decision-         4.1         4.0         4.3         3.9         4.0 
making processes when working on Port
issues. 
Cultural and linguistic competency is a core
component when we do outreach to              4.0        3.6        3.9        3.8        3.8 
external communities. 
Money is allocated to engage with racially
diverse communities (i.e., translations,
interpreters, space for community                  3.8         3.4         3.6         3.6         3.7 
meetings, compensation of community
members for their time). 

Engagement with communities and external stakeholders by supervisory status 
Non-
Supervisor      Supervisor 
Mean 
There is an interest in developing and maintaining strong, authentic,
mutually respectful relationships with Black, Indigenous, and people of               4.3              4.1 
color (BIPOC) organizations in the region. 
BIPOC-led organizations are treated with respect, dignity and are
encouraged to engage as full partners involved in decision-making                   4.1              4.1 
processes when working on Port issues. 
Cultural and linguistic competency is a core component when we do
3.9               3.9 
outreach to external communities. 
Money is allocated to engage with racially diverse communities (i.e.,
translations, interpreters, space for community meetings,                            3.7              3.6 
compensation of community members for their time). 

65

Engagement with communities and external stakeholders by representation 
Non-
Represented    Represented 
Mean 
There is an interest in developing and maintaining strong, authentic,
mutually respectful relationships with Black, Indigenous, and people of              4.1              4.2 
color (BIPOC) organizations in the region. 
BIPOC-led organizations are treated with respect, dignity and are
encouraged to engage as full partners involved in decision-making                   4.1              4.0 
processes when working on Port issues. 
Cultural and linguistic competency is a core component when we do
3.7                3.8 
outreach to external communities. 
Money is allocated to engage with racially diverse communities (i.e.,
translations, interpreters, space for community meetings,                           3.7              3.5 
compensation of community members for their time). 












66

Hiring 
Thinking about where you work at the Port, how strongly do you agree or disagree with the following
statements? 
Neither
Strongly   Somewhat   agree nor   Somewhat  Strongly
Hiring 
disagree     disagree    disagree         agree     agree 
(1)             (2)           (3)             (4)         (5)        Mean 
I am aware of efforts to
partner with HR to               5.3%         7.7%       24.6%        26.8%     35.6%         3.8 
advertise open jobs widely. 
I am aware of efforts to
share job announcements
with racially and ethnically        6.0%          9.4%       30.7%         23.4%     30.6%          3.6 
diverse professional
networks. 
In addition to hiring the
best qualified candidates,
racial equity should be          12.3%         7.6%       20.7%         20.2%     39.3%          3.7 
considered in the hiring
process. 

Hiring by Division 
Corporate/ 
Central                    Economic
Aviation        Services     Maritime   Development 
Mean 
I am aware of efforts to partner with HR
3.7             3.9            3.8              4.0 
to advertise open jobs widely. 
I am aware of efforts to share job
announcements with racially and                   3.6            3.8           3.6             3.9 
ethnically diverse professional networks. 
In addition to hiring the best qualified
candidates, racial equity should be                   3.5             3.9            3.9              4.3 
considered in the hiring process. 



67

Hiring by race* 
Native
American                                 Middle  Hawaiian/ 
Indian/                   Black/              Eastern       Other
Alaskan      Asian    African   Hispanic    North      Pacific          Multi-
Native   American   American     Latinx   African     Islander   White   Racial 
Mean 
I am aware of
efforts to partner
with HR to                4.3         3.8         3.5        3.8       3.7          3.7      3.9      3.6 
advertise open
jobs widely. 
I am aware of
efforts to share
job
announcements
4.1          3.6          3.5         3.8        3.4           3.5      3.8      3.4 
with racially and
ethnically diverse
professional
networks. 
In addition to
hiring the best
qualified
candidates, racial           2.5          3.8          4.2         3.7        4.0           3.7      3.7      3.9 
equity should be
considered in the
hiring process. 
*The "other" category consisted of 1 respondent after recoding and was not included in the analysis. 

Hiring by gender 
Male       Female 
Mean 
I am aware of efforts to partner with HR to advertise open jobs widely.               3.9            3.8 
I am aware of efforts to share job announcements with racially and
3.7             3.6 
ethnically diverse professional networks. 
In addition to hiring the best qualified candidates, racial equity should be
3.6             4.1 
considered in the hiring process. 

68

Hiring by years at Port 
More
0  5      6  10    11  15    16  20    than 20
years       years       years       years       years 
Mean 
I am aware of efforts to partner with HR to
3.7          3.9          3.9          3.9          3.8 
advertise open jobs widely. 
I am aware of efforts to share job
announcements with racially and ethnically         3.6         3.6         3.6         3.7         3.7 
diverse professional networks. 
In addition to hiring the best qualified
candidates, racial equity should be                  3.8         3.7         3.7         3.5         3.7 
considered in the hiring process. 

Hiring by supervisory status 
Non-
Supervisor     Supervisor 
Mean 
I am aware of efforts to partner with HR to advertise open jobs widely.               4.0             3.7 
I am aware of efforts to share job announcements with racially and
3.7             3.6 
ethnically diverse professional networks. 
In addition to hiring the best qualified candidates, racial equity should be
3.8             3.7 
considered in the hiring process. 

Hiring by representation 
Non-
Represented   Represented 
Mean 
I am aware of efforts to partner with HR to advertise open jobs widely.               3.7             3.8 
I am aware of efforts to share job announcements with racially and
3.6             3.6 
ethnically diverse professional networks. 
In addition to hiring the best qualified candidates, racial equity should
3.2             4.0 
be considered in the hiring process. 

69

Promotions 
Neither
agree
Promotions         Strongly  Somewhat       nor  Somewhat  Strongly
disagree     disagree  disagree        agree     agree    Don't
(1)            (2)          (3)            (4)         (5)   know*     Mean 
An internal talent
pipeline with diverse
participants would help
to increase Black,               5.5%         2.4%     22.3%        25.7%     37.1%     7.0%        3.9 
Indigenous and People of
Color representation in
leadership positions. 
In addition to focusing on
the selection of the best
qualified candidate, racial
equity should be involved
11.3%        7.4%     21.3%       21.5%     34.2%    4.3%       3.6 
in the promotion process
to ensure diverse
representation in
leadership positions. 
*Don't know responses were excluded from the mean. 

Promotion by Division 
Corporate/ 
Central                   Economic
Aviation       Services    Maritime   Development 
Mean 
An internal talent pipeline with diverse
participants would help to increase Black,
3.8             4.2           4.0               4.1 
Indigenous and People of Color
representation in leadership positions. 
In addition to focusing on the selection of the
best qualified candidate, racial equity should
be involved in the promotion process to                 3.5            3.9          3.8             4.1 
ensure diverse representation in leadership
positions. 

70

Promotion by race* 
Native
American                                 Middle  Hawaiian/ 
Indian/                   Black/              Eastern       Other
Alaskan      Asian    African   Hispanic    North      Pacific          Multi-
Native   American   American     Latinx   African     Islander   White   Racial 
Mean 
An internal talent
pipeline with
diverse
participants would
help to increase
Black, Indigenous          3.0         4.1      4.3           4.0       4.5          3.9      4.0      4.0 
and People of
Color
representation in
leadership
positions. 
In addition to
focusing on the
selection of the
best qualified
candidate, racial
equity should be
involved in the             2.6          3.9          4.2        3.7        3.9           3.8      3.7      3.9 
promotion
process to ensure
diverse
representation in
leadership
positions. 
*The "other" category consisted of 1 respondent after recoding and was not included in the analysis. 




71

Promotion by gender 
Male       Female 
Mean 
An internal talent pipeline with diverse participants would help to increase
Black, Indigenous and People of Color representation in leadership                    3.9           4.2 
positions. 
In addition to focusing on the selection of the best qualified candidate,
racial equity should be involved in the promotion process to ensure diverse            3.6           4.0 
representation in leadership positions. 

Promotions by years at Port 
More
0  5      6  10     11  15     16  20    than 20
years       years       years       years       years 
Mean 
An internal talent pipeline with diverse
participants would help to increase Black,
4.0          4.0          3.9          3.7          4.0 
Indigenous and People of Color
representation in leadership positions. 
In addition to focusing on the selection of
the best qualified candidate, racial equity
should be involved in the promotion process         3.7         3.6         3.7         3.4         3.8 
to ensure diverse representation in
leadership positions. 

Promotion by supervisory status 
Non-
Supervisor     Supervisor 
Mean 
An internal talent pipeline with diverse participants would help to
increase Black, Indigenous and People of Color representation in                     4.0            4.0 
leadership positions. 
In addition to focusing on the selection of the best qualified candidate,
racial equity should be involved in the promotion process to ensure                   3.7            3.7 
diverse representation in leadership positions. 


72

Promotion by representation 
Non-
Represented    Represented 
Mean 
An internal talent pipeline with diverse participants would help to
increase Black, Indigenous and People of Color representation in                    3.5             4.2 
leadership positions. 
In addition to focusing on the selection of the best qualified candidate,
racial equity should be involved in the promotion process to ensure                  3.2             3.9 
diverse representation in leadership positions. 















73

Compensation 
Neither
agree
Compensation       Strongly  Somewhat      nor  Somewhat  Strongly
disagree     disagree  disagree        agree     agree    Don't
(1)            (2)          (3)            (4)         (5)   know*   Mean 
Employee pay is fair and
equitable for people with
the same or similar jobs
who have the same or
similar qualifications           11.6%        10.7%      13.2%        15.6%     35.9%    13.0%      3.6 
regardless of
race/ethnicity, gender,
age or other diversity
characteristics. 
I understand the Port's
8.3%       10.5%     18.4%       28.5%     27.8%    6.4%     3.6 
compensation structure. 
*Don't know responses were excluded from the mean. 

Compensation by Division 
Corporate/ 
Central                   Economic
Aviation       Services     Maritime   Development 
Mean 
Employee pay is fair and equitable for
people with the same or similar jobs who
have the same or similar qualifications                 3.7            3.5           3.3              3.7 
regardless of race/ethnicity, gender, age or
other diversity characteristics. 
I understand the Port's compensation
3.6            3.6           3.4               3.8 
structure. 




74

Compensation by race* 
Native
American                                 Middle  Hawaiian/ 
Indian/                   Black/              Eastern       Other
Alaskan      Asian    African   Hispanic    North      Pacific          Multi-
Native   American   American     Latinx   African     Islander   White   Racial 
Mean 
Employee pay is
fair and equitable
for people with
the same or
similar jobs who
have the same or
similar                      4.1          3.3      3.0            3.2        3.7           3.3      3.9      3.0 
qualifications
regardless of
race/ethnicity,
gender, age or
other diversity
characteristics. 
I understand the
Port's
4.4          3.5          3.5         3.9        3.5           3.0      3.7      3.3 
compensation
structure. 
*The "other" category consisted of 1 respondent after recoding and was not included in the analysis. 

Compensation by gender 
Male         Female 
Mean 
Employee pay is fair and equitable for people with the same or
similar jobs who have the same or similar qualifications regardless of              4.0               3.1 
race/ethnicity, gender, age or other diversity characteristics. 
I understand the Port's compensation structure.                                  3.8              3.3 



75

Compensation by years at Port 
More
0  5    6  10   11  15   16  20   than 20
years      years      years      years      years 
Mean 
Employee pay is fair and equitable for people
with the same or similar jobs who have the same
or similar qualifications regardless of                      3.7        3.5        3.6        3.8        3.6 
race/ethnicity, gender, age or other diversity
characteristics. 
I understand the Port's compensation structure.          3.5        3.6        3.6        3.8        3.8 

Compensation by supervisory status 
Non-
Supervisor   Supervisor 
Mean 
Employee pay is fair and equitable for people with the same or similar
jobs who have the same or similar qualifications regardless of                         3.7          3.5 
race/ethnicity, gender, age or other diversity characteristics. 
I understand the Port's compensation structure.                                      4.2          4.1 

Compensation by representation 
Non-
Represented   Represented 
Mean 
Employee pay is fair and equitable for people with the same or similar
jobs who have the same or similar qualifications regardless of                       4.4             3.3 
race/ethnicity, gender, age or other diversity characteristics. 
I understand the Port's compensation structure.                                    3.7            3.5 



76

Staff Development 
Neither
agree
Staff Development        Strongly   Somewhat       nor   Somewhat   Strongly
disagree      disagree   disagree        agree       agree 
(1)             (2)          (3)             (4)           (5)      Mean 
I am encouraged to develop
myself professionally through
3.2%         7.0%     13.8%       27.5%      48.5%        4.1 
trainings, PortAbility, or
other learning opportunities. 
I have time in my schedule to
pursue professional
11.8%        18.4%     18.3%       28.0%      23.5%        3.3 
development opportunities
that are of interest to me. 

Staff development by Division 
Corporate/ 
Central                    Economic
Aviation       Services     Maritime   Development 
Mean 
I am encouraged to develop myself
professionally through trainings, PortAbility, or            4.0            4.2            4.2              4.6 
other learning opportunities. 
I have time in my schedule to pursue
professional development opportunities that            3.3           3.4           3.2             3.7 
are of interest to me. 






77

Staff development by race* 
Native
American                                 Middle  Hawaiian/ 
Indian/                   Black/              Eastern       Other
Alaskan      Asian    African   Hispanic    North      Pacific          Multi-
Native   American   American     Latinx   African     Islander   White   Racial 
Mean 
I am encouraged
to develop myself
professionally
through trainings,          3.7         4.1         4.0        4.0       4.5          4.0      4.2      3.9 
PortAbility, or
other learning
opportunities. 
I have time in my
schedule to
pursue
professional
3.5          3.5          3.5         3.4        3.9           3.7      3.3      3.3 
development
opportunities that
are of interest to
me. 
*The "other" category consisted of 1 respondent after recoding and was not included in the analysis. 

Staff development by gender 
Male       Female 
Mean 
I am encouraged to develop myself professionally through trainings,
4.2            4.1 
PortAbility, or other learning opportunities. 
I have time in my schedule to pursue professional development
3.5            3.3 
opportunities that are of interest to me. 




78

Staff development by years at Port 
More
0  5     6  10    11  15    16  20   than 20
years      years      years      years      years 
Mean 
I am encouraged to develop myself
professionally through trainings, PortAbility, or          4.1         4.2         4.2         4.1         4.2 
other learning opportunities. 
I have time in my schedule to pursue
professional development opportunities that are        3.4        3.4        3.3        3.3        3.3 
of interest to me. 

Staff development by supervisory status 
Non-
Supervisor   Supervisor 
Mean 
I am encouraged to develop myself professionally through trainings,
3.2           3.5 
PortAbility, or other learning opportunities. 
I have time in my schedule to pursue professional development
3.8           3.9 
opportunities that are of interest to me. 

Staff development by representation 
Non-
Represented   Represented 
Mean 
I am encouraged to develop myself professionally through trainings,
3.8             4.2 
PortAbility, or other learning opportunities. 
I have time in my schedule to pursue professional development
3.1             3.3 
opportunities that are of interest to me. 




79

Contracting and Use of Women and Minority-Owned Businesses 

Do you work on contracting and the use of women and minority-owned businesses? 
%          n 
Yes                29.6         355 
No*             70.4        844 
*Respondents who answered 'no' skipped to the next section of the questionnaire. 
Thinking about where you work at the Port, how strongly do you agree or disagree with the following
statements? 
Neither
agree
Strongly  Somewhat       nor  Somewhat  Strongly
disagree     disagree  disagree        agree     agree    Don't
(1)            (2)          (3)            (4)         (5)   know*   Mean 
Supplier racial equity and
diversity best practices         4.4%         6.2%      15.2%        37.2%     27.6%     9.4%      3.9 
have been implemented. 
I am aware of and can
access a list of minority
and women-owned
4.4%        6.2%     12.6%       32.8%     37.8%    6.2%     4.0 
businesses that can serve
as potential business
partners. 
Equity goals have been
set to assess the efficacy
of working with minority       3.7%        4.6%     16.1%       27.6%     39.1%     8.9%     4.0 
and women-owned
businesses. 
A concerted effort is
made to procure
goods/services from           3.2%        5.5%     14.4%       29.6%     38.8%    8.6%     4.0 
underrepresented
suppliers. 
*Don't know responses were excluded from the mean. 


80

WMBE by Division 
Corporate/ 
Central                   Economic
Aviation       Services    Maritime   Development 
Mean 
Supplier racial equity and diversity best
3.9            3.9           3.5               4.4 
practices have been implemented. 
I am aware of and can access a list of minority
and women-owned businesses that can serve           3.9          4.1         3.6            4.5 
as potential business partners. 
Equity goals have been set to assess the
efficacy of working with minority and women-           3.8           4.3          3.6             4.5 
owned businesses. 
A concerted effort is made to procure
goods/services from underrepresented                 4.0           4.2          3.5            4.5 
suppliers. 












81

WMBE by race* 
Native
American                                 Middle  Hawaiian/ 
Indian/                   Black/              Eastern       Other
Alaskan      Asian    African   Hispanic    North      Pacific          Multi-
Native   American   American     Latinx   African     Islander   White   Racial 
Mean 
Supplier racial
equity and
diversity best
4.7          3.7          3.1         3.5        4.4           3.5      4.0      3.6 
practices have
been
implemented. 
I am aware of and
can access a list of
minority and
women-owned
3.0          3.6          3.9         4.2        4.6           4.3      4.1      3.8 
businesses that
can serve as
potential business
partners. 
Equity goals have
been set to assess
the efficacy of
working with             3.3         3.7         3.6        3.8       4.6          3.8      4.2     3.8 
minority and
women-owned
businesses. 
A concerted effort
is made to
procure
goods/services            4.0         3.7         3.1        4.3       4.4          3.5      4.2      3.7 
from
underrepresented
suppliers. 
*The "other" category consisted of 1 respondent after recoding and was not included in the analysis. 



82

WMBE by gender 
Male      Female 
Mean 
Supplier racial equity and diversity best practices have been implemented.              3.9          3.7 
I am aware of and can access a list of minority and women-owned businesses
3.9           4.1 
that can serve as potential business partners. 
Equity goals have been set to assess the efficacy of working with minority and
4.0           4.0 
women-owned businesses. 
A concerted effort is made to procure goods/services from underrepresented
4.1           4.0 
suppliers. 

WMBE by years at Port 
More
0  5     6  10    11  15    16  20    than 20
years      years      years      years      years 
Mean 
Supplier racial equity and diversity best
3.9         3.9         3.9         3.9         3.7 
practices have been implemented. 
I am aware of and can access a list of minority
and women-owned businesses that can serve         3.8        4.0        4.2        4.0        4.2 
as potential business partners. 
Equity goals have been set to assess the
efficacy of working with minority and women-         3.9        4.1        4.1        4.0        4.1 
owned businesses. 
A concerted effort is made to procure
goods/services from underrepresented               3.9        4.2        4.2        4.1        3.9 
suppliers. 






83

WMBE by supervisory status 
Non-
Supervisor   Supervisor 
Mean 
Supplier racial equity and diversity best practices have been implemented.             3.8          3.9 
I am aware of and can access a list of minority and women-owned
4.0           4.0 
businesses that can serve as potential business partners. 
Equity goals have been set to assess the efficacy of working with minority
4.0           4.0 
and women-owned businesses. 
A concerted effort is made to procure goods/services from
4.0           4.0 
underrepresented suppliers. 

WMBE by representation 
Non-
Represented  Represented 
Mean 
Supplier racial equity and diversity best practices have been
3.7             3.7 
implemented. 
I am aware of and can access a list of minority and women-owned
3.5             4.0 
businesses that can serve as potential business partners. 
Equity goals have been set to assess the efficacy of working with
3.4             4.0 
minority and women-owned businesses. 
A concerted effort is made to procure goods/services from
3.8             4.1 
underrepresented suppliers. 






84

Personal Experiences and Satisfaction 
How strongly do you agree or disagree with the following statements? 
Neither
Strongly  Somewhat     agree nor   Somewhat  Strongly
disagree     disagree       disagree        agree     agree 
(1)            (2)              (3)            (4)         (5)      Mean 
I feel comfortable talking
openly about issues related
to diversity, equity and            11.9%        13.9%          16.5%        29.9%     27.7%         3.5 
inclusion at the Port of
Seattle. 
I am satisfied that any
conflicts at the Port of Seattle
related to diversity, equity         11.5%        13.6%          24.2%        25.8%     24.9%         3.4 
and inclusion issues would be
addressed appropriately. 
If I or someone else were
experiencing racial/ethnic
discrimination at the Port of
4.9%        3.9%         11.3%       21.5%     58.5%        4.3 
Seattle, I would communicate
to my supervisor or a person
in leadership. 

Personal experiences and satisfaction by Division 
Corporate/ 
Central                   Economic
Aviation       Services    Maritime   Development 
Mean 
I feel comfortable talking openly about issues
related to diversity, equity and inclusion at the            3.3            3.7           3.6              4.3 
Port of Seattle. 
I am satisfied that any conflicts at the Port of
Seattle related to diversity, equity and
3.3            3.5           3.3               4.2 
inclusion issues would be addressed
appropriately. 
If I or someone else were experiencing
racial/ethnic discrimination at the Port of
4.1            4.4           4.3               4.7 
Seattle, I would communicate to my
supervisor or a person in leadership. 

85

Personal experiences and satisfaction by race* 
Native
American                                 Middle  Hawaiian/ 
Indian/                   Black/              Eastern       Other
Alaskan      Asian    African   Hispanic    North      Pacific          Multi-
Native   American   American     Latinx   African     Islander   White   Racial 
Mean 
I feel comfortable
talking openly
about issues
related to
2.7          3.5          3.6         3.6        3.4           3.4      3.6      3.3 
diversity, equity
and inclusion at
the Port of
Seattle. 
I am satisfied that
any conflicts at
the Port of Seattle
related to
diversity, equity            2.7          3.5          3.0         3.3        3.4           3.4      3.6      3.1 
and inclusion
issues would be
addressed
appropriately. 
If I or someone
else were
experiencing
racial/ethnic
discrimination at
the Port of                 3.1          4.1          3.9         4.1        4.5           3.9      4.5      3.9 
Seattle, I would
communicate to
my supervisor or a
person in
leadership. 
*The "other" category consisted of 1 respondent after recoding and was not included in the analysis. 


86

Personal experiences and satisfaction by gender 
Male        Female 
Mean 
I feel comfortable talking openly about issues related to diversity, equity
3.5               3.7 
and inclusion at the Port of Seattle. 
I am satisfied that any conflicts at the Port of Seattle related to diversity,
3.6               3.3 
equity and inclusion issues would be addressed appropriately. 
If I or someone else were experiencing racial/ethnic discrimination at the
Port of Seattle, I would communicate to my supervisor or a person in                4.3             4.2 
leadership. 

Personal experiences and satisfaction by years at Port 
0  5      6  10    11  15    16  20  More than
years       years      years      years     20 years 
Mean 
I feel comfortable talking openly about issues
related to diversity, equity and inclusion at the          3.5          3.4         3.4         3.3           3.7 
Port of Seattle. 
I am satisfied that any conflicts at the Port of
Seattle related to diversity, equity and inclusion         3.6          3.4         3.3         3.2           3.3 
issues would be addressed appropriately. 
If I or someone else were experiencing
racial/ethnic discrimination at the Port of
4.3          4.3         4.2         4.1           4.2 
Seattle, I would communicate to my supervisor
or a person in leadership. 







87

Personal experiences and satisfaction by supervisory status 
Non-
Supervisor     Supervisor 
Mean 
I feel comfortable talking openly about issues related to diversity, equity and
3.5             3.5 
inclusion at the Port of Seattle. 
I am satisfied that any conflicts at the Port of Seattle related to diversity,
3.4             3.4 
equity and inclusion issues would be addressed appropriately. 
If I or someone else were experiencing racial/ethnic discrimination at the
Port of Seattle, I would communicate to my supervisor or a person in                   4.4            4.2 
leadership. 

Personal experiences and satisfaction by representation 
Non-
Represented   Represented 
Mean 
I feel comfortable talking openly about issues related to diversity, equity
3.4             3.6 
and inclusion at the Port of Seattle. 
I am satisfied that any conflicts at the Port of Seattle related to diversity,
3.3             3.4 
equity and inclusion issues would be addressed appropriately. 
If I or someone else were experiencing racial/ethnic discrimination at the
Port of Seattle, I would communicate to my supervisor or a person in                   4.1            4.3 
leadership. 







88

Appendix D



Port of Seattle Office of Equity, Diversity and
Inclusion (OEDI) 
Equity Survey 
Report on Qualitative
Data Analysis 
Prepared by Tu Consulting 




FINAL 
8/2/2021 
1

Contents 
1.   Executive Summary ............................................................................................................. 3 
2.   Summary of Process ............................................................................................................ 8 
2a.   Survey Administration and Data Source ........................................................................ 8 
2b.   Analysis Process - Overall .............................................................................................. 8 
2c.    Analysis Process  Sub-analyses by Race and Gender .................................................. 10 
2d.   Limitations of Data ...................................................................................................... 11 
3.   Respondent Characteristics .............................................................................................. 12 
4.   Summary of Findings ......................................................................................................... 13 
4a.   Code Counts/Prevalence of Themes ............................................................................ 13 
4b.   Narrative Summary by Themes .................................................................................... 15 







2

1. Executive Summary 
Survey Overview and Methodology 
This analysis is based on an internal survey conducted by the Port's Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
(OEDI) from April 29  May 27, 2021, with input from the Port's Business Intelligence unit. 
The purpose of the survey was to learn about Port employees' perspectives on equity, diversity and inclusion
in a number of areas: Port Work Culture; Operations and Processes; Engagement with External Stakeholders;
Hiring, Promotion, Compensation, and Staff Development; Contracting and Use of WMBE; and Personal
Experiences.1 
The survey also included an open-ended question at the end of each of the six topical sections inviting any
additional comments. OEDI engaged external consultant Trang Tu of Tu Consulting to conduct an analysis of
that qualitative data, which is the subject of this report. 
The open-ended comments, which in this report are also referred to as "data" or "qualitative data", were
analyzed using a thematic approach. Analysis was completed for all comments and by race and gender, using a
hybrid deductive and inductive process that resulted in twenty-seven themes grouped into thirteen sub-topics
and five broader topics. 
Limitations of the data may include negativity bias, role and influence of formal survey questions on
respondent choice to add comments, and complexities of coding comments. 
About the Data 
Overall, 1,230 comments were submitted by 505 unique respondents, or 38.7 percent of the 1,306 overall
survey respondents. 
Among the five broad topic areas in the survey, three yielded the largest volume of comments: Workplace and
Organizational Culture, Employment, and Operations and Processes, with 750+, 475, and 275 comments,
respectively. 
Summary of Findings 
Cross-cutting Findings. Analyzing comments across all topics surfaced several noteworthy findings. 
Overall, the majority of comments expressed concerns, constructive feedback, and/or calls for change or
improvement on a specific issue. 
Several themes surfaced that were not asked about in the formal survey questions. These included the
role and impact of managers, unfairness and reverse discrimination toward white employees, and
consideration of gender and other dimensions of equity. 
For many of the themes that emerged, employees of color and in some cases, women, were more likely
to comment, especially regarding concerns or challenges. 
1 OEDI Survey. Analysis of Quantitative Survey Data. Port of Seattle Business Intelligence. June 2021. 
3

Topic-specific Findings. Below are key findings grouped by the five topics and corresponding sub-topics. 
Topic 1. Workplace and Organizational Culture elicited 752 comments spanning four sub-topics: Overall
Vision, Commitment and Progress on Equity; Leadership and Accountability; Workplace Culture; and Equity
Learning and Capacity Building. Prevalent themes are summarized below. 
Sub-topic: Overall Vision, Commitment and Progress on Equity 
This sub-topic included comments about Portwide vision for, prioritization of, commitment to and progress on
diversity, equity and inclusion. 
Nearly 80 comments characterized the Port's efforts on equity in positive terms. 
An additional 90 comments, the largest share in this sub-topic, gave a more mixed view, recognizing the
Port's efforts, while also acknowledging more work needs to be done. 
A smaller number of comments said that inequities exist and/or persist at the Port, especially due to an
entrenched white male power structure. 
Among respondents who identified their race, a greater share of whites described equity efforts in
positive terms and a smaller share commented that inequities exist or remain than compared with their
representation in survey responses overall, while respondents of color were more likely to comment that
inequities exist or remain and/or that more work needs to be done. 
By gender, females were also less likely to comment positively and more likely to comment that more
work needs to be done, compared with their of survey responses overall. 
Sub-topic: Leadership and Accountability 
This sub-topic included comments about several themes: whether Port leaders are seen as champions for
equity across the organization, including ensuring diversity at senior or executive levels; and whether
respondents feel that employees can voice concerns about racism and inequity and have those concerns
addressed. 
The largest share of comments in this sub-topic was about voicing concerns regarding racism,
discrimination or inequity. Almost all of the comments were negative (100 out of 108). Prevalent thoughts
included: employees not feeling safe speaking up and remaining silent for fear of retaliation, lack of
confidence that the Human Resource Department can effectively address concerns, and the difficulty of
raising issues to managers in situations where the manager is the source of concern. 
Among the 100 comments of concern regarding voicing concerns about racism, discrimination or
inequity, respondents who identified as Black/African American and multi-racial were a greater share of
comments compared to their share of survey responses, while respondents who identified as white were
roughly on par with their share of all survey responses. 
By gender, females were also a greater share of these concerns while males were a smaller share. 
Sub-topic: Workplace Culture 
This sub-topic included several inter-related themes related to workplace culture and equity: whether there
are opportunities for safe and open dialog about diversity, equity and inclusion; whether the work
4

environment feels welcoming to employees of different backgrounds and cultures; and whether input from
employees of color inform decision making. 
Most comments about open dialog expressed concerns including fear of backlash, discomfort discussing a
sensitive topic like race, and fundamental disagreements with equity values. 
Comments about the work environment being welcoming to all cultures were mostly negative. A
recurrent concern was employees of color experiencing disrespect, racism, and/or lacking voice. 
Almost all comments about BIPOC input into decision making were concerns. 
A critical mass of comments said that the Port's emphasis on racial equity and non-white groups has
created discomfort, marginalization, and at times amounts to reverse discrimination against whites. 
There were also numerous comments suggesting that the focus should be on a "colorblind" approach of
treating all people equally, instead of a racial equity approach that seeks to address inequities for specific
groups. 
Among the comments of concern about open dialog, welcoming cultures, and BIPOC input into decision
making, there was a general pattern of white respondents being a smaller share of the comments and 
respondents of color comprising a larger share, compared with their share of survey responses overall. 
In contrast, the comments about marginalization of whites were more commonly expressed by white
respondents compared to their representation in the survey responses overall. 
Sub-topic: Equity Learning and Capacity Building 
This theme centered on Portwide equity learning and capacity building, especially activities led by the Office of
Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (OEDI). Comments in this grouping are about quality, quantity and impact of
Portwide equity efforts. 
About two-thirds of the comments on this sub-topic shared concerns or suggestions for how to improve
the work, in some cases along with positive feedback. By far, the most prevalent issue was the lack of
time to participate in equity activities. 
Other respondents felt there is too much equity activity, while others said there is lack of support or
encouragement from their department leaders to participate. 
There were also numerous positive comments about equity efforts. 
Among the comments that shared concerns or suggestions for improvements in the Port's equity efforts,
most groups of employees of color were overrepresented compared to their share in the survey overall. 
By gender, females were a greater share of comments on this theme compared with their representation
in the survey overall, while males were a smaller share. 

Topic 2. Operations and Processes included 275 comments across three sub-topics: General Integration of DEI
in Operations; Role of Managers; and Specific Operational Areas. Prevalent themes are summarized below. 
Sub-topic: General Integration of DEI in Operations 
This sub-topic included comments on the extent to which diversity, equity and inclusion principles have been
integrated into the operations of departments or teams. 

5

Most of the comments about DEI in operations described a need for more work to build equity into day-
to-day operations. The prevailing theme was that there are variations across departments in how much
DEI is prioritized. 
Among the 100+ comments citing a need for more or better integration of DEI in departmental work,
white, Black/African American and Asian American respondents were overrepresented compared to
their representation the survey overall. 
A number of comments said it's important to translate dialog, language and policy into concrete actions
and changes. 
Sub-topic: Role of Managers 
A significant theme across multiple topics was the critical role of managers. Among the comments that
specifically referenced managers, most cited concerns. 
Many noted the important role of managers in determining whether departments' work is informed by DEI
considerations. Some described challenges of department leaders who don't believe in equity efforts 
while others said they feel unable to voice concerns about racism or discrimination. 
Some comments were from managers who expressed needs for more support to advance equity. 
Among comments that noted concerns with manager roles, respondents of color in some racial groups
were overrepresented as were female respondents. 

Topic 3. Community Engagement included 61 comments. 
Comments about community engagement were a mix of about half expressing needs for improvement,
and one-third noting positive aspects of community engagement. 
Areas for improvement cited included the need for clearer and more fully developed policies and
standards for community engagement; consistency in community engagement across the Port; and
culturally competent and equitable opportunities for all key Port stakeholders to engage. 

Topic 4. Employment included 472 comments across four sub-topics: Recruitment and Hiring; Department
Diversity; Professional Development, Advancement and Compensation; and Gender and Other Equity
Considerations. Prevalent themes are summarized below. 
Sub-topic: Recruitment and Hiring 
This sub-topic included inter-connected themes about recruitment, hiring, qualifications and the role of racial
equity goals in these. 
Among 105 comments about qualifications for hiring, 85 stated that hiring decisions should be based
primarily or solely on who is most qualified and/or performance, not race. 
A small number of comments said racial considerations should be part of hiring decisions due to
structural/systemic and historic inequities that have created disadvantages for some groups. 

6

Among the comments that hiring decisions should be based on qualifications or performance and not
race, white respondents made up about the same proportion as in the survey overall, while respondents
of color and females were a smaller share compared with their share in the survey overall. 
Among comments expressing concerns about hiring, employees of color in some racial groups were
overrepresented, notably Black/African American and Asian American. 
Sub-topic: Department Diversity 
Among comments about diversity in departments, the majority described a lack of diversity in specific
teams, while a minority expressed the existence of diversity. 
Among these comments, respondents identifying as white had similar representation as in the survey
overall. 
Sub-topic: Professional Development, Advancement and Compensation 
This sub-topic included comments on inter-related themes of job advancement/promotions, professional
development, and compensation. 
On job advancement, almost all comments expressed concerns or needs for improvement. The most
prevalent issue cited was favoritism of white males in promotion decisions. 
Almost all of the comments about professional development also cited need for improvement. The most
frequent concern was heavy workloads significantly limiting time for trainings. 
Regarding compensation, many comments expressed frustration about pay inequities both within and
across departments as well as by race and gender. Other concerns included job
classifications/evaluations being outdated, subjective and not matching pay levels; and pay being tied to
seniority rather than performance. 
Among the comments expressing concerns about job advancement, professional development and
compensation, white respondents were underrepresented compared with the survey overall, while
respondents of color from several racial groups and female respondents were overrepresented. 
Sub-topic: Gender and Other Equity Considerations 
A number of comments called for consideration of other aspects of equity besides race, with gender
equity mentioned most often. Other groups who face inequities were also mentioned including people
with disabilities, and the LGBTQ+ community. 
The gender composition for these comments was overwhelmingly female. 

Topic 5. Contracting included 95 comments. Prevalent themes are summarized below. 
Among comments about contracting, two-thirds shared concerns and/or ideas for improvements. 
Concerns mentioned included the need for: reduced barriers and more streamlined processes for BIPOC
contractors; addressing lack of WMBE availability; and expanding outreach. 
Respondents of color from some racial groups as well as female respondents were a greater share of
comments expressing concerns about contracting than their share in the survey overall.
7

2. Summary of Process 

2a.    Survey Administration and Data Source 
This analysis is based on an internal survey conducted by the Port's Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion
(OEDI) from April 29  May 27, 2021, with input from the Port's Business Intelligence unit. 
The purpose of the survey was to learn about Port employees' perspectives on equity, diversity and inclusion
in a number of areas. Survey questions were grouped into six topics: Port Work Culture; Operations and
Processes; Engagement with External Stakeholders; Hiring, Promotion, Compensation, and Staff Development; 
Contracting and Use of WMBE; and Personal Experiences.2 
The survey included structured questions for each of the six areas and was administered Portwide in two
formats: online using Qualtrics, and via paper surveys. A total of 1,306 Port employees submitted survey
responses. Fifty paper surveys were completed and entered into Qualtrics. Data collection, quantitative
analysis and reporting were completed by Business Intelligence.3 
The survey also included an open-ended question at the end of each of the six topical sections inviting any
additional comments. This resulted in a total 1,230 comments submitted by 505 participants out of the 1,306
who responded to the survey overall. OEDI engaged external consultant Trang Tu of Tu Consulting to conduct
an analysis of that qualitative data, which is the subject of this report. 

2b.    Analysis Process - Overall 
The open-ended comments, which in this report are also referred to as "data" or "qualitative data", were
analyzed using a thematic approach, which focuses on examining the data to identify prevalent themes. The
table below describes the steps taken in this analysis, which used a hybrid deductive and inductive approach. 
Table 1. Methodology/Process Steps 
1.  Preparing data             Initial review of data for familiarization 
Converted data in Microsoft Word format to Excel spreadsheet 
Established initial coding structure based on OEDI Equity Assessment
Framework from February 2021 that formed the basis for the survey design.
The framework included five topics4: 
1.  Work and Organizational Culture 
2.  Operations and Processes 
3.  Community Engagement 
4.  Employment 
5.  Contracting 

2 OEDI Survey. Analysis of Quantitative Survey Data. Port of Seattle Business Intelligence. June 2021. 
3 Ibid. 
4 Originally called "domains" in OEDI Equity Assessment Framework. 
8

Table 1. Methodology/Process Steps 
2.  Coding                       Round 1: reviewed data and coded by the five topics (deductive analysis) 
Round 2: reviewed data and created fourteen sub-topics5 (deductive analysis) 
Based on first two rounds of data review, adjusted coding structure to include 
thirteen sub-topics below (inductive analysis): 
1.  Work and Organizational Culture 
Overall Vision, Commitment, Progress 
Leadership and Accountability 
Workplace Culture 
Equity Learning and Capacity Building 
2.  Operations and Processes 
General Integration in Operations 
Role of Managers 
Specific Areas 
3.  Community Engagement 
Community Engagement 
4.  Employment 
Recruitment and Hiring 
Department Diversity 
Professional Development, Advancement and Compensation 
Gender and Other Equity Considerations 
5.  Contracting 
WMBE and Supplier Diversity 
3.  Generating themes        Round 3: reviewed data and coded into twenty-seven themes distributed
across the five topics and thirteen sub-topics (see Section 3a. for full listing of
the twenty-seven themes). 
Finalized structure and wording of topics, sub-topics, and themes 
After third round of data review and coding, re-reviewed coding across all 
three levels (topic, sub-topic, theme) for consistency 
4.  Analysis of themes         Tabulated counts for topics, sub-topics and themes, to identify prevalent
themes 
Round 4: reviewed and analyzed data by theme 
5.  Write up of findings        Drafted report including summary of findings for each theme, grouped by
sub-topic. Level of detail in narrative summary in each sub-topic is generally
proportionate to each theme's prevalence. 
Added selected quotes to illustrate each theme. Quotes were selected to
reflect a mix of race and gender. Volume of quotes is roughly proportionate
to the prevalence of a theme. 
6.  Sub-analyses by race      Completed additional analyses by racial group and gender (see process
and gender                 description in the following section). 


5 Originally called "sub-domains" in OEDI Equity Assessment Framework. 
9

2c.    Analysis Process  Sub-analyses by Race and Gender 
Given the focus on equity by the Port of Seattle overall, and the focus of this survey in particular, OEDI also
requested analysis of the data by race and gender. The purpose was to complement both the quantitative
analysis and the overall qualitative analysis, and surface any notable differences in perspectives when
examined by racial and gender groups. 
The process for these sub-analyses generally paralleled that for the overall analysis. An additional round of
data review was completed that involved several steps: 
Comments for each of the twenty-seven themes were tabulated by racial group and gender 
Counts were compared to identify prevalence by racial group and gender 
Sub-groupings of comments were reviewed 
Notable differences among groups were integrated into write-up of findings. 
For the sub-analyses, the reference point used was all survey responses, shown in the table below by race and
gender. These are used as comparators throughout the summary of findings in Section 3 of this report. 

Table 2. Composition of Survey Respondents6 
#                  % 
Total # of respondents                           1,306          100.0% 
Race 
American Indian/Alaskan Native                    14            1.1% 
Asian American                                  128            9.8% 
Black/African American                             99            7.6% 
Hispanic/Latinx                                      44             3.4% 
MENA - Middle Eastern North African               11            0.8% 
Multi-racial                                             80              6.1% 
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific
Islander                                                32             2.5% 
White                                          644          49.3% 
Not reported                                     253           19.3% 
Gender 
Female                                        419          37.4% 
Male                                          643          57.4% 
Non-binary                                        16            1.4% 
Other                                             42           3.80% 

6 OEDI Survey. Analysis of Quantitative Survey Data. Port of Seattle Business Intelligence. June 2021. 
10





2d.    Limitations of Data 
Introduction. Surveys and questionnaire s often contain open-ended questions, as was done in this survey, for
a variety of reasons that can include: providing an opportunity for respondents to elaborate on a particular
issue, especially when the survey topic is sensitive; inviting additional perspectives unconstrained by the
structure of the formal survey questions; and surfacing feedback about the design of the survey itself.7
Yet sometimes the diversity and complexity of qualitative feedback creates methodological challenges for
analysis, and the literature on best practices for analyzing open-ended feedback is fairly scarce. That further
underscores the importance of being transparent about limitations of this dataset, explained below.
Negativity bias. Some research literature suggests that participants who have concerns, dissatisfaction or
negative feedback may be more likely to provide open-ended comments. Respondents who do not feel they
have other avenues to voice concerns may also be more inclined to comment. However, there could also be
other reasons that may make a respondent less likely to comment, such as sensitive topics, survey fatigue
and/or fear of backlash. For this survey, some or all of these considerations may be at play for different
respondents, and are important to consider while also recognizing they cannot be factored out of the analysis.
Content of and bias in open-ended comments. Respondents may be influenced by the formal survey 
questions (also called "closed questions"). For some, closed questions can act as "thought prompts" that
influence respondents' comments, especially when the open-ended questions come after the formal
questions. On the other hand, respondents may also choose to provide comments on a topic different from
the topic area for the survey section in which they are commenting. Both of these occurred in this dataset. To
address some of these complexities, coding involved both deductive and inductive analysis, and included
tagging and redistributing comments by topic, sub-topic and theme, according to the coding framework. 
Coding and redistributing comments and duplication. The issue discussed above also leads to another
limitation of the data. Each of the six survey sections included an open-ended question, leading to six
"groupings" of comments. However, because not all comments were about the section topic in which they
were made, they were redistributed as needed during coding. As a result, this led to a small amount of
duplication when tabulating comments. To help mitigate this, especially when filtered for race and gender, the
analysis discussed themes with larger samples sizes in comparative greater detail; and in highlighting
significant differences, focused on those that were relatively larger or particularly notable (for example,
greater than 1 percentage point difference from reference point). 
Despite the complexities and limitations, having the open-ended survey data brought several benefits. It
enabled participants to share thoughts not specifically contained in the survey's closed questions. It provided
an additional breadth of perspectives, including candid views and personal accounts that might not otherwise
be captured. It allowed for an additional level of analysis by race and gender. And it added a depth of
dimension to the quantitative data that hopefully "brings to life" the critical issues of diversity, equity and
inclusion that the Port is advancing.

7 Tom Decorte, Aili Malm, Sharon R Sznitman. "The challenges and benefits of analyzing feedback comments in surveys: Lessons
from a cross-national online survey of small-scale cannabis growers." First Published  February 11, 2019
https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/2059799119825606 
11

3. Respondent Characteristics 
The survey overall had a response rate of 60 percent, with a total 1,306 responses. Within this, 505
respondents also added at least one open-ended comment. The total number of unique open-ended 
comments was 1,230. 
Overall, 38.7 percent of all survey respondents submitted at least one open-ended comment. It should be
noted that this is a relatively high response rate for comments, especially in a survey with sensitive topics. This
could indicate a high level of trust in the anonymity of the survey. 
Response also varied by race and gender. The table below shows that two racial groups  respondents who
identified as Black/African American and multi-racial  were most likely to add open-ended comments, at 50.5
percent and 50 percent, respectively. Half of participants identifying as American Indian/Alaskan Native also
submitted comments, but the sample size for that group is smaller. Other racial groups had smaller
percentages of respondents add comments, ranging from 27.3 percent to 39.8 percent. 
By gender, 43 percent of respondents who identified as female and 37.8 percent who identified as males
chose to submit comments. 
Table 3. Respondent Characteristics 
% of
Respondents
Respondents   in Group who
All Survey         with           Added
Respondents     Comments     Comment(s) 
#                  #                  % 
Total # of respondents                           1,306             505           38.7% 
Race 
American Indian/Alaskan Native                     14               7           50.0% 
Asian American                                  128              47           36.7% 
Black/African American                             99              50           50.5% 
Hispanic/Latinx                                      44               13           29.5% 
MENA - Middle Eastern North African               11               3           27.3% 
Multi-racial                                             80                40            50.0% 
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific
Islander                                                32                 9            28.1% 
White                                          644            256          39.8% 
Gender 
Female                                        419            180          43.0% 
Male                                          643            243          37.8% 
Non-binary                                        16               0            0.0% 
12

4. Summary of Findings 
4a.    Code Counts/Prevalence of Themes 
The table below shows prevalence of topics, sub-topics and themes using "counts" from the data coding. Note that while the survey
included 1,230 comments, the code count in the table below totals 1,655. This is because a given comment could  and often did  
touch on more than one theme, and as a result would be tagged with multiple codes. 
At the Topic level, two areas - Workplace and Organizational Culture, and Employment  had the largest volume of comments, with
over 750 and 475, respectively. Operations and Processes included 275 comments, and Community Engagement and Contracting
each had smaller numbers of comments. Some of these differences may reflect varying levels of interest or concern among
respondents, and/or may also be due to attrition  that survey fatigue resulted in fewer comments later in the survey. Additionally,
the smaller number of comments for Community Engagement and Contracting may have been because only a sub-set of
respondents may have been more likely to comments  those whose roles involve external engagement or contracting. 
These numbers should be taken as indications of general orders of magnitude or prevalence, not as precise counts, because the
number of comments may also reflect some of the limitations of the data as discussed in the previous section of this report. 
Table 4. Topics, Sub-topics, Themes and Code Counts 
CODE
TOPIC                         SUB-TOPIC                                 THEME                      COUNT 
inequities exist/remain                                     23
OVERALL VISION, COMMITMENT,
priority/making progress on equity                        77
PROGRESS 
1. WORKPLACE                              making progress/more work to be done            90
AND                                voicing concerns/accountability             108
LEADERSHIP AND ACCOUNTABILITY     Port leaders as equity champions                     28
ORGANIZATIONAL
leadership diversity                                         21
CULTURE                                    open dialog                             59
WORKPLACE CULTURE               welcoming cultures                               31
BIPOC input in decision making                            38
13

Table 4. Topics, Sub-topics, Themes and Code Counts 
CODE
TOPIC                         SUB-TOPIC                                 THEME                      COUNT 
white concerns and discomfort                           81
all people are equal/should be colorblind                  77
EQUITY LEARNING AND CAPACITY      quality, quantity, and impact of equity
BUILDING                            activities                                          119
TOTAL                                           752
GENERAL INTEGRATION IN            general integration in operations                    138
OPERATIONS                       translating policy into action                        27
2. OPERATIONS     ROLE OF MANAGERS             role and impact of managers                   79
AND PROCESSES                              assessing and evaluating for equity               19
SPECIFIC AREAS 
communications                                     12
TOTAL                                           275
3. COMMUNITY     COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT        community engagement and partnerships          60
ENGAGEMENT                            TOTAL                             60
recruitment                                             11
RECRUITMENT AND HIRING            hiring                                           74
qualifications and racial equity                             105
DEPARTMENT DIVERSITY              department diversity                               40
4. EMPLOYMENT                             advancement                           80
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT,
job classification and compensation                       72
ADVANCEMENT AND COMPENSATION 
professional development                               56
GENDER AND OTHER EQUITY          gender and other equity considerations                34
TOTAL                                           472
5. CONTRACTING     CONTRACTING                 WMBE and supplier diversity                   96
TOTAL                                            96
14

4b.    Narrative Summary by Themes 
This section includes a series of "Dashboards", one for each of the thirteen Sub-topics. Each Dashboard contains findings for the
twenty-seven Themes, code counts, and a selection of related quotes. 
The findings are grouped into two sections: a Summary of Findings Overall, based on analysis of all comments for each sub-topic and
theme, and Sub-analyses by Race and Gender. The latter highlights notable differences or contrasts when themes were analyzed by
race and gender. It should be noted that those findings do not discuss race and gender for every theme, as in some cases comments
reflected a racial or gender composition similar to that for the survey overall, and in other cases the sample size was too small to be
able to compare differences meaningfully. 
Finally, in presenting the findings, the level of detail both in the narrative summary and volume of illustrative quotes is generally
proportionate to each Theme's prevalence among all comments. Themes with the largest number of comments are discussed in
relatively greater detail and have the largest number of quotes. Quotes were also selected to reflect respondents across diverse
races and gender. Finally, to preserve authenticity, quotes are included without modification or notation for typos or grammar. 







15

TOPIC 
1. WORKPLACE AND ORGANIZATIONAL CULTURE 
Workplace and Organizational Culture elicited 752 comments spanning four sub-topics: Overall Vision, Commitment and Progress
on Equity; Leadership and Accountability; Workplace Culture; and Equity Learning and Capacity Building. The Dashboards below
include summaries of key themes for each of the sub-topics, along with selected quotes and code counts. 
DASHBOARD 1. 
CODE
SUB-TOPIC                                           THEMES                           COUNT 
inequities exist/remain                                                   23 
OVERALL VISION, COMMITMENT, PROGRESS          priority/making progress on equity                               77 
making progress/more work to be done                               90 
Introduction 
This sub-topic includes comments about Portwide vision for, prioritization of, commitment to and progress on diversity, equity and
inclusion. 
Summary of Findings Overall 
Nearly 80 comments characterized the Port's efforts on equity in positive terms, including perceptions that equity is a clearly
stated priority, that equity efforts have been positive, and/or that there has been good progress. 
An additional 90 comments, the largest share in this sub-topic, gave a more mixed view, recognizing the Port's efforts, while
also acknowledging more work needs to be done. Numerous comments cited the need to expand who is involved in the Port's
equity efforts, particularly employees who have been least accepting or most resistant to equity efforts. 
Twenty-three comments said that inequities exist and/or persist at the Port, especially due to an entrenched white male
power structure. Some of these comments also recounted personal experiences of racial discrimination. 
Sub-analyses by Race and Gender 
Among respondents who provided comments on this sub-topic, and identified their race, a greater percentage of whites
described equity efforts in positive terms (58 percent) and a smaller percentage commented that inequities exist or remain (26
16

DASHBOARD 1. 
percent) than compared with their representation in survey responses overall (49 percent). 
In contrast, respondents of color with comments on this sub-topic were more likely to comment that inequities exist or remain
and/or that more work needs to be done (17 percent of comments were from respondents identifying as Black/African
American and 18 and 22 percent as Asian American) compared with their representation in the survey overall (8 percent and 9 
percent, respectively). 
By gender, females were also less likely to comment positively (21 percent) and more likely to comment that more work needs
to be done (47 percent) compared with their share of survey responses overall at 37 percent. In comparison, those who
identified as males were 47 percent of positive comments and 51 percent of comments that more works needs to be done,
while being 57 percent of survey responses. 

Selected Quotes 
"Its forcing people to address it and talk about all of it. Proud that the Port executives and leaders are making room for change." 
"the Port of Seattle has been taking huge strides at improving the diversity, equity, and inclusion.As a person of color I can
remember being asked by a manager if I did windows. At the time I was bringing in coffee to a meeting that my department was 
hosting. I also remember being passed over for consideration for internal promotion in order to promote whites." 
"I know the Port of Seattle is not perfect, but I believe they are truly working to make a more equitable organization for all. The Port
is leaps and bounds ahead of my last employer and I really respect this work. I am proud to work for the Port and appreciate the
continued focus on equity!" 
"Given that much of the leadership is from the dominant culture (i.e. white), it will take time for them and others to exercise their
equity muscles so these conversations and considerations are more front and centered than they already are. I believe there's an
honest effort happening here from leadership, but we still have some way to go until this becomes the default/ norm." 
"Many organizations within the Port on DEI and/or change has a mindset of 'IT TAKES TIME.' My question 'how much time.'" 
"I think a lot more work needs to be done, but I think we are on the right track." 
17

DASHBOARD 1. 
"Recently, sense forming OEDI, the Port has conducted many caucusing; encouraged dialogue about BIPOC experiences.This is good-
-BIPOC can express this openly without retaliation; however, non BIPOC leaders are good to hear but uncomfortable to speak up or
take a real stand." 
"You see the same people self select and participate in equity and diversity events and the same people sit out. It felt as though
people were continually joining but it does seem to have plateaued it feels like." 
"The Port is trying but I am concerned about those who aren't engaged. Why?" 
"There are pockets that inclusion, discussion and embracing black and bipoc people is not happening at all. Actually quite the 
opposite. I think that we are seeing some great progress - where its visible...but the negative and the bad behavior is there and in
some areas getting worse." 
"I think we are moving towards a better understanding of these things, but I still feel like everyone, including myself, is learning how
this is relevant and integral at the Port of Seattle. I think white employees still struggle with how to recognize inequities and respond
to them." 
"Appreciate all the learning options and experiences with other Port employees.Wonder about the folks who refused to turn on their
screens and participate in break out rooms during the required equity trainings. Hoping we can get folks of differing opinions a voice
and hope they don't just stay silent, arms crossed, and faceless." 
"When I first was hired to the port I received comments about being 'spicy' or how a coworker was hiring 'my kind' to do work on
their house. I have been told multiple times to speak English because they can't understand Spanish. The Port of Seattle has a long
way to go concerning equity, diversity, and inclusion." 
"The work culture tells BIPOC employees to keep your head down, do not complain, ask for anything or expect forward advancement.
It also screams that BIPOC's cannot be emotional, have a bad day or make a mistake. The work culture lacks racial diversity in nearly
every grade above 25." 

18

DASHBOARD 2. 
CODE
SUB-TOPIC                                           THEMES                           COUNT 
voicing concerns/accountability                                        108 
LEADERSHIP AND ACCOUNTABILITY                  Port leaders as equity champions                                 28 
leadership diversity                                                        21 
Introduction 
This sub-topic includes comments about several themes: whether Port leaders are seen as champions for equity across the
organization, including ensuring diversity at senior or executive levels; and whether respondents feel that employees can voice
concerns about racism and inequity and have those concerns addressed. 
Summary of Findings Overall 
The largest share of comments in this sub-topic was about voicing concerns regarding racism, discrimination or inequity.
Almost all of the comments were negative (100 out of 108). Prevalent thoughts included: employees not feeling safe speaking up
and remaining silent for fear of retaliation, lack of confidence that the Human Resource Department can effectively address
concerns, and the difficulty of raising issues to managers in situations where the manager is the source of concern. 
Comments about Port leadership championing equity were a mix of views, with 40 percent affirmative. Comments cited Port
leaders communicating openly, setting examples, focusing on systemic changes, and creating space for employees to be
involved. The remaining comments were more critical, expressing the need for leadership to continue voicing commitments,
encouraging more widespread employee participation, and ensuring dialog leads to real results. 
There were also a number of comments about leadership diversity. Almost all of these (18 of 21 comments) expressed a need
for more diversity at the highest levels  the Executive Leadership Team and Commissioners. 
Sub-analyses by Race and Gender 
Among the 100 comments of concern regarding voicing concerns about racism, discrimination or inequity, respondents who
identified as Black/African American and multi-racial were a greater share of these comments (13 percent and 10 percent,
respectively), compared to their share of survey responses overall (8 percent and 6 percent, respectively). 
Respondents who reported identifying as white comprised fifty percent of the same group of comments, roughly on par with
their 49 percent share of survey responses. 
By gender, females were also a greater share of these concerns (55 percent compared to 37 percent in the survey overall), 
19

DASHBOARD 2. 
while males were a smaller share (32 percent of these comments, compared to 57 percent in the survey overall). 

Selected Quotes 
"Many BIPOC may feel less inclined to speak up and speak out for fear of blackballed by managers and fellow employees, as well as
lose their positions." 
"If you raise a concern about your manager/director/chief, it could impact your promotional opportunities, performance evaluation
and pay.  Until there is a zero tolerance/no retaliation policy applied to senior leaders, employees will not feel comfortable bringing
issues forward."
"Even though I would and have reported bias and discrimination, I am 100% confident that NOTHING would be done about it. Our
values are a JOKE! They are not even worth the paper they are written on. This is NOT a safe place to work for women or BIPOC 
people and if you happen to be both a woman and a BIPOC person then this is a terrible culture to work in." 
"I've been impressed that at the executive and leadership level the Port is engaged a quest to epically reframe, grow and adapt its
culture." 
"I don't believe I would be heard if I were to bring up equity issues in my department without retaliation. Management is smart
enough to retaliate without anyone being able to prove it." 
"How is issues with diversity, equity and inclusion going to get addressed if there is no accountability? There is a genuine fear of
retaliation or of not wanting to cause problems. If you speak up, you are a trouble maker. You can say that rules are in place against
all of this but everyone knows that these rules only apply to certain people and not everyone.  Maintaining the status quo is a big
deal. There are people who are just waiting out their retirement and want to not do anything whatsoever that could potentially
jeopardize their retirement. Because of this, issues just get swept under the rug or heads get buried in the sand." 
"When people came from different cultures/countries, they are not always comfortable talking about how they truly feel openly. It
can be due to that is part of their cultures (being reserved). Just because they are quiet, that doesn't mean that they have their own
20

DASHBOARD 2. 
concerns. Who will the Port address this kind of situation? We can't just say, 'if you have concerns, speak up.' That can give them a
lot of pressure, and have them be quieter." 
"Who knows if i say some things, they will never let me to interview for any position. I don't wanna loose my job." 
"I think the Port's leadership like Steve and Lance and some ELT and directors are advocating for better inclusion, creating space in
news. And I love it. There are also colleagues who are anti-change. We need to think about how to face neutrality and tolerance head
on. I am no longer comfortable with "tolerance" as a standard." 
"With mostly white males in high positions, the question about BIPOC adding to the decision making is impossible, since the ones
that hold the most power and do the decision making, are not BIPOC. Even if BIPOC opinions are sought out, in the end, it's the white
males making the decisions." 








21

DASHBOARD 3. 
CODE
SUB-TOPIC                                           THEMES                           COUNT 
open dialog                                                            59 
welcoming cultures                                                   31 
WORKPLACE CULTURE                           BIPOC input in decision making                                 38 
white concerns and discomfort                                        81 
all people are equal/should be colorblind                                 77 
Introduction 
This sub-topic includes several inter-related themes related to workplace culture and equity, including whether there are
opportunities for safe and open dialog about diversity, equity and inclusion; whether the work environment feels welcoming to 
employees of different backgrounds and cultures; and whether input from employees of color inform decision making. 
Summary of Findings Overall 
Most comments about open dialog expressed concerns (46 of 59 comments) including fear of backlash, discomfort discussing a
sensitive topic like race, and fundamental disagreements with equity values. 
Similarly, comments about the work environment being welcoming to all cultures were mostly negative (29 out of 31
comments). A recurrent concern expressed was employees of color experiencing disrespect, racism, and/or lacking voice. 
Related to the previous point, almost all comments about BIPOC input into decision making were concerns (31 out of 38
comments). Comments described BIPOC employees' input not being heard and/or valued, especially at the highest levels of
decision making and particularly for people who are less proficient in English; and when they do participate, being tokenized. 
80+ comments said that the Port's emphasis on racial equity and non-white groups has created discomfort, marginalization,
and at times amounts to reverse discrimination against whites. Many comments shared concern about the lack of affinity
groups for white employees, while others said they felt being white is undervalued, or even a liability such as when it comes to
hiring or promotions. Others felt the Port's equity efforts are identity politics and should not be part of operations, while others
believe too much time is spent on it. 
Related to the above, there were also numerous comments suggesting that the focus should be on a "colorblind" approach of
treating all people equally, instead of a racial equity approach that seeks to address inequities for specific groups. 

22

DASHBOARD 3. 
Sub-analyses by Race and Gender 
Among the comments of concern about open dialog, welcoming cultures, and BIPOC input into decision making, there was a 
general pattern of white respondents being a smaller share of the comments and respondents of color comprising a larger
share, compared with their share of survey responses overall. 
In contrast, the comments that the Port's emphasis on racial equity and non-white groups has created discomfort and reverse
discrimination against whites, were more commonly expressed by white respondents (62 percent) compared to their
representation in survey responses overall (49 percent). 

Selected Quotes 
"I believe that in the broad sense, issues related to EDI can be openly spoken about, but on a team to team basis I feel like there is a
less open channel of open conversations." 
"For many at the Port, equity, diversity and inclusion are new topics that are we are wary of discussing openly for fear of personal or
professional backlash. It is hard to know what level of discussion is generally acceptable in day to day conversation with fellow
employees." 
"I think an attempt is made within my organization to include POC and minority groups, however there are still quite a few
inappropriate things said, often tacitly approved by supervisors, and there is minimal to no effort made to help bridge the gap. All
attempts are "come do what we do" and not "let's do what you do", and when one doesn't participate they are no longer asked to
participate with no conversation as to why. Minimal attempts are made to make people feel included. Bringing issues up almost
always backfires on the individual raising the concern and very few of the majority crowd are ever disciplined for their actions." 
"This topic makes people nervous, so they avoid opportunities and/or conversations. I think it is important to continue encouraging
people and make them feel safe that it is OK to talk about race." 
"BIPOC employees feel under-valued, under-compensated, under-promoted and that they have to work 10x harder/more than white
employees. Often the BIPOCS are more educated and experienced yet WE receive less than favorable ratings/raises and
23

DASHBOARD 3. 
opportunities. When WE express these concerns we are often considered "problem" employees. Culturally speaking some cultures 
particularly the AAPI community some are taught to never ask for anything. So if a manager/supervisor doesn't insist on training,
development and opportunities then it likely will never happen for those employees." 
"For the most part, BIPOC individuals are respected and valued, but voices are often silenced because they operate in a culture that is
dominated by other voices and systems." 
"It very much depends on which department you work in. There is a Port culture, and there are also mini-cultures in departments.
Some are more or less supportive and respectful in words and actions to BIPoC employees and communities." 
"As far as the actual daily work, the opinions of employees of the BIPOC community are not taken seriously, ignored, not even asked,
and patronized at best. I find this to be insulting and hypocritical. It feels that you are only on the team to fill a department mandate
to have a BIPOC employee on your team, however, they are not invited to contribute to solutions or even discussions." 
"Inclusion indicated visibly but there is a sense of exclusion deeply felt without saying words or actions." 
"It's difficult for diversity, equity, and inclusion to be a part of the work culture when most managers, directors, and executives are
white males. Most of the Port's diversity comes from low level positions and is not spread out evenly amongst all pay scales." 
"The Port has a long way to go and I am glad to have the oppotunity to answer the survey questions truthfully. As an Asian woman at
the Port, in my years at the Port, there have been time, my ideas are not listened to unless it is presented by a men. And yes, there
have been time where I asked a white men to carry my opinion and idea forward. A man and woman can say the exact same thing,
but how the message is received is different; how the person receives the message depends on their race, gender and listening skills,
which all have its on biases. So, I am happy that the Port is having this honest conversation." 
"With mostly white males in high positions, the question about BIPOC adding to the decision making is impossible, since the ones
that hold the most power and do the decision making, are not BIPOC. Even if BIPOC opinions are sought out, in the end, it's the white
males making the decisions." 
"As a caucasian person working at the Port, I feel as if the Commission and leadership has placed so much emphasis on EDI that it's
24

DASHBOARD 3. 
starting to creep into 'reverse discrimination.'" 
"As a white male who has worked at the Port for more than 20 years, I feel left out.There are social groups for everyone except
white males. There are situations and events, and even jobs, where it seems that white males need not apply. I don't seem to belong
anywhere. Do I belong at the Port? For the most part, I ignore the culture-oriented events and programs and let others do their
thing. I remain at the Port because my job works out ok, and my commute is actually quite favorable. I definitely don't feel included." 
"I feel like its almost going to far the other way. I was always taught to take people for who they are not what color they are or how
they identify." 
"I think there needs to be a group for white males to belong to - Hispanics, Blacks, Asian, Pacific Islander, LGBTQ, Women, they all
have groups to support and advocate for each other in the work place. I feel it can be a disadvantage to be a white male that works
at the Port. And no one, regardless of heritage, should feel that way here. We are not celebrated in Port culture." 
"Is their a such thing as over-equity?" 
"The Port has created a somewhat hostile environment towards white people, especially men. Definitely a feeling of white men not
having a voice." 
"Equity does not equal Equality. Treat all people equally, be a truly color blind organization." 
"I don't believe racial equality needs to be considered. I have never felt like any certain race has had a disadvantage here. I feel like
the moment you start breaking things down by race you are building a racial divide." 
"I feel these views are being pushed down our throats too much.I understand there are current issues that need to be addressed.
However enough is enough, people need to treat people equally regardless." 
" 
It's hard to concentrate on your job when constantly worrying about offending someone! This has been shoved in our face to the
point where it's almost reverse discrimination! Equal treatment can be achieved without putting any one group on a pedistle!" 

25

DASHBOARD 4. 
CODE
SUB-TOPIC                                           THEMES                           COUNT 
EQUITY LEARNING AND CAPACITY BUILDING           quality, quantity, and impact of equity activities                    119 
Introduction 
This theme centers on Portwide equity learning and capacity building, especially activities led by the Office of Equity, Diversity and
Inclusion (OEDI). Comments in this grouping are about quality, quantity and impact of Portwide equity efforts. 
Summary of Findings Overall 
About two-thirds of the comments on this sub-topic shared concerns or suggestions for how to improve the work, in some
cases along with positive feedback. By far, the most prevalent issue was the lack of time to participate in equity activities,
especially in the context of heavy day-to-day workloads and/or for employees who work off-shift hours. 
Other respondents felt there is too much equity activity such as trainings, events and caucuses, while others said there is lack of
support or encouragement from their department leaders to participate. Finally, some felt that employees should not be
required to participate in equity activities. 
There were also numerous positive comments about equity efforts, specifically citing book clubs, caucuses and special events as
important spaces for the Port as a whole to engage in this work. 
Sub-analyses by Race and Gender 
Among the comments that shared concerns or suggestions for improvements in the Port's equity efforts, most groups of
employees of color were overrepresented compared to their share in the survey overall. This included those who identified as
Black/African Americans (11 percent vs. 8 percent), Asian American (15 percent vs. 9 percent), and multi-racial (15 percent vs. 6
percent). In contrast, respondents who identified as white were underrepresented (43 percent vs. 49 percent). 
Females were a greater share of comments on this theme compared with their representation in the survey overall (46 percent
vs. 37 percent), while males were a smaller share (43 percent vs. 57 percent). 

Selected Quotes 
"Better conversations have started about diversity and racial issues in general. Change Team has really helped to start these
26

DASHBOARD 4. 
conversations to help people learn about each other." 
"Finding time to attend any Equity sessions is difficult due to my workload. Port management can scream all they want about
providing this education, but if you don't allow for your employees to attend then I you are screaming into deaf ears." 
"I am never prevented from participating in OEDI trainings and events as long as it doesn't impact my other work, however I don't
think my supervisors/managers have openly encouraged or shared information on these events."
"While I support the efforts of the Port on equity and inclusion it can be awkward or uncomfortable to express anything but
unwavering support for any of these initiatives brought forward. It can feel like there is no space for critical examination of them, or
to bring up potential unintended consequences. Due to this I believe most questions or concerns go unsaid. This is a risk that could
undermine the effort in the long run." 
"I feel that leadership could do more to encourage participation. Making the caucuses and trainings mandatory would demonstrate
the value and importance that Port leadership places on advancing these issues and would also provide dedicated time within the
work day for staff to participate." 
"I really appreciate the efforts of the OEDI team and our CEO to continually highlight opportunities to learn more about EDI at the
Port, especially related to the book clubs and other events. Learning about institutional & structural racism is the first step to
becoming a good ally." 
"Maybe having equity and inclusion in p-links would help promote the dialog.Also, for represented employees, there are not too
many opportunities to take trainings." 
"Sometimes there are an extreme amount of conversation(s) about this topic that really distracts from normal job duties." 


27

TOPIC 
2. OPERATIONS AND PROCESSES 
Operations and Processes includes 275 comments across three sub-topics: General Integration of DEI in Operations; Role of
Managers; and Specific Operational Areas. The following Dashboards include summaries of key themes for each of the sub-topics,
along with selected quotes and code counts. 
DASHBOARD 5. 
CODE
SUB-TOPIC                                           THEMES                           COUNT 
general integration in operations                                        138 
GENERAL INTEGRATION IN OPERATIONS 
translating policy into action                                                27 
Introduction 
This sub-topic included comments on the extent to which diversity, equity and inclusion principles have been integrated into the
operations of departments or teams. 
Summary of Findings Overall 
Most of the comments about DEI in operations (109 of 138), described a need for more work to build equity into day-to-day
operations. The prevailing theme was that there are variations across departments in how much DEI is prioritized. Factors 
cited include lack of information and know-how on how to integrate equity into the work, attitude and willingness of manager(s)
and/or other team members, and for some the belief that equity considerations are not relevant for their areas of work. 
A smaller number of commenters (29 of 138) noted that their departments or teams have effectively integrated DEI into their
work and/or are actively working to do so. 
A number of comments said it's important to translate dialog, language and policy into concrete actions and changes. Some
said this is a gap or concern, while others acknowledged that system change takes time. 
Sub-analyses by Race and Gender 
Among the 100+ comments citing a need for more or better integration of DEI in departmental work, white, Black/African
American and Asian American respondents were overrepresented compared to their representation in the survey overall. 
28

DASHBOARD 5. 
Percentages were 56 percent vs. 49 percent, 13 percent vs. 8 percent, and 11 percent vs. 10 percent, respectively. 
Among the same group of comments, the composition by gender was roughly the inverse of that for the survey overall.
Respondents reporting as female comprised 54 percent of these comments (vs. 37 percent in the survey overall), while males
were 36 percent of comments and 57 percent of surveys overall. 

Selected Quotes 
"I am fortunate to work in a department whereby the Director fully embraces equity and diversity and is actively involved in
supporting our commitment to equity. We are beginning this journey and are ready to make changes within our sphere of influence
and informing the broader port wide initiative." 
"I regularly think about whether or not our department's work has undiagnosed racial inequities - and have discussed it with my
supervisor - and we cannot come-up with any areas where we are not being inclusive. The only thing I can think of is - potentially - 
past hiring decisions. It would be helpful to hear about operations and processes that are doing well on the DEI front as additional
comparison points, because a lot of the areas we hear about are those that are problematic." 
"I work in a department that there is mainly all white men.The comments I have heard about races, color, and sexes are not inline
with EDI." 
"I'm not sure I understand how diversity, equity, & inclusion has a part in operations or processes! Operations & processes are
outlined steps to be followed! Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion shouldn't be a concern in operations & processes if qualified individuals
are handling their operations & processes!" 
"It very much depends on which department you work in. There is a Port culture, and there are also mini-cultures in departments.
Some are more or less supportive and respectful in words and actions to BIPoC employees and communities." 
"More broadly, there is inconsistency among leaders at the Port toward fostering an inclusive and equitable work culture thereby,
creating the challenges for the Port to achieve "A work culture" that embraces equity, diversity and inclusion. When speaking with
cohorts including at recent caucuses, it is surprising to hear about the challenges some employees at other Port operations are
29

DASHBOARD 5. 
experiencing but are with apprehension to speak out for fear of retribution or retaliation. Continued work is needed to make the Port
EDI priority "credible" in the eyes of all employees, make "visible" how Port leaders are held accountable to act and behave in ways
that embrace this Port priority to reshape our work culture, to seamlessly incorporate EDI within our "core" leadership responsibilities
and job performance expectations, and that all leaders visibly demonstrate the "passion" to make this happen." 
"There are deep differences between teams, departments and divisions.Some are good at this, some are horrible." 
"There is resistance to dealing with the genuinely systemic issues embedded on many of our more formal processes.To speak of 
change at the level of revision of processes is clearly discouraged, particularly any processes that are seen as closely tied to CPO, or
are presumed to have a legal basis. That is just a 3rd rail around here and this really is at the heart of the matter in my opinion." 
"There's always room for improvement -- the Port's focus on equity is still in its earlier phases and so it has yet to be a fully integrated
priority throughout every department, team, etc. But change doesn't happen over night." 
"We are just starting this process but again, aren't sure of what we are doing." 
"Countless words fly around about diversity, equity and inclusion but an equitable amount of action has yet to be included" 
"I appreciate all the events the Port has been hosting to have difficult conversations and highlight the importance for equity and
diversity. But again, we need to see the results of those events in acts of equity and inclusion." 
"I hear a lot of equity lip service that is not backed up by accountability and action." 




30

DASHBOARD 6. 
CODE
SUB-TOPIC                                           THEMES                           COUNT 
ROLE OF MANAGERS                             role and impact of managers                                   79 
Summary of Findings Overall 
A significant theme across multiple topics was the critical role of managers. Among the comments that specifically referenced
managers, most (68 of 79 comments) cited concerns. 
Many noted the important role of managers in determining whether departments' work is informed by DEI considerations. Some
comments described challenges of department leaders who don't believe in equity efforts and/or show tepid support for it as
significant barriers to advancing DEI. 
Some commenters said they feel unable to voice concerns about racism or discrimination because of unsupportive supervisors,
or because the managers are the source of the concern, and they fear retaliation if they were to speak up. 
Some comments were from managers who expressed needs for more support, resources, information and capacity building in
order to advance equity in their teams. 
Sub-analyses by Race and Gender 
Among the 68 comments that noted concerns with manager roles in relation to DEI efforts, respondents identifying as white
were slightly underrepresented compared with the survey overall (46 percent vs. 49 percent, respectively). 
In contrast, respondents of color in some racial groups were overrepresented. This included: Black/African Americans (13
percent of comments vs 8 percent survey overall), Asian Americans (13 percent vs. 10 percent), and multi-racial (10 percent vs. 6
percent). 
By gender, the proportion of female respondents who shared comments of concern about managers/manager roles was
significantly greater than their representation in the survey overall (60 percent vs 37 percent, respectively), while the inverse
was the case for male respondents (29 percent vs. 57 percent). 

Selected Quotes 
"I think that some managers and leaders are on board with promoting equity and racial justice and some are not. I think it is really
key for managers and leaders to openly encourage discussions of equity and inclusion in order for their group to really openly
31

DASHBOARD 6. 
embrace it." 
"My leader is a fraud. My leader is not open or tolerant of others. My leader is a hostile, passive-aggressive bully and tyrant. My
leader constantly lies and blames others for shortcomings and bad action. I do not trust my leader. I do not respect my leader." 
"Well-meaning leaders are still at a loss for how to integrate DEI into our operations and processes. They are only starting to
approach it and it's currently treated as a separate matter, addressed in a 10 minute equity moment at a meeting." 
"I think a lot of words are given toward the idea of inclusion, but day-to-day most managers don't make it priority or actually think
anything needs to be changed. Especially managers that have been here any length of time. They're very happy to collect a paycheck
and keep operating under the 'good 'ol boys' club mentality as long as it doesn't affect their position or pay. And HR does nothing to
hold them accountable when complaints are brought, especially if it's a female employee experiencing harassment or
marginalization from a male manager." 
"I don't believe I would be heard if I were to bring up equity issues in my department without retaliation. Management is smart
enough to retaliate without anyone being able to prove it." 
"I feel as if those managers who are in the pool of older Caucasian men need more diversity training for how to respect women and
BIPOC people. It's often not a thought in their head and can be a toxic role as they are in a position of power and lack the
awareness." 
"I want to lead a more diverse, equitable, and inclusive team.But the people I have are the people I have. As a manager with limited
opportunities for hiring I struggle to figure out how to make my team more diverse, equitable, and inclusive with the resources we
have and the hours in the day.  Speaking of, we are trying to bolt diversity, equity and inclusion into the existing expectations of our
work. If I were to say let's build an anti racist organization you'd need to stop doing everything and build back up. We haven't
stopped a thing. Still racing at a million miles an hour." 


32

DASHBOARD 7. 
CODE
SUB-TOPIC                                           THEMES                           COUNT 
assessing and evaluating for equity                                       19 
SPECIFIC AREAS 
communications                                                  12 
Summary of Findings Overall 
A small number of comments touched on whether teams' work are evaluated for equity impacts. Most commenters said that
their teams do not, with the most common reason noted being lack of knowledge and tools. 
A number of comments also referenced communications. Some noted appreciation for specific communications tools used to
disseminate information about equity across the Port, while others were more critical. 
Sub-analyses by Race and Gender 
Sub-analysis by race and gender on these two themes was not undertaken because the number of comments in each was too
small for meaningful analysis. 
Selected Quotes 
"I think many staff are unclear about how to assess their work and processes in terms of equity, diversity and inclusion." 
"I really appreciate the efforts by OEDI to normalize equity in our work. I think there's still a lot of work to do to make sure everyone
is operating under a similar baseline of knowledge around equity principles and practices. The trainings help tremendously.
Personally for me, the equity sessions are one meeting out of several in any given day, so sometimes it is hard to retain the 
information (more of a me problem, not a OEDI problem). Therefore, having access to the information, the newsletter, SharePoint,
and teams channel has been very helpful. For many of us, this is an added layer of responsibility in our work, so the resources and
guidance is very helpful." 
"The big problem is English as a second language. I feel like, your intelligence, experience, and knowledge is weighted by your English
speaking proficiency. There are employees who have a ton of knowledge and experience, but with English as a second language, it
takes longer time to pass it to others. We should really work on it. Even in the interview process, it is sometimes harder for those, for
whom, English is second language." 
33

TOPIC 
3. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT 
Community Engagement includes 60 comments. The following Dashboard includes summary of key themes related to community
engagement, along with selected quotes and code counts. 
DASHBOARD 8. 
CODE
SUB-TOPIC                                           THEMES                           COUNT 
COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT                     community engagement and partnerships                       60 
Summary of Findings Overall 
Comments about community engagement were a mix of about half expressing needs for improvement, and one-third noting
positive aspects of community engagement. 
Areas for improvement cited included the need for clearer and more fully developed policies and standards for community
engagement; consistency in community engagement across the Port; and culturally competent and equitable opportunities for
all key Port stakeholders to engage. 
A number of commenters noted their department or unit conducts community engagement with an intentional equity lens,
including citing of good examples such as the South King County Fund and Duwamish Valley Community Equity Program. 
Sub-analyses by Race and Gender 
Among the comments for this theme, the racial composition reflected a mix of under- and overrepresentation compared with
the survey overall. 
Respondents who reported gender had an equal share between male and female of 47 percent each. This compares with
overall survey representation of 37 percent females and 57 percent males. 

Selected Quotes 
"Across the port, we need stronger and clearer guidance on best practices for engaging community groups overall and for specific
34

DASHBOARD 8. 
projects. This means support for understanding the history and existing relationships, key issues, and the best groups, people, ways
to get new and broad perspectives on issues." 
"External Relations has made some great efforts to include BIPOC voices in certain conversations and input processes but there are
still many stakeholder groups and public processes that continue to be dominated by voices that are not representative of the
broader community." 
"For the programs I work on, racial equity and access are top priorities for community engagement." 
"I think the Port is a community leader in external out reach.However, more employees should be encouraged to assist in this area." 
"It's tough work.Many disadvantaged communities have been left on the outside for so long that it will take a long, concerted effort
to incorporate them into Port decision-making.".
"Take it seriously.If you plan on dislocating or effecting a community, any community, the Port has a responsibility to clearly
communicate those effects (and predict them) and minimize disruptions to their economic and social life. Do not engage
communities for some sort of moral cover or absolution; it is insulting and undermines your position." 
"The Port would benefit from a clear policy/standard around compensation for external communities/stakeholders that participate in
Port-led community engagement or outreach efforts." 
"There is a strong desire and support for robust and culturally relevant engagement in theory, but in practice I don't see that
happening. There's a lack of guidance about what equitable engagement means or policy for how to do it. For example, how long
should you put out a document for comment? Which communities do you reach out to? When do you need to translate something?
How much should you budget annually for translation? Do you need to translate the draft for comment or the final document? How
do we pay people for their time to participate? Which department should budget for those payments? How do you set up a contract?
etc. There is an effort going on to figure these questions out, but I think to really do engagement equitably and in a way that
recognizes BIPOC communities, we need port-wide policies and more centralized budgets." 

35

TOPIC 
4. EMPLOYMENT 
Employment included 472 comments across four sub-topics: Recruitment and Hiring; Department Diversity; Professional
Development, Advancement and Compensation; and Gender and Other Equity Considerations. The Dashboards below include
summaries of key themes for each sub-topic, along with selected quotes and code counts. 
DASHBOARD 9. 
CODE
SUB-TOPIC                                           THEMES                           COUNT 
recruitment                                                           11 
RECRUITMENT AND HIRING                        hiring                                                      74 
qualifications and racial equity                                            105 
Introduction 
This sub-topic includes inter-connected themes about recruitment, hiring, qualifications and the role of racial equity goals in these. 
Summary of Findings Overall 
Among 105 comments about qualifications for hiring, 85 stated that hiring decisions should be based primarily or solely on
who is most qualified and/or performance, not race. Some commented that factoring in race can result in problems including
reverse discrimination, hiring underqualified people, and doing harm to people of color who are hired. 
A small number of comments (11) said racial considerations should be part of hiring decisions due to structural/systemic and
historic inequities that have created disadvantages for some groups. 
Some said that racial equity should be supported in other aspects of hiring. Ideas included creating diverse candidate pools 
during recruitment, including through mentorship programs and career pipelines; expanding the definition of "qualifications"; 
and working to eliminate racial bias from hiring processes. 
Sub-analyses by Race and Gender 
Among the 85 comments that hiring decisions should be based on qualifications or performance and not race, white
respondents made up about the same proportion as in the survey overall (49 percent). In contrast, employees of color in most
36

DASHBOARD 9. 
racial groups were a smaller share compared with their share in the survey overall. Black/African American (2 percent vs. 8
percent), Asian American (1 percent vs. 8 percent), Hispanic/Latinx (1 percent vs. 3 percent), multi-racial (1 percent vs. 6
percent), and Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander (2 percent vs. 3 percent). 
Females were also underrepresented in this viewpoint, comprising 15 percent of comments compared with 37 percent of all
survey, whereas males comprised 55 percent of these comments compared with 57 percent of the survey. 
Among the 73 comments expressing concerns about hiring, white respondents were slightly underrepresented compared to
the survey overall (47 percent vs. 49 percent), while employees of color in some racial groups were overrepresented, notably 
Black/African American (14 percent vs. 8 percent) and Asian American (10 percent vs. 8 percent). 

Selected Quotes 
"I feel like it is unfair to bring race into a hiring process or a promotion. I should not matter what race you are and if you are pushing
to hire or promote someone of color over a white person even though the white person is more qualified that would be racist. The
most qualified person no matter what race should be the one for the job." 
"I have been involved in at least 10 hiring processes at the port. NEVER ONCE have I looked at color or gender to help me determine if
I think someone should be hired or promoted. The most qualified candidate should get the job always." 
"I just want qualified good people in positions regardless of race, sexual orientation, politics, or religion.I think it is great that the
Port wants to be sure that everyone has equity of opportunity and that no one is discriminated against. That is a good and noble
goal that I stand behind. That being said, it is starting to feel like the discrimination is going to go the other way. I have come to the
conclusion that, as a white male, my long term opportunities at the Port have been artificially capped. It leaves me thinking that I
have progressed in my career as far as I can. That may be ok with the Port and if that is the case I understand, but I don't think there
is transparency around this. I think if this is the new policy, I would just like the courtesy of knowing. Like everyone else here, I am
just trying to support my family as best I can." 
"In fair hiring practices, it seems to me that if the KSA's, general qualifications, and the interview process are the same across the
board regardless of background, it could potentially put some groups at a disadvantage as we are not all starting with the same level
of opportunity or advantages/disadvantages. How can we make sure the hiring practice is "fair", but also takes into account systemic
37

DASHBOARD 9. 
issues such as lack of funding, education, and job opportunity disparity?" 
"The hiring and promotional process should only be based only on merit. To factor in diversity in any way would be a mistake that
could lead to injury or death. I would not feel safe at work if a less qualified or less capable person was hired or promoted over a
more experienced, skilled, and competent person." 
"Ultimately, the most qualified candidate with the best experience and skill set should get a position or promotion. I do think that
equity needs to be considered, but I don't think that someone should be promoted or hired mostly for equity consideration, if they
aren't the strongest candidate as it related to being effective in that role." 
"I disagree that you can both work to hire the most qualified and according to racial diversity. You can do one or the other. I support
hiring for racial equity." 
"Diversity and inclusion is a very good words and good initiative. but it must be achieved by hiring, training and giving chance to
the minority within." 
"when it come to hiring even in labor job. race is very important.being white is always privilege. even when asks HR what is the
reason I was not selected? they even not really care to respond to your Email. if your not white" 
"The Port should considering hiring more junior level positions or recent college gradsto provided opportunities to people from
diverse backgrounds who may not have experience. I believe this would help the Port develop a pipeline of diverse talent and be
more inclusive." 
"Words should come with actions. As stated before, the way job descriptions are written exclude people of color. Do you need a
degree for everything. You have people qualified to do the job but hire from the outside and ask the person who you didn't give the
job to train the new person. I've seen non-people of color have opportunities and are groomed for positions. Job sharing and
internships don't lead to any type of promotion or opportunity to move up." 


38

DASHBOARD 10. 
CODE
SUB-TOPIC                                           THEMES                           COUNT 
DEPARTMENT DIVERSITY                          department diversity                                          40 
Summary of Findings Overall 
Among comments about diversity in departments, the majority described a lack of diversity in specific teams, while a minority
expressed the existence of diversity. 
Sub-analyses by Race and Gender 
Among these comments, respondents identifying as white had similar representation as in the survey overall (55 percent). 

Selected Quotes 
"1)We need more women in the trades. 2) We need more BIPOC in the trades." 
"It's difficult for diversity, equity, and inclusion to be a part of the work culture when most managers, directors, and executives are
white males. Most of the Port's diversity comes from low level positions and is not spread out evenly amongst all pay scales." 
"The Fire Department has had a strong emphasis on diversity, equity, and inclusion for many years.We consider it in our recruiting
and promotional processes as well as many other functions of the fire department."
"It does feel as thought the Port is finally addressing EDI, but the Fire Department has been doing so for quite some time." 
"There is an obvious and noticeable lack of BIPOC representation in leadership positions in the Sea Port and those departments that
support the Sea Port. ZERO in Real Estate, ZERO in Environmental, only one in PMG, etc." 
"We need an airport team that resembles the communities around the airport." 

39

DASHBOARD 11. 
CODE
SUB-TOPIC                                           THEMES                           COUNT 
advancement                                                   80 
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT, ADVANCEMENT AND
job classification and compensation                                     72 
COMPENSATION 
professional development                                            56 
Introduction 
This sub-topic includes comments on inter-related themes of job advancement/promotions, professional development, and
compensation. 
Summary of Findings Overall 
On the theme of job advancement, almost all comments were about concerns or needs for improvement (78 out of 80). The
most prevalent issue cited was favoritism of white males in promotion decisions, including longstanding "good old boys
networks" that create barriers for employees of color outside of those networks. Another issue noted was the perception that
external hiring is often prioritized over internal promotions. 
Similar to job advancement, almost all of the comments about professional development cited need for improvement (50 out
of 56). The most frequent concern was heavy workloads significantly limiting time available to attend trainings, though there
was also acknowledgment that professional development opportunities are offered, in some units quite plentifully. Others
commented on difficulties obtaining manager approval for trainings, limited training budgets, and lack of mentorship resources. 
Regarding compensation, many comments expressed frustration about pay inequities both within and across departments as
well as by race and gender. Other concerns included job classifications/evaluations being outdated, subjective and not
matching pay levels; pay being tied to seniority rather than performance; and lack of compensation for language skills. 
Sub-analyses by Race and Gender 
Among the 78 comments expressing concerns about job advancement, white respondents were underrepresented compared
with the survey overall (37 percent vs. 49 percent), while respondents of color from some racial groups were overrepresented,
notably: Black/African American (18 percent of comments vs. 8 percent in survey overall) and Asian American (18 percent vs. 8
percent). Employees reporting as Hispanic/Latinx, Middle Eastern North African (MENA), and American Indian/Alaskan Native 
were also overrepresented but had small sample sizes. 
By gender, respondents identifying as female were also overrepresented (45 percent vs. 37 percent) while male respondents
40

DASHBOARD 11. 
were underrepresented (42 percent vs. 57 percent). 
Similar to job advancement, the comments about professional development needing improvements were slightly
underrepresented in white respondents compared to the survey overall (48 percent vs. 49 percent), while respondents of color
from some racial groups were overrepresented including Black/African American (14 percent vs. 8 percent) and Asian American
(14 percent vs. 8 percent). 
Comments about compensation and job classification followed a similar pattern. White respondents were underrepresented
(36 percent vs. 49 percent of survey overall), while several employee groups of color were overrepresented: Black/African
American (10 percent vs. 8 percent), Asian American (18 percent vs. 8 percent), and multi-racial (14 percent vs. 6 percent). 

Selected Quotes 
"Leadership knows there is a problem but chooses to turn a blind eye. If you are white, you will promote. You do not have to prove
yourself, you are given a chance to prove yourself. If you are a white man, you come first. Period. We call it favoritism. It hurts moral
and sets up no confidence in leadership."
"I can go to training but there isn't always TIME to go or time to take on an entire series of training. I am a white female. I
understand there is an importance for non-white to have more equal rights, over due by decades but I hope you realize that the
GOOD OL' BOYS are alive and well at the Port. I've been in the same position for over 20 years with white males getting promoted,
and hired above me. Yet they are not required to know the job or know/learn the technology to do their job. That is left up to me by
my white male manager" 
"This is a good 'good ol'boys' club' at the Port of Seattle or CROYNISM when it comes to hiring or getting promoted.Merritt or
experience does not matter - what matters is if you are 'connected.'" 
"The Port promotes old white men to management positions and expects the company to be diverse, inclusive, and respectful? These
men are given huge incomes with little accountability, and little regard to their effective or ineffective management performance.
Our managers kiss up to our directors and paint rosy images of their direct reports or respective departments and their
responsibilities, but don't actually do anything themselves. Port's HR doesn't hold managers accountable or cultivate their leadership
further and this is where all the problems stem from.Everyone knows that the Port will not fire an individual unless they absolutely
41

DASHBOARD 11. 
must or it's as a reaction to something easily documentable. "Bad Managers" don't get fired; the company has to wait for them to
retire, move on, or hopefully become a good manager at some point. If the Port is going to continue to promote old white men to
positions of power: HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE." 
"There is a ton of training at the Port, but my job and all of the people that work at Fishermen's Terminal are in operations, which
means we have customers calling and stopping by the office and support work to do. It is very difficult to be in all of the training and
do the type of job that I expect from myself." 
"My interest in memberships and training has been denied every year but I have seen managers in the same department below my
grade were being developed with memberships and certification that I was not approved for." 
"Sometimes, I have to beg for the training opportunities before being granted." 
"Does not feel like there is parity in compensation, ability to negotiate on salary, or positions across departments. Feels like some
departments work harder, have higher expectations, very specific goals to meet, and get paid less. and others work less, no goal
setting or accountability, were able to negotiate entrance salary, and get paid more." 
"I am glad that we have a third party evaluating compensation because I think the current system is flawed." 
"It doesn't matter how much training or education you have when managers are bias towards you. You get excuses like 'I didn't
know you had those skills', 'We can only look at how you did in the interview and we are not allowed to look at anything outside of
that, regardless of your skills, abilities and previous work performance' When it comes to pay we get told that we cannot do anything
unless we conduct a review and that could take a while. Then no review is ever done and each year the pay gap gets wider." 
"I've seen unfairness in compensations. It doesn't make any sense when HR comes with the pay grades for certain group members
higher than another group members who do the same types of work. I feel like whoever has louder voices get paid more." 
"Minorities been getting the short end of the rope for a long time.Taking survey like we don't already know this crap. Really is a
waste of time. Somebody getting paid way to much to keep re-inventing the wheel. You can google these questions. Everyone knows
minorities don't get treated the same as their white counter-parts. The white just look the other way as long as they can stay ahead
of the game. Two years from now we will be taking the same survey. We don't need surveys, we need to go after the Supervisor and
42

DASHBOARD 11. 
Managers who gives us low scoring when it comes to a raise. The port is a joke." 
"The Port HR Dept job assessment process is flawed and needs to reflect jobs under a common platform. Why are Aviation jobs
measured higher than Non Aviation. The work is the same but I make less than my Aviation functional areas. This also includes my
staff." 
"The Port is a great place to work. That said, I believe we have to strongly improve our focus on pay equity for actual work performed
and equity regarding promotions; esp. for women and people of color. Since the Port operates primarily on a white male dominant
hierarchy for decision-making with HR as support, women and BIPOC are often overlooked, paid less than their white male
counterparts, ignored, or not inclusively acknowledged, heard or respected." 
"The Port places a high value on employee longevity in determining compensation, which has the effect of discriminating against
high performing younger workers on the basis of their age. Because years of experience are a factor in setting initial compensation
and ad hoc raises are generally disfavored, high performing younger employees are generally compensated in alignment with older
employees who have lower quality work. This also applies to other areas of equity - because most people with longevity in technical
fields are white men, their compensation is then necessarily higher than that of other groups, even if they're performing at the same
level." 
"Women of color at the Port, in particular, Black women, are not compensated as they should or could be. I have heard first hand
accounts of BIPOC women who are highly qualified, experienced and high performing and yet, they are unable to advance or get paid
what their white counterparts are paid. Black women must "perform" for their advancement to unbelievable high standards while
more "middle of the road" performers who happen to be white males are promoted and pursued with far less need to "perform"
their way into their advancing roles." 



43

DASHBOARD 12. 
CODE
SUB-TOPIC                                           THEMES                           COUNT 
GENDER AND OTHER EQUITY                       gender and other equity considerations                           34 
Summary of Findings Overall 
A number of comments called for consideration of other aspects of equity besides race, with gender equity mentioned most
often. Gender inequity was cited in several areas from hiring to advancement to compensation. 
Other groups who face inequities were also mentioned including people with disabilities, and the LGBTQ+ community. 
Sub-analyses by Race and Gender 
Among this group of comments, 65 percent of respondents who reported race identified as white. Another 18 percent
identified as multi-racial (vs. 6 percent in the survey overall), while 12 percent identified as Asian American. 
The gender composition for these comments also was overwhelmingly female (74 percent), compared with 37 percent in the 
survey overall. In contrast, respondents identifying as male were 15 percent of these comments and 57 percent in the survey. 

Selected Quotes 
".it would be nice if the Port wanted to be equitable for ALL genders and all diversity characteristics. Systemic racism and sexism
(and other forms of discrimination) are intersectional and rooted in the hierarchal system in place at the Port." 
"I can't speak about racial equity and pay, but I can tell you there is pay inequity between genders. I do the same work as three male
colleagues and I am three pay grades below them. This is because the job title my work is given is different. I do not have the time or
the energy to put into getting my job re-evaluated or get the promotion to be fairly compensated by comparison. It's not enough to
just look at job titles and look at pay of people in the same job title and then say it's equitable. It's not." 
"I know the focus on EDI right now is on race - but I just want to call out that diversity and inclusion also includes people with
disabilities, religion, LGBTQ+, etc..." 
"I wish we could include gender equity in the conversation more often." 
44

TOPIC 
5. CONTRACTING 
Contracting includes 95 comments. The following Dashboard includes a summary of key themes related to contracting, along with
selected quotes and code counts. 
DASHBOARD 13. 
CODE
SUB-TOPIC                                           THEMES                           COUNT 
CONTRACTING                                 WMBE and supplier diversity                                  96 
Summary of Findings Overall 
Among comments about contracting, including efforts to support WMBE and supplier diversity, two-thirds shared concerns
and/or ideas for improvements, and about one-third were positive, neutral or stated that their department or team is able to
achieve WMBE or supplier diversity goals. 
Concerns mentioned included the need for: reduced barriers and more streamlined processes for BIPOC contractors; addressing
lack of WMBE availability for certain services; and expanding outreach to a broader universe of suppliers and vendors. 
Similar to thoughts expressed about diversity goals in hiring and advancements, some comments questioned whether WMBE
goals should take precedence over quality goals. 
A number of commenters also said that the Port's Diversity in Contracting team does a good job. 
Sub-analyses by Race and Gender 
Respondents of color from some racial groups were a greater share of comments expressing concerns on this theme, 
compared with their share in the survey overall, including: Black/African American (18 percent vs. 8 percent) and Asian American
(13 percent vs. 8 percent). Respondents identifying as Hispanic/Latinx and multi-racial also had a greater share of these
comments but based on small sample sizes. 
The gender composition for these comments included 55 percent from respondents identifying as female (compared with 37 
percent for the survey overall), and 47 percent males (compared with 57 percent of the survey overall). 

45

DASHBOARD 13. 
Selected Quotes 
"Again, Why are you asking us to look at color. We want quality vendors, we do not care what color people are. Color has zero effect
on who I choose to do business with." 
"Black Contractors are not used at the port equally" 
"current Port Contracts and specifications make it difficult for small businesses and WMBEs to win contracts.Contracts and
specifications are complex, requirements can be expensive and there are language barriers. Legal language can make it very difficult
for WMBE to understand and may deter businesses from bidding on contracts" 
"It is far too easy to game the contracting system here at the Port and allow for repeated use of big business versus contracting with
small and WMBEs. It is also much too complicated for WMBEs and small businesses to get to do business with us in the first place
and it places significant barriers to them even trying." 
"Diversity in Contracting does a good job balancing WMBE availability and inclusion goals." 
"I really like that the Port of Seattle supports small business, but I don't understand how it's legal to require contracting with a group
of service/good suppliers that exclude white men only. When I think about supporting small businesses owned by women &
minorities, it feels really good. I support it. But then when I think about supporting small businesses owned by everyone except for
'white men,' it doesn't feel as good." 
"State laws need to change in order to provide equitable opportunities for WMBEs.Culturally, Port employees need to be trained to
understand WMBEs are just as capable as white owned, large firms. Many times Port employees score WMBEs harder as they are
unknown and need more mentoring--and port employees are consistently tasked with delivering faster so nobody has time to
train/mentor new vendors." 
"In my opinion we need to extend our outreach and budget more funds to increase our WMBE and DBE partnerships." 

46

Appendix E

EDI Assessment Listening Sessions/Conversations
Overview
From July 20 to September 17, the Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion organized and held 18 "EDI
Assessment Conversations." These 90-minute sessions, which were open to all staff, were designed to
achieve the following: to share data from the Equity Survey with staff; to increase our understanding of
data from the Equity Survey; and, to create opportunities for staff to brainstorm creative solutions to
disparities and inequities identified in the Equity Survey.
Every week of the EDI Assessment Conversations had a different theme or focus. For the first five weeks,
the sessions focused on data from one of the five domains of the Equity Survey - workplace culture;
operations and processes; community/external stakeholder engagement and partnerships; hiring,
promotion, and compensation; and, contracting and WMBEs. For example, the first week's sessions
discussed data regarding workplace culture, the second week discussed data related to operations and
processes, and so on. For the sixth week, the sessions focused on the role that supervisors play in
leading us to become a more equitable and anti-racist Port. The sixth week focused on the role of
supervisors, because it was a prominent theme that emerged from both the qualitative data of the
Equity Survey and from the first five weeks of EDI Assessment Conversations.
In total, there were 283 people (including repeats) who participated in the EDI Assessment
Conversations. Deduplicating that number, a total of 155 individual staff participated in at least one EDI
Assessment Conversation. Of those 155, 49 were from Aviation, 17 from Maritime, 85 from Central
Services, and 8 from Economic Development.
Process
The EDI Assessment Conversations were announced and advertised to staff through Port-wide emails
from Executive Director Metruck and Senior Director Gheisar, Compass, and What's Happening.
Additionally, at the department-level, members of the Change Team informed their colleagues of the
events and encouraged participation.
All sessions were held on Microsoft Teams, and they were facilitated by members of the Change Team
and OEDI staff. Each week, staff had three options for participation  early morning (6-730am), daytime
(between 9am-330pm), and early evening (5-730pm). Early morning and early evening session were
offered so that employees who work non-traditional hours or off-shifts had opportunities to participate.
While the early morning and early evening sessions were not as well attended as the daytime sessions,
there were employees from Aviation and Maritime who reported being able to participate because the
sessions were held during non-traditional work hours.
Every session was 90 minutes. During the first 30 minutes, OEDI staff reviewed the agenda, established
group expectations for participation, and presented a set of data from the Equity Survey that illustrated
an inequity or pattern of disparity. Instead of viewing the totality of the survey data at one time, each
session focused on a specific issue and set of data in order to target and focus the discussion. As a result,
the recommendations for improvements are specifically related to the data and issues of the sessions.
For instance, during the sessions that focused on workplace culture, participants were shown
quantitative and qualitative data that identified the following pattern of racial disparity: "The opinions
of BIPOC employees are not sought out, valued, and fully considered in decision making." Then,
facilitators walked participants through a process and conversation to assess the root causes of the
inequity, or pattern of disparity, and to brainstorm ideas for addressing the inequity. Mural, a web-

Appendix E

based interactive white board, was used during the discussions so that participants could write their
ideas and see the ideas of their fellow participants. This allowed for both written and verbal
participation, and Mural served as a tool to capture notes from each session while preserving the
anonymity of respondents.

Appendix E

Findings
After the conclusion of the EDI Assessment Conversations, the Mural comments and notes from each week were consolidated and sorted for
common themes and ideas. Below is a summary of the notes and recommendations from the sessions. These recommendations came directly
from the feedback and perspective of Port employees who attended the sessions.
Domain                        Inequity                       Root Causes                    Ideas for Change 
Workplace Culture                 The opinions of BIPOC employees     Lack of BIPOC representation      Job Outreach to BIPOC
are not sought out, valued, and         in leadership                       Communities: Invest in more
fully considered in decision            Untrained, apathetic, and/or        targeted outreach to BIPOC
making.                             unsupportive supervisors and      communities
managers                     Position Descriptions: add
Lack of opportunities for             development language to all
input and advancement for        position descriptions
BIPOC employees               Mentorship program
Bias                                   specifically for BIPOC staff
Structure                            Hiring and Promotions:
require new positions to be
posted internally first and
prioritize internal
hires/promotions; require
racial diverse hiring panels;
require every panel watch
and discuss bias video
Accountability of
supervisors: require more
EDI training; include EDI plink
goals; make department
demographic data publicly
visible (focus on
demographics of supervisors,
individual contributors/front
line staff, and new hires);
staff evaluations of
supervisors

Appendix E

ELT: create an ELT position
elected by ERGs; ELT needs
to regularly hear directly
from BIPOC employees
Training: Make time and
funding available for ALL
employees to take EDI
training and participate in EDI
learning activities (require a
set number of hours per
year); community-of-practice
groups for white supervisors
to train and receive support
about how to be an antiracist
, inclusive supervisor
Operations & Processes            The Port's work, programs, and        Budgeting and resources          Budget: have a budget for
processes are not evaluated in         Fear                               specifically evaluating the
terms of their impact on racial         Lack of BIPOC representation       environmental impact of
equity.                                 in leadership                       project on communities of
Structure                             color 
Lack of training and skills           Community engagement:
slow down our processes and
timelines so that we have
sufficient time to
meaningfully engage
impacted communities and
staff 
Accountability of leadership
Accountability: Project
Managers required to show
evidence of their outreach to
underrepresented
communities for construction

Appendix E

and goods and services
contracts. 
Goal Setting: Mandatory
equity goals for all
departments; EDI plink goals
for all employees; supervisor
goals that trickle down to
employees
Transparency: publicly share
department EDI goals and
progress toward them; make
salaries (and who is receiving
what salary) more public;
centralized and more
communication re EDI efforts
Normalize equity: continue
efforts to train, educate, and
normalize racial equity (e.g.
book clubs, caucusing, lunch
and learns, etc.) 
Promotions                       In comparison to women and             Lack of accountability            New standards for
employees of color, white men            Cultural Norms                    hiring: Lower the
receive unfair and unearned              White supremacy in the            minimum education
advantages with regards to job             Workplace                         requirement, or make it
advancement and promotions.           Changing hiring                  clear that xx years
practices/networking              experience is equal to x
years of education 
More benefits for
minimum/low wage and
front line workers: Give
hourly workers more of
the benefits that salaried
workers get, and ensure

Appendix E

that our minimum wage
is a living wage. 
Provide different
Services: Having
scholarships specifically
for women of color, as
well as daycare services. 
Accountability: HR
involvement in hiring
processes, fuller
investigation of claims of
discrimination with
compensation for the
injured parties. 
Community Engagement          Across race, Port employees have        Lack of BIPOC                  Language accessibility:
mixed assessments of the                 representation in                  Develop an Employee
treatment and inclusion of                 leadership                         Language Bank to use for
BIPOC-led organizations in the             Barriers for community             community engagement;
Port's work and decision-making.           partners                           give Port employees the
There is a need for stronger                Stakeholder analysis                tools they need to
guidance and consistency in how          Lack of clear guidance             communicate with
the Port engages BIPOC                   and structure for                  community partners with
communities.                           navigating community            various language needs. 
partnerships                      Remove obstacles for
community partners:
Create simplified CPO
and paperwork processes
for community partners,
develop a "Best
Practices" toolkit to use
as a community
engagement resource;
bring partners into
decision-making process

Appendix E

Employee
representation: Diversify
staff at all levels at the
Port  more BIPOC staff
in upper management
and executive roles;
continue trainings on
navigating power
dynamics with
community engagement
projects and partnerships 
Contracting & WMBEs             Across race, Port employees have         Complicated contracting          Increase support for
mixed assessments of the Port's            process for WMBEs                WMBEs: Educate WMBEs
efforts to contract with WMBEs.           Commitments regarding           on Port practices;
There is a need to reduce barriers           WMBEs are unclear or              complete thorough
and create a more accessible               poorly defined                     onboarding processes;
process by which WMBEs can            Lack of streamlined               provide continuous lines
compete and win Port contracts.           outreach process                  of support for WMBEs 
Simplify process,                    Diversify firms and
especially for smaller                contracts: Expand
projects                            outreach to WMBEs;
incentivize Prime
contractors to select new
WMBE sub-contractors,
research existing BIPOC
NPs in the area and how
the Port can support
them 
Increase internal training
and understanding of
contracting process: 
Define WMBE
commitments and goals
clearly to make external

Appendix E

communication clear;
provide department
trainings for WMBE
outreach and services 
Simplify Process,
especially for smaller
projects: Tailor language
(and expectations)
differently for smaller
WMBEs. Reduce overall
amount of paperwork
required. 
The Role of Supervisors in          To become an equitable                   Lack of direction and              360 reviews of
Advancing Equity                  organization, we need the                 guidelines for integrating          supervisors: anonymous
support and commitment of              EDI into work                    staff evaluations of their
leadership, supervisors, and               Lack of support for EDI             supervisors to be
managers.
efforts from some                 included in their annual
review 
supervisors
Include EDI in job
Lack of standardization of
descriptions of all
what equity and diversity
supervisors: If potential
looks like.
hires (including those
Lack of accountability
internally) were required
and consequences when
to demonstrate
a supervisor says or does
commitment to equity
something problematic
and strategies around
Staff fear retaliation if                EDI, we could better
they raise equity-related            support and
issues/concerns                   institutionalize these
efforts. 
Require EDI Performance
Link goals for all
supervisors: include in

Appendix E

Development, Behaviors,
and Essential Functions 
New supervisor
orientations: monthly, a
panel of current
supervisors deliver an
orientation for new
supervisors about the
role of EDI at the Port
and expectation for
supervisors in advancing
these efforts 
More time and space for
supervisors to develop
skills: a community of
learning for managers
(strengthen what Tracy
Patterson is already
doing) 
Require EDI goals at the
department-level, and
hold supervisors
accountable to meeting
those goals

Appendix F

The Port of Seattle Change Team
Formation and Self-Assessment
What is a Change Team?
A Change Team is a proven strategy for successful organizational transformation. Change Teams are
used by local governments and municipalities around the country, including in King County and the City
of Seattle. They take different forms depending on the needs of the organization, but there are many
similar elements.
A Change Team brings together a diverse group of people from across the organization who work
collectively to achieve equitable outcomes. It creates a structure for employees to be continuously
trained and developed as leaders in this movement. And it helps us organize and operationalize racial
equity, moving us toward a Port where equity is central to every employee's work.
The Port of Seattle Change Team was mandated by the Racial Bias and Equity Motion and created
in September 2020. The Change Team is a Port-wide cohort of employees from all departments, teams,
and leadership levels. The
mission of the Change
Team is to engage all
levels of the Port in using
an equity framework in
their daily work and
decisions. The Change
Team will fulfill this
mission by working with
leadership to develop
Port-wide equity goals,
and by working within
their respective teams to
develop Department-specific equity goals. The Change Team is working toward a vision of a Port that
mirrors  throughout its breadth of operations and services and within its leadership hierarchy  the
diversity of our community, instills principles of equity in its culture, and ensures a fair and intentional
distribution of opportunities with the goal of expanding economic development and quality of life for
all.
How Was the Change Team Developed?
There are many ways to form a Change Team and many structures for such a group. During the summer
of 2020, OEDI has worked closely with representatives from Human Resources, Organizational
Development, Strategic Initiatives, Aviation, Maritime, and several other departments to brainstorm
ideas about how to develop and structure our Change Team. OEDI identified departments in every line
of business to be a part of the first iteration of this group. (Note: not all departments have members of
the Change Team at this moment, but that is one of our goals for the future.)
Next, OEDI reached out to the directors of the identified departments and made two requests. One,
please serve on the Change Team as a Sponsor, and two, please work with OEDI to identify one to five
members of your department to serve as Core Members of the Change Team. OEDI worked with the
identified directors to ensure that the composition of Core Members is diverse in many senses, including
identities (e.g. race and gender), leadership levels, job functions, and tenure at the Port.

Appendix F

Who are the Members of the Change Team?
There are two types of members and each have different roles and responsibilities.
1. Sponsors  directors from each department are a part of the Change Team; initially, this will not be
every director, but we hope to build to that. Sponsors provide institutional sponsorship and
accountability. They work closely with their staff who are designated as Core Members to implement
equity principles and practices into their departments. The responsibilities and expectations of Sponsors
include:
Attend monthly Change Team meetings
Ensure that Core Members have the necessary support and resources to carry out the work of
the Change Team, including the incorporation of the Change Team into their work plan
Represent their department at leadership meetings and communicate messages from the
Change Team to their own department
Continually support department learning and education
Coordinate, track, and report department racial equity action plans, successes, and
improvements
Collaborate and build work plans across departments to advance equity goals
2. Core Members  staff from each department serve as the Core Members of the Change Team.
Department directors nominate members of their staff to serve in this capacity. OEDI will review and
finalize nominations to ensure diverse representations of Core Members. The responsibilities of the
Core Members include:
Serve one 2-year term
Work approximately 1  2 hours per week on Change Team activities
Attend monthly Change Team meetings
Champion and advocate for racial justice and model the organizational values
Work with respective Sponsor to implement strategies and plans to advance racial equity and
social justice across all areas of work within the department
Provide leadership, facilitation, coaching, and technical assistance within the respective
department to develop goals, plans, and implement strategies for achieving results
Provide leadership, facilitation, coaching, and technical assistance for Port-wide initiatives
Continually support department learning and education
Members of the Change Team are trained and supported equity leaders within the Port. They learn to
use a systemic and structural lens to inform creative changes to policies and procedures; they develop a
shared understanding and vision of equity at the Port and champion that vision; and, they have the
responsibility to continue to deepen their learning and the learning of their department/team around
issues of equity, racism, and social justice.
A snapshot of the demographics of the Core Members of the Change Team are as follows:
Division
Aviation: 24 members
Corporate: 32 members
Economic Development: 5
Maritime: 13

Appendix F

Tenure
0-3 years: 24
3-5 years: 12
5-10 years: 9
10-15 years: 11
15+ years: 18
Supervisor?
Yes: 29
No: 45
Race
Native America/Alaska Native: 3
Asian/Asian American: 12
Black/African American: 18
Latinx: 4
MENA: 1
Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander: 2
White: 41
Core Team Self-Assessment
During the first 6 months of the Change Team, the Core Member participated in monthly, in-depth racial
equity trainings that taught them foundational terminology and concepts, root cause analysis skills, and
tools to evaluate the effectiveness of programs in terms of racial equity impact. After completing their
training, the Core Members were asked to evaluate their ability to advance racial equity. They were
given a series of statements to rate in the following format.
As a result of the Change Team work thus far please rate the below using the following scale.
Green = "I believe I am making good progress in learning this ability."
Yellow = "I've made some progress on this ability, but I think I have more to learn."
Red = "I don't believe I have learned this ability."
Red     Yellow     Green 
Initiate more valuable conversations about the impacts of race with     5.4%     36.5%     58.1% 
my team/colleagues (outside the Change Team) than I did prior to
joining the Change Team.
Identify examples of institutional racism at POS (programs or policies    9.5%     45.9%     44.6% 
that work better for white people than for people of color, regardless
of intention).
Articulate to my team(s) the case for why we must commit to racial     8.1%     29.7%     62.2% 
equity at POS.
Identify one or more concrete actions that POS has taken to address    9.5%     33.8%     56.8% 
racial inequities.
Disrupt situations in which interpersonal racism is present and          10.8%   54.1%     35.1% 
marginalizes team members.

Appendix F

Articulate to my team(s) the case for why the POS leads its equity       5.4%     39.2%     55.4% 
work with race.
Based on this simple self-evaluation, the time and development of this group of employees is
meaningful and several conclusions can be drawn.
Core Members are growing and pushing themselves to become racial equity champions within
the organization.
Core Members recognize that racial equity is a process and learning is ongoing.
Core Members are developing abilities to address racism at both interpersonal and institutional
levels.
Core Members are developing abilities to identify patterns of racial disparities (i.e., racial
inequities).
The trainings provided to Core Members have been effective at growing their skills, analysis, and
confidence to do racial equity work.
For this first cohort of Core Members, and for future cohorts, OEDI will continue to evaluate the group's
progress and development and make adjustments, as needed.

12/8/2021


Appendix G

Equity in Budgeting
Survey Results

Prepared by Meridith Fishkin, David Kleiber, Nancy Vuong                                                         1
1


Appendix

1.  Common Theme by Division | Corporate
2.  Common Theme by Division | Aviation
3.  Common Theme by Division | Maritime
4.  Common Theme | Port-wide
5.  Survey Result Summary
6.  Examples of Good Answers
7.  Strengths and Weaknesses
8.  Conclusion
9.  Q&A

2
2

1

12/8/2021


Common Theme by Division | Corporate

Workforce Development
TRAINING, HIRING, and SALARY
Training to develop a discrimination-free work environment, equitable
access to the tools and software needed, advertising to reach a broader
diverse audience, and conduct periodic salary equity reviews.

Community Engagement:
EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Duwamish Valley Community Equity program, Port 101, Boat Tours, and
Crisis Coordinator program supporting homelessness and mental health
crisis.

Procurements & Contracts:
with BIPOC groups
Increase the percentage of the dollar spent with WMBE and SBE firms.

3
3


Common Theme by Division | Aviation

Stakeholders/Customers:
ACCESSIBILITY
for passengers with functional needs, wheelchair accessible vehicles,
accessible languages.

Community Engagement:
OUTREACH ACTIVITIES that reach diverse communities
joint promotional projects with our airline's partners, Interfaith Prayer &
Meditation Room, Language Line.

Procurements & Contracts:
with MINORITY groups
Maximize the participation of WMBE, DBE, and small businesses.

4
4

2

12/8/2021


Common Theme by Division | Maritime

Community Engagement:
PUBLIC OUTREACH
public outreach and water quality improvements to underserved
communities, funds for DIRT Corps to fund green job development in
near-Port communities.

Procurements & Contracts:
WMBE suppliers and BIPOC communities
use WMBE businesses for goods and services where possible, distribute
grant funds to market to BIPOC communities, and distribute funds to
BIPOC tourism stakeholders.

Workforce Development:
Focus on UNDER-REPRESENTED groups
provide maritime career experiences to under-represented communities,
promote job to diverse audience with an inclusive hiring panel, and roll
out equity toolkit.
5
5


Common Theme | Port-wide









6
6

3

12/8/2021


Survey Result Summary
70% of Port departments consider the impact of EDI in               Not all departments' current budget advance the Port's
baseline budget                                          Century Agenda EDI goals
37
50

16
3
Consider the impact of EDI   Don't consider                               Advance the Port's Century       Don't Advance
in baseline budget                                               Agenda EDI goals
60% of Port departments stated that there are specific areas or           Most departments are willing to take training in how to
programs to add to the 2022 budget to advance equity considerations        include consideration of Equity in your budgeting process
32
46
21

7
Have specific areas or       Don't have
programs to improve                                               Willing to take training   Don't think it's
necessary            7
7


Examples of Good Answers

Question #1. Have you considered the impacts on equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) in the programs and initiatives
included in your baseline budget? In thinking about this,consider external stakeholders and communitiesthat may be
positively ornegatively affected by your programs as well as internal equity considerations.

We have considered equity as a primary consideration in several programs
included in our revenue budget. For example, in support of making SEA the most
accessible airport, we established a program to offer wheelchair accessible               Provide examples
vehicles a discounted annual permit.


Outreach activities have large impacts with our significant spending on goods and         Provide data
services with many different vendors. 2021 to-date we are at 31.4% WMBE
spending.


8
8

4

12/8/2021


Examples of Good Answers

Question #2. Does yourDepartment's current budget advancethe Port's Century Agenda EDI goals?If yes, please
describe how.


For capital and cleanup projects we include public outreach and community
engagement in our budgets and include a scope and budget for both internal and
external public relations activities. This includes meetings, pamphlets, flyers,             Provide specific
translation services, surveys, or other methods as appropriate and as approved           answer
by the project team (project management, external relations, etc). The Habitat
Program budget includes funds for DIRT Corps to fund green job development in
near-Port communities.




9
9


Examples of Good Answers

Question #3. Are there specific areas or programs your Department would like to add to the 2022 budget to advance equity
considerations? If yes, describe the specific area(s) and how much funding would be needed.

The Accessibility Customer Service Elevation Program ($50,000) will fund key
initiatives and programs such as the accessibility focused flyers & maps (Braille),
Sunflower Lanyard promotion and improving the wheelchair experience at SEA.
The growth in the use of Language Line necessitates a budget increase to
maintain service                                                       Provide quantitative
and qualitative
Formalizing the Quality Assurance program will enable the airport to examine           response
specific experiences, such as reserving a wheelchair, and measure progress for
improvement.
The J.D. Power Operational Excellence program ($40,000) brings a consumer-
oriented lens to the airport experience; a wide range of customer feedback.


10
10

5

12/8/2021


Examples of Good Answers

Question #4. Do you think your team members would benefit from additional training in how to include consideration of
Equity in your budgeting process?


LR would certainly welcome additional training on how to include more equity as
it relates to our budgeting process. We would love a holistic approach not solely
based on supplies and stock but how to get more WMBE trainers, how to be              Provide detailed
inclusive with regards to outside council, and our external outreach events.              answer


The department would greatly benefit from learning tools for applying equity to          Provide detailed
budgeting. This includes training on spending cut risks that make inequities              answer
worse. 


11
11


Weaknesses

Many of the answersdid notanswer thequestion
Lack of specifics
Some groupsdid notunderstand thequestion.
Did notidentify stakeholders, communities or measurable
improvement orviability
Some Depts answered: No/none/no specificrequests

12
12

6

12/8/2021


Weaknesses

Some Depts answered: No on needingtraining
Training: Need help determine how much scope and budget to include forprojects of various size
and complexity and to understand what questions toask when during the process.
Depts don't feel like they can use baseline budget for external stakeholders or communities
Some divisions focus more on external stakeholders than internalstakeholders.
For external stakeholders, many divisions are focusing on limited numberof minority groups,
mainly WMBE.
Legal: this Dept has areas for improvement given their lack of diversity incompanies that they
have contracts with, but they claimed that there is nospecific areas or programs they would like
to add to the budget to advanceequityconsiderations.
Internal Depts expressed level of impact to EDI low due to smallbudget
Less focus on hiring practices

13
13


Strengths
Most Dept's willing to take training and learn
Legal are experts EDI with an eye on ensuring that the Port's efforts
remain within the boundaries of Washington law.
BI Survey and Analysis on Equity
IA: Applyingan equity lens in our audit plan. Specifically, an IAF
Capital audit,anEastside for Hire Operational Audit and a WMBE
Program audit.
Risk Service: expert at risk management to support the Century
Agenda objectives

14
14

7

12/8/2021

Budget and Equity Action Items
ER: Completing an equity SWOT analysis to determine where we are not meeting needs and how we can most effective meeting
the needs of our business/operational units and Port initiatives would be an important first step to determine if budget items need
to be adjusted.
Discussion on current issues locally as well as regionally and nationally, that then leads to areas in which new training canbe
idened, taken, and applied.
LR: We would love a holistic approach not solely based on supplies and stock but how to get more WMBE trainers, how to be
inclusive with regards to outside council, and our external outreach events.
Need tool to measure budget costs that make inequies worse
Blacks In Government National Training Institute: I have added funding for two (2) staff members to attend the annual Blacks In
Government National
The team is about to initiate a IDIQ for outside services analytical automation. Training on how to find diverse competition,how to
advertise to attract WMBE businesses, what wording to use in the RFP, and how to hire with diversity in mind would be invaluable.
Training on this subject will be provided by HR.
More guidance in how to incorporate these questions into our daily work and budgeting processes would be helpful.
it would be helpful to learn what other departments consider during budgeting and equity in budget.
See Airport Operation's Budget Review Panel PowerPoint for a more comprehensive response to Equity in budgeting questions.


15
15

Q&A
16
16

8

Appendix H

The Inclusion of Represented and Shift Workers in the Port's EDI Efforts
Overview
Since the creation of the Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion in 2019, one of the ever-present
barriers and challenges to advancing equity within the Port has been the inclusion of represented staff
and shift workers. This is not an obstacle that is specific to OEDI, but rather, an ongoing, chronic
challenge for the Port.
As of September 7, 2021, the Port employs 2,158 people, which includes interns, Veteran Fellows,
Commissioners, on-call employees, and the Executive Directive. Of those employees, 980 (or 45.4%) are
represented by a labor union. Of those 980 represented employees, 709 work in Aviation (62.9% of the
Aviation division), 166 work in Central Services (21.7% of the Central Services division), and 105 work in
Maritime (44.1% of the Maritime division). While this group of employees represents almost half of the
Port's entire workforce, including nearly two-thirds of the Port's largest division, represented employees
and shift workers participate in EDI trainings, learning opportunities, and events at disproportionately
lower rates than non-represented employees and employees who work during traditional hours.
This is a significant barrier to the Port's efforts to become a model for equity, diversity, and inclusion,
and this barrier is further illustrated in both the quantitative and qualitative data of the Equity Survey.
Of the 1,306 employees that completed the Equity Survey, 30.1% identified as represented in
comparison to 45.4% of the organization that is represented. Within the survey data, in comparison to
non-represented employees, represented staff reported the following, which is not an exhaustive list.
Their leaders and supervisors do not encourage and facilitate open dialogue about racial issues.
They are not encouraged to participate in OEDI programming.
Their work and projects are not evaluated in terms of their impact on racial equity.
They do not believe that racial equity should be a consideration in hiring and promotions.
They are not encouraged to develop themselves professionally through training and learning
opportunities.
In addition to the insight and data from the Equity Survey, OEDI and Strategic Initiative coordinated a
series of conversations and interviews with represented staff and shift works, supervisors of
represented staff, and Labor Relations staff. The intention of these meetings was to learn about the
barriers and challenges that represented and shift workers experience with regards to participation in
EDI programming and implementing EDI frameworks into their work. From these meetings, several
themes, many of them already known, emerged.
Lack of support from managers and supervisors: staff reported that when they are interested in
participating in EDI programming, they often cannot get approval from their direct supervisor,
and/or their supervisor is unwilling to take a few additional steps (e.g., finding staffing coverage
and securing equipment and private space) to encourage their participation. This is consistent
with what was reported in the Equity Survey.
Goals: staff reported some areas with no P-link goals committed to equity, diversity or inclusion.
Also represented staff not included in the P-link process, so lack of directive or goal that this is
the work that needs to happen and is a commitment of all at the Port.
Funding: staff and supervisors reported funding as an issue to participation, saying that because
programming often happens outside of staff's shifts then they would be required to pay
overtime. Or, in the case of programming occurring during staff's shift, supervisors would need
to pay for additional staff to ensure necessary coverage. In addition to funding, represented

Appendix H

staff charge their time to work orders, and if a supervisor does not create a work order to EDI
programming, then they are unable to get paid for their engagement. 
Timing, advertising, and accessibility: staff reported that almost all programming is offered
during traditional work hours, and because of the issues listed above, if they wanted to
participate, they would have to do so on their own time. Programming is almost always
advertised and announced via email and Compass. For many represented and shift workers,
they do not regularly access their email and/or computers, so they often miss announcements.
Finally, many events and trainings are offered back-to-back or in successive weeks, which can
make it difficult for represented and shift staff to participate because it requires a prolonged
adjustment of their schedule. The suggestion was to have more time between programming so
that schedule adjustments were more manageable and easier to plan for. 
Every department is unique: while there are commonalities among different teams of
represented and shift workers, every department and team are unique, with unique business
needs and are often faced with unique challenges. For instance, the Pathfinders at SEA are
subject to the flow and fluctuations of airport passenger counts/traffic, while Aviation
Maintenance if operating many 24-hour teams that do not have much availability for time in
front a computer. 
Again, without the full inclusion and involvement of the Port's represented staff and shift workers in its
EDI efforts, the organization will always struggle to fulfill its goal of becoming a model of equity,
diversity, and inclusion.
Recommendations
1.   Goals and direction
a.   Collective Bargaining Agreements/Labor  include EDI training and engagement
requirements (# of hours or percentage of time?)
b.   Performance Goals
i.  For represented and shift workers (including foreman and general foreman)
ii.  Supervisors of represented and shift workers (non-represented supervisors,
managers, and directors)
2.   Funding/budget
a.   Dedicated funding for employees to participate in training and EDI efforts, covering
time/work and equipment.
b.   Dedicated funding for overtime to ensure the work is done while making time and space
for training and engagement for EDI efforts.
c.   Dedicate funding for OEDI, Strategic Initiatives, and other employee service-related
departments to expand our abilities to serve all shifts and employees
3.   Aviation Engagement Strategy for 2022
a.   All Aviation leadership complete mandatory equity training
b.  Foremen of all represented shops complete mandatory equity training 
c.   All represented and off-shift employees complete mandatory equity training
d.   EDI/Continuous Process Improvement collaboration
i.  Work with represented and off-shift teams
1.   EDI/CPI a priority item for 2022
2.   Identify waste due to inequities

Appendix H

a.   Underutilized employee talent  when employees are unable to
be authentic selves at work
b.   Resistance  fear and push back due to lack of understanding
and engagement
3.   Improvement efforts for systemic change
4.   Maritime Engagement Strategy for 2022

How to use Mural:         Make a sticky note:                                                                          Appendix I
o Double click in a white space that you would like a note.
o Then just type your comment
Edit Text of an existing note
o Click on the note one time and wait to see the curser,
o Then just type                                                                                What do Blacks In Government need the Port of Seattle to
To move a sticky note
o Click on the note and drag it to where you would like it to be                                             focus on in combatting racial discriminations?
Duplicate a note
o Right click on the note and left click on "Duplicate"
Change the color of a note
o Left click on the note                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 What does membership expect from BIG
o View the menu and select the colored box to change the color
Equity & Inclusion Accountability ..
Pay Equity                                       Policies and Procedures
Greater racial
Make sure       higher level of
A voice in             Focus on the
A pay equity      Research pay                     polcies are      engagement with                             advancement of       diversity in the
inequity                                                                                                        deciding
study and                                     applied       EDI initiatives and                            current black            overall       the people of non-
A collaborative                                                                                                                     Advocacy
share                                  throughout the     training among        policy               employees in          employee     color to do this work                                       fellowship   development
strategic plan
addition to
organization      Port staff; require                                                                                                                Partnering
recruiting new/           population
with other
racial equity                                fresh talent.                                                                   ERG/D&D
Practice here:                                                                                           Normalize calling
out those who are                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                          on OEDI
resisting instead of                                                                       training
Performance Link                        keeping it hush                                                                                                                                                                                    Mentoring
hush.                                                                                                                                                                                                      Infiltrate these                                     Share with
Transparency
department managers        Diversity                                            Mentorship &
Less hostil work           Recruiting                                                  Contracting                                                              sponsorship
environment for                                    and their like minded
those that stand              Policy
staff who are flying                                                                                                             Engagement
up or become           Changes            under the radar. Stop                                                                                                            w/black
whistle blowers.                                                                                                                                                                                            employees
retaliation                                            protecting and excusing                                                                                                                                        who are not
them like the racist           Holding                                                                                      BIG members
auntie and uncle.          managers
accountable
Sponsorship                                            Outreach
Training and Development
of future leaders                                                                                    A the Port to
help BIG ID           Transparency
those that                 and
Middle                                                     selected African      communication
Train mid          Management -                                                         American status      around progress
level             development
Managers        and evolving.
This is a huge                                                                   Representation
barrier
Black        For the Port to
STOP Pandering       Hiring more
Black Business Barriers                                                                  images         w/photos ops          Black
being used     and begin real     employees at                         To-Do's
tangible cahnge.       Executive and
eliminating
Director levels
Making our internal            barriers for                                                                                                                                                                                                     Who is responsible
Detail/ Notes if
processes less                                                                                                                                                                                           What. Action. Item                    for coordinating     When is this due?       Status
needed
work
cumbersome for              black
black businesses and        businesses to                                                               Charles P Huey             Increase the number of
other people of color       do business with                                                                 Internship name                black employees in                                                  Description per
Jo                  3/19
acknowledgement            positions of supervisory,                                               category
to do business with
the Port                    the Port
management and director
positions by 15% by Q3 of                                        Create and send out
TBD               TBD
2022.                                            survey or email
Update Delmas and      Feedback and work
BIG                                      Terrence               3/25
we have done


Set up next meeting                                   Lacretiah              3.19
Pay Equity                        We expect that the Port promotes black and brown employees to similar location (3-                                                                   Ask for feedback and
comments from BIG                                   Terrence
Pay equity                                                                                                                                                                                  and ask to attend April
7%) on the pay bracket as their white counterparts. We expect black and brown                Data from                                                                        meeting
HR?
employees to have a similar distribution for pay at the port as their white counterparts                                                                                        Set meeting with Lance,
Patricia, Delmas,                                                  Jo
Terrence, LaCretiah, Jo
in similar roles. We expect that black and brown employees that are promoted are not                                                                                     and Mandela
always brought in at the bottom of the pay scale.
Training and Development        We expect links to Job descriptions to be attached to individual PLinks and all other Job
description be made available for reference. We expect budgeted unfilled positions to be
We still need to:
made visible.
Create and send out survey
Capture and create recaps of each topic
Share these topics with members to edit
We expect Black and Brown employees in all levels of the organization to have a
Sit down with _____ (Lance or Steve or D&D or OEDI or HR or Labor) to
Black Business Barriers            voice in reviewing, creating and editing Port policies. We expect links to Job                                                               share expectations and primary requests from the black voice
descriptions to be attached to individual PLinks and all other Job description be                                                                          Gather what is happening in these areas
made available for reference. We expect budgeted unfilled positions to be made                                                                      Relay efforts completed, underway and planned for the future
visible.
We expect that the Port invests resources to overcome barriers in that WMBE firms have
Policies and Procedures            in doing work with the Port. The Port should fund and partner with incubation agents and
bridge resources like airport bonding access and things of that nature. We expect that the
Port puts "teeth" behind the effort of increasing WMBE numbers.

Create meaningful and successive opportunities for black employees to have access and
Equity & Inclusion Accountability ..     interaction to ELT and director level people. Executive shadows and follows the front line
worker and the employee gets to shadow and see the ELT member. Min- 1 day a month
split between ELT shadowing employee and employee shadowing ELT.
Create specific criteria when investigating employee complaints about racism.
Employees
Representation                  Engage with community groups and school districts to ensure that Black students         LaCretiah to pull
photos of
Debbie talking
about ladies of
know the role of and the work opportunities at the Port of Seattle.                              maritime
Recruit Black students (HBCU's, PWI's)                                                        Mandela to
find
Integrity when using images of Black people and the context in which they are used.          business
meeting.
Develop and implement a plan to increase Black employee representation in
supervisor, manager and director roles

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


Appendix J

Racial Equity Trainings

1








1
Land Acknowledgement
Equity Matters would like to acknowledge that we are
working on the traditional land of the Coast Salish People,
specifically the Duwamish, Suquamish,Puyallup, and
Muckleshoot Tribes, past and present. And honor with
gratitude the land itself and the Coast Salish Nations. We pay
'Real Rent' to the Duwamish Tribe as one small way to put our
words into action.

2

12 /8 /2 0 2 1



In 2019, the PORT's Office of Equity, Diversity, and
Inclusion (OEDI) developed an OEDI Strategic Plan
to guide the PORT's work on equity. As next steps
in the process of normalizing equity, the PORT is
prioritizing the need for Racial Equity Trainings for
PORT management and staff.

Port Solicitation 00320361
Racial Equity Trainings


3


Racial Equity Trainings


2

Overview                Training Summary             Lessons Learned             Recommendations


Resources:
Port of Seattle Solicitation 00320361 -Racial Equity Trainings
Equity Matters Deliverables Dropbox Folder

4

12 /8 /2 0 2 1



OVERVIEW
What was our purpose?



5


I used to think organizations paid lip
service when dealing with inequity in
the workplace. Now I think it is
transformative to see how the Port is
making effort and committed to bring           3
around change.
Supervisor Racial Equity Training
'Shift in Thinking' -staff of color


6

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


Team



Equity Matters                                       Office of OEDI
Heidi Sohn & Cikeithia Pugh                       Bookda Gheisar, Jay Doran, & Bushra Zaman



7


Project Objective: Plan & Lead Racial Equity Trainings


4





Change Team Foundational Training        Staff Racial Equity Orientation          Supervisor Racial Equity Training

8

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


Timeline

December
2021
Change Team                Staff Racial Equity
Foundational                 Orientations
Trainings                    March 2021 -
October 2020 -                 November 2021
January 2021
Supervisor Racial
Equity Trainings
February 2021 -
November 2021
July 2020


9


I used to think I had no power to change
anything about racism, but now I think I have
some ideas of where to look for it and when to
speak up about it and how to start those
conversations and normalize the topic with              5
leadership. I don't make the decisions, but I
work closely with those who do.
Staff Racial Equity Orientation
'Shift in Thinking' -white staff


10

12 /8 /2 0 2 1



TRAINING SUMMARY
What did we do?



11

I used to think that I am
alone and now I think we
are in this together to            6
lead change at the Port.
Supervisor Racial Equity Training
'Shift in Thinking' -staff of color


12

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


Equity Matters Training Approach
Heart

Normalize
Racial Equity
Hand                           Head


13

67   431   384
Change Team        Staff         Supervisors         7
8 Trainings Hours                  3 Orientation Hours                  8 Training Hours
2 Groups                         5 Groups                         5 Groups



14

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


Training Learning Outcomes

Change Team                Staff                 Supervisor
Foundational Training      Racial Equity Orientation      Racial Equity Training
See Race: Collect "People-           Acknowledge Why We Lead         Connect to the Port's Racial
Centric" & Race Conscious Data     with Race                          Equity Values (learning,
cultural safety, & inclusion)
See Systemic Racism: Identify       Gain Foundational
Patterns of Racial Disparities        Terminology, Language, &           Increased Knowledge of an
Frameworks                   Approach to Normalize Talking
Diagnose Racial Disparities:                                               about Race & Racial Bias
Analyze Root Causes (Historical      Connect to Strategies for
Legacy, Practices, Narratives)        Identifying Racial Inequity &         Practice Using the Heart, Head,
Creating Racial Equity               Hand Approach to Address
Apply Racially Just Solutions:                                             Racial Bias in Real Work
Distribute Power & Transform                                          Scenarios
Structures


15


I used to think, many people did not
want to talk about racial equity at
all. Now I think, many people stay
silent due to lack of confidence in            8
articulating their thoughts.
Supervisor Racial Equity Training
'Shift in Thinking' -staff of color


16

12 /8 /2 0 2 1



LESSONS LEARNED
What did we learn?



17



I liked the call out on White male firms are 87%
contracts, while WMBE are 12%, usually you see
the WMBE % and you think ok that's good, but to
reframe and see a Whopping! 87% are white male
firms, that changes the perspective. I liked that, I                9
will use that in the future.

Staff Racial Equity Orientation
'Shift in Thinking' -white staff


18

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


Equity Matters Evaluation Metrics
Usefulness

*Name & Racial Group                                                  Goals Met

Collective
Suggestions                              Evaluation                              Satisfaction
Summary

Questions                                                  Shifts in Thinking

Takeaways
*We ask for names because one of our organizational racial equity practices is transparency. As a team of all women of color facilitators, we have found that, unfortunately, anonymous feedback
too often has provided a cover for harmful and unprofessional comments. We value feedback and sharing names helps balance racialized and gendered power dynamics.

19


Evaluation Response Rate
63%               67%               60%

10



Change Team Trainings                      Staff Orientations                       Supervisor Trainings


20

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


Racial Representation of Evaluation Responses
715 Evaluation Responses -U.S. Based Dominant Society Categories









21


Quantitative Evaluation Results
Change Team Trainings           Staff Orientations             Supervisor Trainings

98%   Very Useful (79%) &            Very Useful (72%) &            Very Useful (76%) &
Useful (19%)                 92%     Useful (20%)                 92%     Useful (16%)

11
95%   Goals Met w/ Depth (78%)   88%   Goal Met w/ Depth (69%)          Goal Met w/ Depth (77%)
& Goals Met (17%)                       & Goals Met (19%)             90%     & Goals Met (13%)

97%   Extremely Satisfied (65%    90%   Extremely Satisfied (45%)         Extremely Satisfied (38%)
& Satisfied (32%)                       & Satisfied (45%)             90%     & Satisfied (52%)

No Notable Racial Disaggregation Differences

22

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


Qualitative Evaluation Themes
Shifts in Thinking: I used to think. . . Now I think. . .

Change Team Member
"That the Port
was not serious
about EDI. Now,
w/the new EDI
department
maybe they are."
staff of color




23




Staff Orientation                      Qualitative Evaluation Themes
Participant                                Takeaways: One thing I will remember later. . .
"I have been
through these in
several agencies I
have worked with.
All were a phase.
Port of Seattle is
more dedicated in
being a leader. I                                                                                                          12
need to step up and
do my part. Ive done
so in the past and
have been let down.
This time around I
have played it safe
for my own mental
health"
staff of color

24

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


Qualitative Evaluation Themes
Questions: One thing I still have questions about. . .
Supervisor
"What is the right
approach to
answering some of
these scenarios. I
think we are still in
the forming stage of
some of the policy
decisions that would
provide some
direction."
white staff



25


Qualitative Evaluation Themes
Work Connections: One connection I made to my/our work is. . .
Change Team Member
"How Diversity in
Contracting needs
to be more
transparent
particularly in how a
WMBE org is                                                                                        13
determined and
how dollars are
tracked toward Port
goals of utilizing
WMBE businesses"
white staff


26

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


Qualitative Evaluation Themes           Staff Orientation
Suggestions: One thing I suggest is. . .                                   Participant
"I think you should
suggest that people
in breakout groups
turn their cameras
on, I think it provides
more human
discussion cues. Of
course some may
not be comfortable
and can decline
without pressure. If
this was an
in-person workshop
we'd all be able to
see each other and
read body
language."
white staff

27


Lesson Learned Highlights
Change Team                      Supervisor
Trainings      Staff Orientations      Trainings         staff of color        white staff
Gained a Deeper        Gained a Deeper         Gained Specific
Understanding of                                                 Gained a Greater Sense     Gained a Deeper
Understanding of         STRATEGIES &
Foundational Racial                                                     of HOPE and         Understanding of                                                           APPROACHES to
Equity CONCEPTS &     Foundational Racial     Address Racial Bias,
Equity CONCEPTS &                          COMMUNITY from the    Foundational Racial
TOOLS -5 Why's & Racial                         Especially 'Heart, Head
Equity Mapping Tool        RESOURCES          Hand' Approach         Training Spaces       Equity CONCEPTS
14
Connected to Change Team's    Connected to Staff's        Connected to                               Connected More to
COLLECTIVE POWER to         INDIVIDUAL        Supervisor's ROLE in     Connected More to        Foundational
Influence Areas Such as Data   RESPONSIBILITY to Play                                                CONCEPTS, Especially
Analysis, Contracting,
a Role in Normalizing      Fostering a Racial          Individual
Relationship Building,                                                                        Examples of Individual
Management Role, &      and Impacting Racial      Justice Learning       APPLICATION Ideas     Racial Bias & Systemic
Identifying Root Causes           Equity                Culture                                  Racism at the Port

Seeking Even Deeper         Seeking More                             Seeking Even Deeper
Seeking More        Understanding of Racial    INDIVIDUAL Application  Supervisors of Color are    Understanding of
Equity Foundational
INSTITUTIONAL &                           Ideas, Including How to
CONCEPTS, Especially about                         Seeking Port Specific       Racial Equity
STRUCTURAL Change     Settler Colonization,      Engage Reluctant Co-
Decolonization, Institutional     Workers & Deeper       INSTITUTIONAL &         Foundational
Models          vs. Structural Racism, and   Understanding of Racial  STRUCTURAL Changes   CONCEPTS, Across All
Equality vs Equity         Equity CONCEPTS                               Three Groups


28

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


I used to think that as a Black
woman I was well versed in these
topics, but now I think there is still
room for learning and unlearning
for other BIPOC groups.
Staff Racial Equity Orientation
'Shift in Thinking' -staff of color


29


RECOMMENDATIONS         15
So now what?



30

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


EQUITY MATTERS ORGANIZATIONAL CHANGE LEVERS
Levels of Racism

Individual &
Foster Cross-Racial Relationship Building
Interpersonal
Increase Awareness & Knowledge of Race, Systemic Racism & Racial Equity
Racism Level
Develop Shared Definitions, Frameworks, Analysis, & Tools

Institutional Racism Level      Transform Policies & Practices to Close Racialized Outcome Gaps
Shift Systemic Power to Communities of Color; Dismantle the white
Racial Hierarchy

Societal-Cultural Racism Level          Acknowledge of Legacy of Racialized Policies & Practices
Shift Societal Narratives to Amplify the Collective Voices of
Communities of Color

Structural Racism Level                         Enact Reparations (Repair) for Black Americans
Establish 'Land Back' Policies & Practices for Indigenous
Communities


31

I used to not think much
about Indigenous people's
issues but the pre-work video
really opened my eyes to think         16
(and act) about it more.
Staff Racial Equity Orientation
'Shift in Thinking' -staff of color


32

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


CAPACITY BUILDING RECOMMENDATIONS
INDIVIDUAL LEVEL      INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL    INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL    INSTITUTIONAL LEVEL
Participant Requested    People Development     Org. Capacity Building    Org. Practice Focused    Intentional Power Shifts
Seeking More       Provide Case Study      Create a Change Team     Focus on Closing the
Labs to Dig Into       Core Group to Function    Racialized Gap for One
Change Team     INSTITUTIONAL &
Institutional &          as Racial Equity        Specific Work Place
STRUCTURAL       Structural Racial      Facilitators, Auditors,     Outcome -detailed in
Change Models     Equity Change Models    Coaches, & Influencers      a Dept Equity Plan
Seeking Even Deeper       Offer a Range of           Develop a         Require Annual Racial
Understanding of       Workshop Topics,       Standardized Racial       Equity Professional
All Staff        Racial Equity        Especially Related to      Equity Orientation      Develop Hours that are
Foundational        Settler Colonization &      Curriculum AND      Aligned w/ Department
CONCEPTS           Anti-Blackness         Facilitator Team          Equity Plans

Seeking More                            Design Supervisor's
Offer Follow Up                           Weekly or Monthly      Use Recommendations
INDIVIDUAL Application                        Role & Responsibilities                        from the WOC Assessment
Supervisors                          Opportunities to                          (More Frequent than
Ideas, Including How to                        for the Retention of &                            in Defining the
Engage Reluctant       Practice Engaging                         Annual) Racial Equity
Sense of Belonging for                         Supervisor's Retention
Co-Workers        Reluctant Co-Workers
Staff of Color        Goal Setting Reviews      Roles & Responsibilities

Seeking Port Specific     Provide Multiracial AND       Design specific         Work Towards         Develop a Staff of
Racial Caucus Spaces to    Supervisor curriculum        Co-Creating        Color AND Women of
Staff of Color      INSTITUTIONAL &
Continue to Build Hope       that centers the       Indigenous Specific     Color Decision-Making
STRUCTURAL        & Community Across     unique experiences of    Organizational Policies       Participation
Changes         Departments & Positions     Supervisors of Color         & Practices            Mechanism

Resource: Restructure Your Organization to Actually Advance Racial Justice, Evelyn R. Carter

33


I used to think this was my
task to work. Now I think we
can work this as a collective,           17
and the outcome will be better.
Supervisor Racial Equity Trainings
'Shift in Thinking' -white staff


34

12 /8 /2 0 2 1



Thank You & Dig In!
www.equitymattersnw.com

heidi@equitymattersnw.com

206-372-2413

www.facebook.com/equitymatters




35

CiKeithia is an amazing
facilitator/trainer. Three hours
went by so quickly and I was
engaged throughout the          18
training. Just thank you.
Staff Racial Equity Orientation
'Suggestion' -staff of color


36

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


I used to think it was important to
not ruffle anyone's feathers, but
now I think it's more important to
demonstrate an intolerance of
racism in the workplace.
Supervisor Racial Equity Trainings
'Shift in Thinking' -white staff


37


I used to think I could take an
easy exit from engaging with
racial biases. Now I thinking I can
be more effective by thoughtfully         19
addressing the situations.
Supervisor Racial Equity Trainings
'Shift in Thinking' -white staff


38

12 /8 /2 0 2 1


I used to think that there wouldn't be
a way to facilitate this conversation in
the workplace. Now I think that these
types of conversations should happen
more frequently.
Staff Racial Equity Orientation
'Shift in Thinking' -staff of color


39


I used to think equity training would
not be embraced at such a large entity
such as the Port, now I think it is
becoming a vital part of workplace            20
training which is awesome.
Staff Racial Equity Orientation
'Shift in Thinking' -white staff


40

Appendix K

Black Lives Matter Caucusing Series
A Tool to Advance Racial Equity at the Port
Hosted by the Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion
Series Recap
June - August 2020
On Friday, June 5th, 250 Port employees gathered for a community conversation focused on the impacts
of the deeply racialized and tragic killings of Ahmaud Arbery, Breonna Taylor, and George Floyd. Their
deaths are some of the most recent in a long history of unjust systemic racism and violence against
African Americans in our country. During this event, we broke into caucuses to process our feelings,
build solidarity with one another, and begin a conversation about how the Port can create meaningful,
lasting change. In July and August, we continued caucusing to strengthen our commitment to equity
work and build our capacity to undo racism. Below is a summary of the seven-part caucusing series, and
to learn more about caucusing as an effective racial equity tool, please visit the OEDI Resources page on
Compass.
Goals of Caucusing Series
To normalize conversations about race and racism
To build partnerships with one another as we work together to
combat racism
To create a space for employees to share feelings and thoughts
To strategize how we create an equitable, anti-racist organization
Participants
Total participants (duplicated): 1,045
Deduplicated participants: 344
Average participant attended 3 events                                 Racial demographic of employees who
Employees who facilitated caucuses: 27                                 participated in the caucusing series.
High-Level Themes
One of the main focuses of this series was to brainstorm and identify changes that the Port could make
in order to become a more equitable, anti-racist organization. In a post-series survey, participants were
asked to expand on these ideas. Both areas for improvement and existing strengths were identified.
Here are a few predominate themes.
Employees Identified These Areas for Improvement
Internally
Compensation Equity: There is a strong perception that we have significant disparities in how
people with the same position are paid, namely Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC)
and women are compensated at lower rates that white men.
Performance Evaluations: Employees perceive the process of for performance evaluations as not
being consistent across the organization, and it requires employees to write their own
evaluations. This relies too heavily on the discretion of supervisors, which leads to bias.
Hiring & Promotions: Employees are concerned about how and to what communities the Port
advertises in and recruits for open positions. Additionally, many employees named a history of

Appendix K

women and BIPOC serving in the same position for long periods of time without opportunities
for development, advancement, and promotion.
Workplace Responsibility: Employees experience the process of reporting discrimination, bias,
or inappropriate behavior as not transparent, and to many, it feels like there is not follow
through or consequences associated with problematic behavior.
Externally
Stakeholder Engagement & Outreach: There is an opportunity to create more meaningful
relationships with community partners, especially with those communities who are directly
impacted by our work. 
Contracting: Employees expressed the need for greater utilization of women- and minorityowed
businesses. Many expressed the need to help decision makers have access to WMBE
vendor options/contracts, and hope managers and supervisors are held accountable to this in
their performance reviews. 
Strengths
Time & Space for EDI Work: Employees view EDI work as valuable and central to improving the
operations and culture of the organization. 
Support & Investment in OEDI: The Port's goals and vision for EDI are inspiring and ambitious.
This is everyone's responsibility, and there needs to be continue and increased investment in
OEDI to help lead this work forward. 
Commitment & Interest for EDI from Commission and Leadership: The support of EDI from the
Commission and Leadership to-date has been critical to the momentum and energy for change.
Employees expressed the need to sustain this, because without leadership actively
communicating support, these efforts will lose traction. 
Summary of Survey Responses
Over 20% (79 people) of caucus participants submitted comments and feedback in a post-series survey.
Of the survey respondents, 34 identified as Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) and 45
identified as white. For several survey questions, people were asked to rate a statement on a scale of 1
to 5 (1 being "I completely disagree with the statement" and 5 being "I completely agree with the
statement). Below is a summary of the responses.

Statement: After caucusing, I have more tools and language for
talking about race and racism.
As you see in the pie chart to the right, 75 out of 79 people
answered with a 3, 4, or 5, and 58 out of those 75 answered with
a 4 or 5. This suggests that we made progress toward our goal of
normalizing conversations about race.

Appendix K

Statement: After caucusing, I have a better understanding of
how I can personally help combat and dismantle systemic
racism.
All but 4 of the participants answered with a 3 or above, and
none of the participants answered with a 1. While our work is
far from over, this suggests that caucusing helped employees
strategize about how to dismantle systemic racism.

Statement: These caucuses allowed me the opportunity to strategize
with my coworkers about how we can transform the Port into an antiracist
organization.
All but six participants posted a 3 or above, suggesting we made
progress at both facilitating partnerships between colleagues and
providing a space for people to strategize about how we, as an
organization, can become anti-racist.

Statement: The weekly guest speakers deepened my understanding
of systemic racism.
At the beginning of each event, participants heard from a local,
experienced racial equity leader, including Benita Horn (Equity
Consultant, City of Renton), Michele Storms (ED, ACLU of
Washington), Eric K. Ward (ED, Western States Center), Ericka Cox
(King County Office of Equity & Social Justice), Scot Nakagawa
(Senior Partner at Change Lab & Senior Advisor with Race Forward),
and Anita Whitfield (Director, King County Office of Equity & Social
Justice). The speaker overwhelming resonated with participants.
Statement: My facilitator(s) created a space where I was
respected and heard.
One of the goals for this series was to create a space for
employees to share feelings and thoughts and to process the
most instances of violence against Black Americans. This response
indicates that caucus facilitators were very effective in meeting
that goal.

Appendix K

Statement: I think caucusing is helpful in both transforming the
Port's culture and improving the Port's ability to dismantle racism.
This suggests that caucusing is an effective tool for the Port,
helping us normalizing conversations of race and racism and to
infuse equity principles and practices into all aspects of Port
operations and culture.


Racial equity work is difficult, uncomfortable, and emotional, and the success of this caucusing series
speaks volumes to employee's commitment and energy for transformational change. Based on the level
of engagement, informal feedback, and survey responses, it is clear that Port employees benefitted from
caucusing, and we benefited organizationally as we made clear progress toward the first goal of the
Port's EDI Strategic Plan  to infuse principles and practice of equity into all aspects of the Port's
operations and culture. OEDI will offer more opportunities to caucus during the last quarter of the year.
Please be on the lookout, and if you have any questions, please contact Jay Doran.

Appendix L

Port of Seattle 
SOUTH KING COUNTY FUND 2020 
ECONOMIC RECOVERY GRANTS PROGRAM 
Cycle 1 Final Report 
April 2021 




Aaliyah Gupta and Nanette Fok 
South King County Fund Consultants

PART I: DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF CYCLE 1 
OVERVIEW
Port of Seattle established the South King County (SKC) Fund in 2018 to develop equity-based
partnerships and provide resources and support in historically underserved near-airport communities.
These communities  including Burien, Des Moines, Federal Way, Normandy Park, SeaTac and Tukwila  
are some of the most culturally and ethnically diverse in King County, with over 95 spoken languages.
Established by a Port of Seattle Commission motion (Motion 2019-10, amended and adopted in June
2019), South King County Fund has been designated $10 million for distribution between 2019 and
2023. The fund's program priorities are airport noise, environmental health and sustainability in near-
airport communities. It is managed as a joint project of two Port of Seattle departments: Office of
Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (OEDI) and External Relations. 
The first full cycle of South King County Fund was launched in 2020. Initial plans were to run two cycles
in 2020, with the first request for proposals (RFP) released in early summer and awards made by fall,
and the second released in the fall with awards in early 2021. With the onset of the coronavirus
pandemic  which had risen to an all-encompassing level by March 2020, affecting every corner of every
community  departments across Port of Seattle worked actively to create and refine policies and
programs to respond to the vast pandemic-related disruptions and economic needs that were emerging
in all communities. 
To help address the devastating impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on communities located around Port
operations, the Port Commission added economic development as an additional focus for SKC Fund
(Motion 2020-10, adopted in April 2020) as part of the Port's regional recovery strategy. Through SKC
Fund, the Port is prioritizing support for communities most deeply impacted by the current economic
crisis by making awards to projects connected to Port-related industries, including aviation, maritime,
construction trades and green career industries. In this first cycle, $1,000,000 was available to be
awarded. 
Note: As part of SKC Fund's 2020 work, an additional $500,000 of South King County Fund's dollars were
distributed to other Port programs in 2020: $250,000 was allocated to Diversity in Contracting's PortGen
program to expand existing contracts with organizations that support women- and minority-owned
businesses and $250,000 to External Relations for implementation of the new SKC Fund Environmental
Grants Program, which expands the reach of the successful Airport Community Ecology (ACE) program
into more communities that surround Seattle-Tacoma International Airport. 

PLANNING
In 2019, OEDI and External Relations created an internal working group to think through the
development of the Fund. Participants included: Bookda Gheisar from OEDI; Pearse Edwards, Sally del
Fierro, Andy Gregory, Dave Kaplan, Clare Gallagher, Marco Milanese and Nate Caminos from External
Relations; Marie Quasius from Legal; Aaron Pritchard and Pete Mills from the Commission Office; and
Michael Tong from Budget and Finance. 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          1.

By March 2020, when consultants came on board and RFP development began in earnest, several
characteristics of the Fund had been determined: 
The Fund would be centered in equity and exist as an opportunity for the Port to build equity-based
relationships with communities that have been historically underserved by community resources,
including those whose community members have low incomes, are immigrants and refugees and
have limited English proficiency. 
The Fund would focus on near-airport cities, with an emphasis on Burien, Des Moines, Federal Way,
Normandy Park, SeaTac and Tukwila. 
SKC Fund's program pillars would be airport noise, environmental health and sustainability in near-
airport communities. 
The Equity Index, produced by OEDI, would help inform decision-making about how the Fund's
dollars would be prioritized. Based on the Washington Environmental Health Disparities Map, the
Index provides data that demonstrates how people living in Washington State experience
environmental risks and how related health effects differ depending on where they live. The Index
shows which communities face the greatest impacts due to historical disparities based on numerous
sociodemographic factors (education, economy, environmental pollutants, linguistic isolation and
many more). Research for it was conducted by a team from University of Washington: two graduate
students  Hanna Navarro (UW Masters in Public Administration student) and Claire Schollaert (UW
PhD in Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences student)   who worked under the direction
of Edmund Seto, University of Washington Environmental and Occupational Health Sciences
associate professor  and Esther Min, School of Public Health doctoral student. 
The statutory authority in which South King County Fund is rooted (RCW 35.21.278) is the same one
that dictates the parameters of the (sunsetting) Airport Community Ecology (ACE) program and
ACE's new iteration, the SKC Fund Environmental Grants Program. A core feature in this statute is a
3:1 match requirement where awardees must provide cash, volunteer hours and/or in-kind
resources valued at three times the award amount. 
While this provided some foundational characteristics for the Fund, many important questions were
outstanding: 
What entities would be eligible to apply? Nonprofit organizations? For-profit small businesses?
Municipalities? 
What would be the maximum amount for each award? 
Would these be one-year or multi-year awards? 
What types of projects and activities can be supported by SKC Fund? 
How would community members engage in the process? As members of a community advisory
panel that informs design of the RFP? Through participation in the grant review process? 
Would it be possible to provide technical assistance to prospective applicants? 
The Commission's decision in April to add economic development to SKC Fund's program priorities as
part of its overall response to the impact of Covid-19 opened up the opportunity to establish a grant
cycle focused on economic recovery. To learn how existing Port grant programs are designed and to
understand what practices or parameters could be incorporated into SKC Fund's process, SKC Fund
consultants met with staff from different departments: Mian Rice, Diversity in Contracting; Christina
Billingsley, Port Community Engagement, Public Affairs; Joe Meyer and Dave McFadden, Economic
Development; and Luis Navarro, Consuelo Davis and Gail Muller, Workforce Development. Consultants
also met with two local workforce development experts to hear and understand what they were seeing
as current and emerging needs. 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          2.

To get an understanding about how this Fund could add value to the many Covid-response funds that
were quickly emerging across the region, the consultants conducted research to see what other efforts
were being launched by public and private entities. They found that, while federal relief is critical in the
long term for recovery, local efforts hold an important role for being able to respond quickly to
emergent needs and to help community members navigate confusing and challenging processes for
accessing relief funds. There was a spectrum of support being offered to help constituents, including
small businesses, gig workers, artists, hospitality workers, nonprofit organizations and more. 
Concerningly, however, many response funds being established in our region were targeted to the
Seattle area, and many South King County residents were feeling like their needs were not being
noticed. In late March, External Relations' community engagement consultant team reached out to the
South King County community liaisons that were working with the Port and asked them how Covid-19
was impacting their communities. They talked about job loss and resulting economic strains. While
many of the needs they identified were things that are outside of the Port's funding purview  things
like child care; mental health/grief support; loans and other direct financial support to both individuals
and small businesses; technology assistance to access Covid-19 information; and basic-needs resources
this information was important for understanding the breadth and depth of impact that the pandemic
was already having on South King County communities. 
The research the consultants conducted of emerging response funds and evolving conversations within
the Port led to a recommendation of a two-pronged approach for SKC Fund: an economic stimulus fund
to support the resiliency and sustainability of small businesses to help them overcome barriers to
accessing relief funds; and an economic recovery fund to support nonprofit organizations, community
mutual-aid groups and faith-based organizations to strengthen their ability to quickly serve individual
community members and help them navigate the current crisis. This was then further narrowed down to
focus on particular aspects of economic recovery: workforce development, job creation and the
development of new, innovative economic recovery strategies. 
Unfortunately, the need to move swiftly to get the fund established (to meet an original launch date of
June 1) meant that it was not possible to activate a community engagement process to inform planning
and development of the guidelines. By the time it became clear that the launch date would not occur
until later into the summer, the community engagement work (through the External Relations
consultants) had been put on temporary pause. It was subsequently reactivated for the Environmental
Grants cycle in summer 2020. Ultimately, the design of the SKC Fund guidelines was conducted by the
OEDI/External Relations team, Central Procurement Office (CPO), Legal and consultants. 
Relevant Document 
SKCF - COVID-19 final (03.26.20) 

TIMELINE 
The original timeline of SKC Fund (established pre-Covid) became unrealistic in light of shifting
circumstances due to the impact of the pandemic. The proposed launch date for SKC Fund's first RFP
cycle was June 1, 2020, which was ambitious, but could have been achievable for an existing program
(such as the Environmental Grants Program). Once SKC Fund shifted to focus on economic recovery,
however, this timeline became impossible. Creating a new grant program and related materials required

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          3.

the involvement of many Port departments, the staff of which were also stretched by other duties and
priorities. New systems had to be developed with input and guidance from other departments and there
were many rounds of review required. 
The timeline below covers all activities related to the Economic Recovery Grants Program RFP process. 
RFP Process (May 2020  March 2021) 
May 1-July 30, 2020: Developed RFP guidelines and application. 
May 13-20: Planned for outreach and communications. 
May 21-July 27: Developed outreach and communications materials. 
June 2-July 29: Translated outreach and communications materials. 
July 10-24: Recruited evaluation panel. 
July 31: Released request for proposals. 
October 5: Completed evaluation panel orientation. 
September 30: Submission deadline for proposals. 
October 8-14: Evaluation panel reviewed proposals. 
October 14-21: Evaluation panel conducted oral presentations. 
October 21-22: Consensus meetings with community advisors. 
October 23-November 2: Consensus meetings with Port evaluators. 
November 6: Submitted Executive Summary with funding recommendations. 
November 12-17: Legal review of funding recommendations. 
November 25: Notice of intent to award sent to successful applicants. 
December 3: Drafts of scopes of work sent to successful applicants. 
December 8: Submitted Action Memo to Commission with details on funding recommendations. 
December 15: Commissioners approved funding recommendations. 
December 15-March 13: Legal review of draft scopes of work. 
December 17: Milestone schedule and company information form sent to successful applicants. 
January 25-28, 2021: Debriefs with unsuccessful applicants. 
February 8-April: Executed contracts. 
Project implementation begins upon execution of contracts. 

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND OUTREACH 
While the original intent was to engage community members to help shape design and implementation
of the Fund, this did not happen in this first cycle. Community engagement efforts wound up being
extraordinarily limited, and little of it actually influenced the development of the 2020 Economic
Recovery round. 
Prior to the active development of this first cycle of SKC Fund, some outreach and community
engagement efforts had taken place: Several community meetings and town halls were hosted in 2019
to introduce OEDI to the community and hear from them about their priorities, but these were not
sessions that focused on SKC Fund explicitly. External Relations contracted with AV Consulting in July 
2019 to launch multicultural and multilingual community engagement work for SKC Fund, including:
developing a comprehensive community engagement plan; beginning engagement and relationshipbuilding
efforts; exploring the feasibility of a community advisory panel; and facilitating relationship

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          4.

building between community and the Port. At the time the work began, the primary focus of the Fund
was environmental health and sustainability. A community liaison model was developed, and 10 liaisons
were recruited and trained. These liaisons were poised to begin in-person engagement with
communities when the pandemic hit and engagement was then halted. In March 2020, AV Consulting
reached out to these liaisons to gain a better understanding of how Covid was impacting their lives and
the lives of others in their communities. They described hardships being faced by their communities,
with financial insecurity being the greatest concern. 
With the flurry of work involved in the shift to and development of the Economic Recovery Grants cycle,
the lack of opportunity to meaningfully engage liaisons in the process, unpredictability related to
conducting in-person engagement during a growing pandemic, and the urgency to launch the RFP in
June, AV Consulting felt it best to shift liaisons' engagement to the Environmental Grants Program
process. The liaisons worked during the summer and engaged community prior to the September launch
of the Environmental Grants RFP. 
As the Port embarks on the second year of the Fund, it needs to be intentional and strategic about
engagement and the critical role it plays in moving the Fund closer to its intent of being communitycentered.
Relevant Document 
Community-Centered Grantmaking Model 

LANGUAGE ACCESS 
Language access was a key element in ensuring accessibility to the Fund's information and materials. In
an effort to share information about the Fund as widely as possible, messaging was translated into
multiple languages for distribution across several platforms, including social media, email, ethnic media
publications and the South King County Fund website. Interpretation was also offered at information
sessions and oral presentations. SKC Fund consultants managed the language access process with
support from the External Relations team. 
Planning was key to ensuring that language access was embedded into the RFP process. Deep
discussions tackled the following questions: 
Which languages should materials be translated into? 
Should the RFP guidelines and application be translated? 
Should applicants be offered the opportunity to submit in-language? Did the Port have the
infrastructure to review proposals in-language? 
Should social media posts be in-language? 
Should the website be translated? 
How would interpretation work on virtual platforms? How can interpretation requests be handled? 
Languages. In consultation with External Relations, the decision was made to translate materials into
the top two tiers of King County languages: Amharic, Arabic, Chinese (simplified), Russian, Somali,
Spanish, Vietnamese and Russian. 


South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          5.

All of the communications materials were translated in these eight languages. Translations of the
website were included as linked pdfs on the South King County Fund website. Because the Port did not
have existing infrastructure to respond to questions and review written proposals in languages other
than English, the decision was made not to translate the RFP documents. Even though community
groups and organizations often have access to a grantwriter or volunteer to write their applications in
English, in-language informational materials are good practice. And so, it was important to promote this
opportunity in-language to more broadly reach immigrant and refugee communities, even if proposals
had to be received in English. 
The External Relations team and consultants worked together to draft messaging content with the goal
of keeping language simple and understandable so that it would be more easily translated. Final edits
were made by Communications Director Kathy Roeder. 
Interpretation. Applicants were offered interpretation to assist with their participation at information
sessions and oral presentations. There was one request for interpretation in Spanish for an information
session and none for oral presentations. Consultants drew from an interpreter pool they had an
established relationship with. 
Translation. Translation services were provided by Universal Language Service, External Relations'
preferred translation vendor, and consultants worked closely with Kelly Schimelfenig (from External
Relations) to submit content to them. Consultants provided to Universal a translation template for their
translators to use. This template facilitates ease of editing by community reviewers and formatting of
final versions of documents, which the consultants coordinated. 
The translations were reviewed for context and accuracy by independent community reviewers
(community members who are professional translators). Because language is cultural, translations of
terms that are well understood in English (like "communities of color") can be difficult to translate into
another language. These reviewers provided important feedback that was incorporated into the final
versions to make the content more natural in-language. This was a critical step in the process, as the
community reviewers identified problems with some of Universal's translations and, in some cases, 
made substantive changes in some of the materials. 
The consultants utilized the Language Access Toolkit developed by Seattle Office of Immigrant and
Refugee Affairs to inform this process and to identify community reviewers. 
Budget. Translation expenses (for work conducted by Universal) were covered through the External
Relations budget, while community review and interpretation expenses were covered through the
consultants' budget. 
Relevant Documents 
Communications Package (all translations) 
. press release (all translations) 
. website (all translations) 
. email announcement (all translations) 
. Facebook post (all translations) 
Language Access Implementation Plan 
Language Access Plan 
OIRA Interpreter and Translator Directory 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          6.











OIRA Language Access Toolkit 
Translation Template 

COMMUNICATIONS 
External Relations led the charge on communications. Consultants worked with the External Relations
team, in particular Omie Drawhorn, to develop a communications timeline and plan. 
Collateral. The communications package for announcing the SKC Fund RFP included: 
a dedicated South King County Fund website (https://www.portseattle.org/programs/south-king-
county-fund). 
an email announcement. 
social media posts. 
o   https://www.facebook.com/portseattle/posts/10157535673691463 
o   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/port-of-seattle_south-king-county-fund-activity-
6696195311452372992-LUoc 
o   https://twitter.com/PortofSeattle/status/1290429473536409600 
a press release. 
o   https://www.portseattle.org/news/south-king-county-fund-launches-first-grant-cycle-focusedregional-recovery-projects
ads in ethnic and community media. 
a blog post on the Port website. https://www.portseattle.org/blog/data-drives-equity-economic-
development 
Language access. In order to more effectively reach immigrant refugee communities, some materials
were translated into the following top tier languages: Amharic, Arabic, Chinese, Russian, Somali,
Spanish, Ukrainian and Vietnamese. Materials that were translated included: 
a portion of the website  information about the purpose of the Fund, details about this first grant
cycle and the most pertinent of the FAQ questions and answers. 
the email announcement. 
the social media post. 
the press release. 
Strategies: An email announcement was sent out to OEDI's and External Relations' mailing lists and
newsletters as well as forwarded through team members' community and professional networks. There
were multiple social media posts throughout the application period on the Port's Facebook, Instagram,
LinkedIn and Twitter accounts. The press release was sent to the Port's media distribution list. 
Ads were purchased and placed in ethnic and community media: 
Joy Seattle. 
Northwest Asian Weekly. 
Northwest Vietnamese News (NV Northwest). 
Runta Somali / African News. 
South King Media. 
South Seattle Emerald. 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          7.

The Skanner. 
t Decides. 
At the completion of this cycle, after the Port of Seattle Commission approved the list of organizations
recommended for funding at its December 15 meeting, a press release was sent out to announce the 10
awardees (with a note that these awards are contingent upon final contract negotiation). 
Relevant Documents 
Communications Package (all translations) 
. press release (all translations) 
. website (all translations) 
. email announcement (all translations) 
. Facebook post (all translations) 
Ethnic Media Advertising Summary 
SKCF Communications Implementation Plan 
SKCF Ethnic Media Implementation Plan 

EVALUATION PANEL 
Recruitment. To hold up South King County Fund's intent to elevate community voices, two community
members were invited to join three Port staff on the grants evaluation panel. The role of the community
members was purely advisory: They reviewed all written proposals, participated in all oral presentations
and provided feedback, but did not vote on funding recommendations. The CPO contract administrator
facilitated all evaluation-related activities and the consultants were present to observe and support with
documenting the process. 
Several factors were taken into consideration in determining the composition of the evaluation panel. It
was important that all members have knowledge, experience and perspectives that would inform and
advance the goals of the Fund. Additionally, to uphold the equity focus of the Fund, it was important
that evaluators  both Port and non-Port members  were practiced in utilizing an equity lens for
decision-making and to keep the process focused on achieving equitable outcomes. Because of the tight
timeline of this first round of the Fund, it was also essential that panelists brought skills to contribute to
the grantmaking process without the need for coaching and/or mentoring. 
Recruitment of evaluators took place in July in order to complete recruitment before the RFP launch on
July 31. OEDI developed a list of potential evaluators for establishing a panel of five to seven members.
OEDI reached out to nine community members to inquire about their interest in participating and two
responded with enthusiasm. In addition to the two SKC Fund program managers  one each from OEDI
and External Relations  a third Port staffperson was invited to join the panel. 
CPO then took over the onboarding process and reached out to evaluators on July 24 with a summary of
key dates and asked them to review the Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest agreement as well as the
Conflict of Interest policy. Signatures were not required until after the list of applicants became
available. 


South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          8.


Evaluation Panelists. Port staff on the panel included representatives from the Office of Equity, Diversity
and Inclusion, External Relations (the two departments that co-manage the Fund) as well as Aviation. All
three Port staff are engaged in equity-based work at the Port, know the intent and values of the Fund
and are deeply committed to building partnerships with community. 
Community advisors brought their lived experiences as members of near-airport communities, their
deep community connections, professional expertise and meaningful knowledge about community
needs and solutions. One advisor has professional grantmaking experience in these communities; the
other is a workforce development professional. They were provided stipends of $50/hour for their
participation in the process, which entailed a great deal of work: Panelists spent approximately 75 hours
reading and reviewing proposals and participating in oral presentations, consensus review and other
activities. 
The 2020 South King County Fund Economic Recovery evaluation panel comprised: 
Alison Beason (SKC Fund co-program manager), Senior Data and Policy Analyst, Port of Seattle Office
of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion. Alison's work focuses on South King County Fund and reviewing
data through an equity framework. During her tenure at City of Tacoma, she oversaw the immigrant
and refugee portfolio, resulting in the creation of the city's first Commission on Immigrant and
Refugee Affairs. In addition to forming the Commission, she developed Tacoma's Equity Index. The
Index evaluates the city by census-block groups and looks at obstacles and barriers which prevent
the success of residents. She previously worked at United State Office of Management and Budget,
National Science Foundation, National Institutes of Health, and U.S. Department of Health and
Human Services. Her passion for diversity and equity started early in her career, and her internship
at the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington, D.C., and overall life
experiences helped shape her understanding of representation in the sciences. Alison is the lead for
South King County Fund's Economic Recovery Grants Program. 
Andy Gregory (SKC Fund co-program manager), Senior Program Manager, Environmental
Engagement, Port of Seattle External Relations. Andy works at the nexus of equity and the
environment, supporting nonprofit organizations and community groups to access Port resources.
He has a background in nonprofit program management, with prior work at Puget Soundkeeper
Alliance. There, he launched a paid jobs training program for at-risk youth of color to learn water
quality monitoring, riparian restoration and community education. His work at the Port supports
both internal and external equity goals by advocating for policy and process improvements and
providing hands-on technical support to community partners. Andy is the lead for South King County
Fund's Environmental Grants Program. 
Abdirahman Hashi (community advisor), City of SeaTac Advisory Board Member. Abdirahman works
with King County as a project/program manager. He is a veteran workforce development and human
services professional with an extensive background in employment, training, housing, public health,
translation services and community development. He has managed the operations of governmentfunded
employment, training and language programs. Abdirahman has been active in addressing
socio-economic barriers, health disparities and racial equity in the greater King County region. He
offers technical assistance to grassroot organizations, facilitates community focus discussions for
policies and for equity and social justice priorities, and participates in evaluations for community
development grants. Abdirahman is an award winner and certified facilitation practitioner. 
Dawn Hunter, Director, Port of Seattle Aviation Commercial Management. As director, Dawn is 
responsible for generating non-aeronautical revenue and leading a team of skilled managers. Her
scope includes concessions, parking, ground transportation and airport building facilities
management. Joining the airport team in 2017, Dawn was originally recruited to serve as the senior
manager over the Airport Dining and Retail Program. In this role, she successfully managed the

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          9.

program through a concessions master plan and construction challenges. Prior to joining the Port,
Dawn spent more than 10 years at Los Angeles World Airports in the Commercial Management
Group on the Concessions Team. She holds dual master's degrees in Public Administration and
Policy. 
Ruel Olanday Jr. (community advisor), Burien resident and Community Impact Manager for Youth,
United Way of King County. Ruel has held various roles in the public sector in support of youth:
community organizer, teacher, social worker, philanthropic advisor and executive director. He is
recognized for being an innovative, purpose-driven leader with a steadfast commitment to the
empowerment of youth and communities impacted by racial inequity, and is a sought-after expert
on youth development and systems change. He has a proven history of building bridges across
sectors, community organizations, philanthropy and the education system. 
Evaluators were expected to be in attendance at all meetings and oral presentations and to uphold the
confidentiality guidelines provided by the Port. 
Orientation. An orientation for panelists was conducted on October 5. Materials were not shared in
advance of the meeting, but at the meeting itself. The first section of the orientation focused on
ensuring that the Port of Seattle maintained "fair, competitive, and transparent processes for its
competitive opportunities." This section was led by CPO Manager Sofia Mayo, CPO Contract
Administrator Carol Hassard and Senior Port Counsel Ryan Stamper. They provided guidance to
evaluators regarding conflict of interest, guidelines on communication with the public on matters
related to the RFP and the risks and consequences that could arise from diverging from communication
guidelines. 
This was followed by an overview of the South King County Fund Economic Recovery grant process,
which was led by OEDI Project Lead Alison Beason. This included the mission and intent of the Fund,
highlights of the RFP guidelines, evaluation criteria and the Equity Index. 
The next section, led by Carol Hassard, covered the evaluation guidelines, schedule, evaluation criteria
and rating, and the consensus process. She also provided guidance on reviewing and notetaking and
provided references to evaluation tools. Evaluators asked questions throughout the orientation. 
Relevant Documents 
Community Grant Review Process (06.04.20) 
Community Grant Review Process_ Hybrid Model (06.25.20) 
CPO Conflict of Interest Materials 
. Attachment A CC-O2 Consultant Ethics and Conflict of Interest 
. Attachment B List of Proposers 
. Confidentiality and Conflict of Interest Agreement 
CPO Orientation Materials 
. Evaluation Guidance 
. Guidance for Decision Makers 
. Guidance for Evaluators and Decision Makers 
. Orientation Oct 2020 
CPO Review Materials 
. ACE 1. Interview Evaluation Team Guidance 00320148 
. Draft Evaluation Notes template 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          10.

RFP DEVELOPMENT 
Many meetings took place between late March and July involving varying combinations of staff from
OEDI, External Relations, CPO and Legal as well as SKC Fund consultants to work through the RFP details
and resolve numerous sticking points, mostly related to the equity intent of the Fund: 
Who would be eligible to apply? Nonprofit organizations? (Large ones? Grassroots ones?)
Municipalities? Small businesses? Which of these entities had deeper need for resources to help
them become better positioned to serve their constituents and support their communities'
economic recovery? 
Under the umbrella of economic recovery, what types of programs would be prioritized for funding?
Job creation, workforce training, etc.? 
What were examples of the types of projects that might be funded? (This was a bit of a chicken-or-
egg conversation. Until program priorities were solidified, it was challenging to imagine the types of
projects that could be funded. But, this information was important to Legal for determining the
fund's parameters.) 
Is a match required and, if so, how much? 3:1? 1:1? 0.5:1? 
Could cash assistance be provided to individuals, small businesses and/or nonprofit organizations? 
What types of wraparound supports for community organizations' program participants can be
funded? 
Can funds be disbursed as grants (where dollars are distributed at the start of the award period) as
opposed to through a reimbursement process so that awardees do not have to carry a financial
burden as they are implementing their projects? 
How can the Port's typical procurement process be adapted to include practices that are rooted in 
access and equity so that organizations that have little or no previous experience interacting with
the Port  including those that serve immigrant and refugee populations and that serve people with
low incomes  can compete for Port funding? 
Could the application phase  the time period between the RFP launch and the proposal deadline  
include provision of technical assistance to help prospective applicants better understand the
expectations of the funding program and prepare more competitive proposals? 
How can community members contribute to RFP development and/or implementation? 
Who can serve on the grant review panel? Can community members (that is, non-Port staff) serve
and, if so, can they hold decision-making power equal to Port staff's? If not, can community
members serve as advisors by participating in every step except for the final step of taking a vote on
funding recommendations? 
Ultimately, several components were able to be implemented to create more equity and access for
community-based groups to compete for funding: 
The application process would include both submission of a written proposal (in English) as well as
participation in oral presentations to the grant review panel. For applicants whose primary language
is not English and/or those who have limited grantseeking experience, including both of these steps
as part of the proposal process means that applicants have more than one way  written and spoken
to tell their stories. The written application would comprise a set series of questions and the oral
presentations would be more open-ended, where applicants are provided a certain amount of time
to talk about their project and grant review panelists can ask questions for clarification. This
collectively creates a more equitable ground on which applicants can compete. 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          11.

Once the decision was made to focus on economic recovery for this first round of the Fund, the
match requirement was lifted because the economic development statute that serves as the
foundation for this cycle does not require a match. This was a significant step towards equity. Match
requirements  particularly for large grant awards and/or when the match is set at a large ratio  
place a burden on the awardee. For example, a 3:1 match for a $100,000 grant would mean that the
organization must secure $300,000 for the project in order to receive the $100,000 funding award.
For smaller organizations and during an extended economic crisis, this type of requirement can be
impossible to meet. 
Interpretation would be offered at all the information sessions and for the oral presentations. 
While the review process would include assessment of a project's strength in five evaluation
categories, no one category would be weighted more than any other. This creates a more equal
playing field where an organization that has deep experience in a given program but is new to
serving a particular population can be considered alongside an organization that has deep roots
serving a specific immigrant community but is expanding a program to include a new scope of work. 
Once the consultants developed a draft of the RFP, CPO took over ownership of RFP development and
significantly re-worked and re-formatted the draft to be in compliance with CPO's personal services
procurement documents and practices. 
On July 31, 2020, the South King County Fund RFP was released as solicitation #00320376. Parameters
included the following: 
Projects must support economic recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic. The fund's focus was to
increase equitable access for small businesses and workers and to provide opportunities for workers
to acquire the skills, experience and education they need to secure increasingly complex and better
compensated jobs and careers, all to the benefit of Port industries and economic activities. 
Project outcomes must be related to: workforce development, job creation programs and/or
economic recovery solutions in Port-related industries. 
Projects must serve near-airport communities, defined as the group of people and organizations
that live, work, play, study, or worship in the near-airport communities and that have been
historically impacted by economic, racial and environmental injustices. 
Applicants should demonstrate experience serving populations in near-airport communities that are
most economically vulnerable and that disproportionately face greater challenges: people of color,
Native people, immigrants and refugees, those with less English proficiency, veterans, seniors, youth
and/or people with disabilities; and those who occupy the lowest tiers of pay, have little to no
savings and/or have disproportionately greater financial challenges. 
Projects must be related to Port industries: aviation, maritime, construction trades and/or green
career industries. 
Applicants must be a nonprofit organization or an organization that has a nonprofit fiscal sponsor.
Nonprofit organizations must have an established 501(c)3 or 501(c)6 tax-exempt status. 
An organization serving as a fiscal sponsor was permitted to submit its own proposal in addition to a
proposal submitted on behalf of its sponsored organization. 
Nonprofit collaboratives could apply, but one group in the collaborative had to submit the proposal
on behalf of the group. 
Activities not eligible for funding included the following: 
Direct cash assistance, such as payment for rent, food, healthcare, etc. 
Equipment. 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          12.

Projects or parts of projects that have already been completed prior to executing an agreement. 
Projects that directly fund for-profit entities. 
Projects that don't engage with Port-related industries (aviation, maritime, construction trades and
green career industries). 
Projects on airport property. 
Activities that would violate federal, state, or local laws or are outside of the Port's authority. 
Relevant Documents 
Addenda 1-7 
Exhibits 1-7 
Info Session PowerPoint Presentation 
Proposal Checklist 
Question & Answer Publications 1-3 
SKC Fund Economic Recovery RFP 00320376 

INFORMATION SESSIONS 
As part of the outreach effort, three sessions were held to provide information about the RFP to
prospective applicants. Participation was not mandatory. Attendees registered through a link accessible
through the electronic version of the RFP, on the SKC Fund website and through the applicant's
VendorConnect account. The External Relations administrative support staff managed the registrations.
All sessions were held as video meetings on Microsoft Teams. 
Sessions took place: 
Wednesday, August 12, 12:00pm  1:30pm 
Thursday, September 3, 12:00pm  1:30pm 
Tuesday, September 15, 10:00am  11:30am 
Although 1.5 hours was allotted for each session, they all concluded in no more than one hour's time. 
Language Access. Participants had the option to request an interpreter. One person requested one for
Spanish. Both the attendee and the interpreter logged into the Teams meeting from their respective
locations. At the same time, they were on a phone call together, which was where the interpretation
took place. 
Presentation. All three sessions were led by Carol Hassard (CPO) and Alison Beason (OEDI). The
information they shared ranged from the background and purpose of South King County Fund to
selection criteria to an overview about award contracts. 
While attendees were able to post questions using the video call's chat feature, these sessions were not
intended to be a venue for providing technical assistance, and only questions directly related to
information published in the RFP were answered. People who asked other questions were instructed to
post their questions through VendorConnect. (People posted questions about eligibility, fiscal
sponsorship, project types, etc.; many, many questions were about VendorConnect itself.) 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          13.

Participation. In all, 118 people registered for these information sessions, and 90 attended. These
included multiple people from single organizations as well as individuals who attended two or all three
sessions: 
Session 1 (August 12)  39 registrants, 23 attended. 
Session 2 (September 3)  63 registrants, 40 attended. 
Session 3 (September 15)  16 registrants, 11 attended. 
Feedback. OEDI administered a survey to all those who had registered for information sessions to get
feedback to help improve future sessions. Twenty participants responded. 
47% (n=17) found it difficult-very difficult to use Vendor Connect. 
25% (n=20) reported that the information did not provide them with what they needed to prepare a
proposal. 
25% (n=16) did not get a response to their question submitted through Vendor Connect. 
Improvements suggested by survey respondents included: 
o   Tutorials for Vendor Connect. 
o   Sample monthly reporting requirements. 
o   Longer question and answer period. 
o   Host in-language info sessions. 
o   Have a more community friendly process. 
o "run a focus group on how to improve this type of process and then implement the ideas being
open to them running differently." 
o   Contract info sessions presentations out to a communications firm. 
o   Use a platform other than Microsoft Teams. 
o "Look to funding processes from King County Waterworks for ideas on implementing equity in
grant making OR talk with The Nature Conservancy about their grant from Boeing to then run
the grant making process using accessible technology and in-person coaching that the Port is
just not set up to do." 
o "Do not keep answering questions and posting new answers and more addendums right up to
almost the deadline. RFP's usually stick to the question and answer cut off dates, and I was
surprised to see so many addendums posted in Vendor Connect. If we had not been checking it
daily we easily could have missed some of the addendums that were posted later in the
proposal process." 
o   We also wished we had more than 6 pages to present our narrative request for such a big and
complicated project. It's hard to explain your organization, your project, and your plan in just six
pages. 
Reasons for not applying (8 out of 16 respondents) included the following: 
o "We ultimately did not apply, even though we felt we had a good program to help South King
County residents most affected by Covid-19. There were two things that kept us from applying:
1) That any materials we created would become the property of the Port. We would like to
share the intellectual property; and 2) Given staff cuts, we didn't know if we could support the
monthly reporting requirements. By the time we realized the issue with intellectual property
ownership, it was too late to ask any questions." 
o "The organization that I work with was not sure about how to apply. Spanish is also their first
language and they were intimidated about responding in English." 
o "We didn't know if there would be a perceived 'conflict of interest' until 3 days before the due
date and many of our other questions were not answered before then. I would suggest the Port
contract out their community grant making to lower the barriers to participation." 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          14.

o "too many administrative requirements." 
o "We felt we needed more time to work on our partnership plan in order to propose a fully-
baked proposal." 
o "Not a good fit." 
o "Not a good fit based on our current project." 
Relevant Documents 
Grants Communication Plan 
Info Session PowerPoint Presentation 
Question & Answer Publications 1-3 

PROPOSAL REVIEW 
Proposals were submitted to e-submittals-sa@portseattle.org and received by CPO. They were then
reviewed for completeness by Carole Hassard. Evaluators received the list of applicants along with a
Conflict of Interest form on October 5. Once all the signed forms were received by CPO, evaluators were
sent their copies of proposals on October 8, along with a template for making evaluation notes, as well
as the Evaluation Team Guidance and the Guidance for Evaluators and Decision Makers that was shared
at the orientation. Evaluators had one week to review 27 proposals prior to the start of oral
presentations on October 14. 
Oral Presentations. Applicants were required to submit both a written proposal and participate in oral
presentations with the grant review panel. Although the ACE Fund process also includes face-to-face
meetings with applicants, this oral presentation process differed in two ways: 
Oral presentations were not scored on their own. Instead, they were considered a supplement to
the written proposal and the combination of the two were evaluated together. 
Because the oral presentations served as a supplement to the written proposal  together, the two
components told the applicant's whole story  there was not a single set of questions that were
posed to every applicant. Instead, applicants were invited to choose what they wanted to present
and discussions were open-ended. 
Applicants were invited to bring as many people as they wanted whom they felt relevant to their
project. On average, two to three people from each organization participated. 
South King County Fund had the benefit of a loaned administrative staffperson, Bushra Zaman, from
OEDI who managed all the logistics of scheduling each of the 27 oral presentations. She used Doodle to
manage the registration for the appointments. This year, logistics had the additional challenge of having
to be virtual because of Covid-lockdown restrictions. Each applicant was assigned a unique Microsoft
Teams meeting link for their scheduled presentation time. Sessions were facilitated by CPO's Carol
Hassard. 
All applicants were offered the opportunity for interpretation during the oral presentation. None of the
organizations requested this support. 
Each oral presentation was scheduled for one hour. The first 15 minutes were for the review panelists to
prepare for the upcoming conversation. Once the applicant joined the call at the 15-minute mark, Carol

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          15.

led introductions of all the people on the call and reviewed the process for the session. The organization
then had 20 minutes to make its presentation. There were no stated requirements of them. They could
present a PowerPoint, have an open-ended conversation, etc. This segment was up to them to design as
befitted them. The following 10 minutes were for the review panelists to ask questions of the applicant
organization. At the end of the session, Carol informed the applicant organization about next steps in
the process. After these 30 minutes, the applicant left the call and the review panelists had 15 minutes
to de-brief. 
Oral presentations occurred over six days' time and evaluators were scheduled as follows: 
Wednesday, October 14, 8:45am  1:00pm 
Thursday, October 15, 12:45pm  4:30pm 
Friday, October 16, 8:45am  1:30pm 
Monday, October 19, 8:45am  1:30pm 
Tuesday, October 20, 11:45am  4:30pm 
Wednesday, October 21, 8:45am  1:30pm 
Consensus meetings. Consensus meetings began right after oral presentations were completed. During
the first two meetings, community advisors provided their feedback on strengths and weaknesses of all
the proposed projects. Their combined knowledge of community needs and priorities, nonprofit
organizations serving South King County, workforce development and personal lived experience was
critically important at this stage of proposal review. Port evaluators then convened separately and
deliberated at length over each proposal over the course of six meetings, reviewing strengths and
weaknesses, discussing the intersections of proposed projects with Port-related industries and assigning
adjectival ratings as laid out in the RFP guidelines. 
Consensus evaluation meetings were scheduled over eight days' time: 
Wednesday, October 21, 3:00pm  5:00pm (all evaluators) 
Thursday, October 22, 8:00am  1:00pm (all evaluators) 
Friday, October 23, 9:00am  2:00pm (Port evaluators) 
Tuesday, October 27, 9:00am  1:00pm (Port evaluators) 
Wednesday, October 28, 8:00am  1:00pm (Port evaluators) 
Thursday, October 29, 8:00am  10:30am (Port evaluators) 
Friday, October 30, 8:00am  1:00pm (Port evaluators) 
Monday, November 2, 8:00am 10:00am (Port evaluators) 
Carol Hassard facilitated the process and recorded the strengths and weaknesses and adjectival ratings
while consultants observed and documented the process. An executive summary with funding
recommendations was submitted for review to the Legal department on November 12. Each
recommended project was reviewed by Legal for its perspective on project alignment with Port
parameters, including its connection to Port industries and benefit to the Port, and Port evaluators met
with Legal to respond to questions. Ultimately, 10 projects were forwarded for Commission approval at
its December 15 public meeting. 
Briefings. In advance of the December 15 Commission meeting where award recommendations were up
for approval, the two SKC Fund program managers prepared an Action Memo and conducted meetings
with nearly all of the Port Commissioners to brief them on the 10 projects being recommended for
funding. The presentation at the December 15 Commission meeting included an overview of the Fund
and the Equity Index, brief descriptions of the 10 projects being recommended for approval and

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          16.

testimony by SKC Fund community advisors Ruel Olanday and Abdirahman Hashi. The presentation and
testimony were well-received and Commissioners asked questions about the possibility of multi-year
funding for future cycles, funding for organizations new to the Port, clear deliverables and metrics. All 10
projects were approved for funding. 
Relevant Documents 
Dec 15 Commission Meeting . slide deck 
Oral Presentation Invitation 

CONTRACT NEGOTIATION 
Note: Consultants were not directly involved in this part of the process, but were kept updated on
progress by OEDI. This section reflects information gathered by consultants at meetings with Alison
Beason and emails sent to applicants by OEDI and CPO. 
CPO and OEDI worked together to implement the contract negotiation process. Notices of intent to
award were sent by email to successful applicants on November 25 by OEDI's Assistant to Senior
Director Bushra Zaman. Successful applicants were notified that their organizations were selected to
move forward into the negotiation process and were asked to select a meeting date and to submit the
following: 
Certificate of Insurance and Insurance Endorsement fulfilling the requirements identified in the
Terms & Conditions of the RFP. 
Form W-9 (Taxpayer Identification and Certification). 
Notifications to unsuccessful applicants were emailed by Carol Hassard on November 25. This
communication included an offer for a debrief of their RFP submittals during the last week of January. 
Scopes of work. A summary of each awardee's scope of work was developed by Alison Beason to serve
as a starting point for contract negotiation. Scopes of work and milestone schedules were kept simple
and easy to understand, and would serve as reference points for reporting. These were emailed by Carol
Hassard on December 3, in advance of the first negotiation meeting. The negotiation meetings were
intended to further develop project descriptions and tasks as well as verify project expenses and identify
expenses that were outside of the Port's authority to fund, including wraparound services and other
direct costs. 
On December 17, Carol reached out to successful applicants to inform them that scopes of work were
undergoing an internal review by the Legal department in order to move forward on contract execution,
and shared the following documents: 
Milestone Schedule  Applicants were asked to itemize each deliverable from their scope's tasks and
provide the lump sum amount for each deliverable and a brief explanation justifying the costs. 
Company Information Form  Applicants were asked to complete the form and include project
partners (subconsultants, subcontractors, etc.) to be paid through their contract. 
Legal's review of scopes of work continued into March. The last contract negotiation is expected to be
completed in April. 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          17.

Debriefs. Applicants who did not receive funding were offered the opportunity to debrief with OEDI and
CPO. Seven organizations expressed interest. Each received an email that offered the following agenda
items: the Port's evaluation of significant weaknesses or deficiencies in the proposal, the overall
evaluated cost or price of successful proposals, technical ratings of the successful proposals, a summary
of the rationale for awards, and discussion on adherence to the established procurement process. These
debriefs did not include a point-by-point comparison of proposals. 
Debrief meetings were conducted between January 25-28. 
Relevant Documents 
Company Information Form 
Milestone Schedule Sample 

SUMMARY OF APPROVED PROJECTS 
Proposals were received by 27 King County organizations that proposed a spectrum of projects to
support a range of communities. These proposals totaled $2,350,775 in requests. The evaluation panel
recommended 10 projects for Commission approval. A brief summary of Commission-approved projects
were written up by the OEDI program manager: 
African Chamber of Commerce of the Pacific North West 
Request Amount: $100,000     Award Amount: $100,000 
African Chamber of Commerce-PNW will work with highly impacted Black-owned businesses to support
them on both technical assistance for compliance with the Clean Truck Program and provide Small
Business Covid-19 Recovery and Resiliency Program workshops to youth and adults. This project
supports maritime transportation through small-business assistance. 
African Community Housing & Development 
Request Amount: $99,902      Award Amount: $99,902 
African Community Housing & Development will support the African Diaspora immigrant communities in
South King County with a pilot program to provide workforce development in the form of education and
job application assistance in technical Port-related industries such as construction and aviation. This
project falls under the Port's workforce development authority. 
Asian Counseling and Referral Service 
Request Amount: $100,000     Award Amount: $70,000 
Asian Counseling and Referral Service will partner with UFCW Local 21, which represents workers from
Hudson News who have been heavily impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic. They will be connected to
ACRS employment case management services for culturally-competent job search assistance in Portrelated
industries. This project provides workforce development assistance to aviation retail workers. 
Businesses Ending Slavery & Trafficking (BEST) 
Request Amount: $100,000     Award Amount: $100,000 
Businesses Ending Slavery and Trafficking (BEST) will serve human trafficking survivors and at-risk youth
living in the near-airport communities of Burien, Des Moines, Federal Way, Normandy Park, SeaTac, and
Tukwila. This project will further economic recovery in South King County by delivering employment

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          18.

readiness training, supporting employers in Port-related industries, and creating paid internships and
job opportunities for human trafficking survivors and at-risk youth in Port-related industries. 
Cares of Washington 
Request Amount: $91,160      Award Amount: $91,160 
CARES of Washington supports people with disabilities and low incomes to realize their purpose,
potential, and strength. The Connect for Success project will support BIPOC communities living around
Port of Seattle's facilities to enter and successfully complete pre-apprenticeship programs in Port
related industries such as construction, green industries, manufacturing and aerospace. This project falls
under the Port's workforce development authority. 
Chief Seattle Club 
Request Amount: $100,000     Award Amount: $100,000 
Chief Seattle Club's mission is to provide a sacred space to nurture, affirm and renew the spirit of Urban
Native people. In December 2020, Chief Seattle Club's trauma-informed indigenous-designed job
training program, Native Works, launched Sovereignty Farm. Sovereignty Farm is a new urban Indian
farm located in Tukwila, with green jobs for homeless American Indian/Alaska Native apprentices. These
apprentices will learn about land and water stewardship, garden design and planning, and invasive
species removal, preparing them for green jobs at Port habitat sites on the Duwamish River. 
El Centro de la Raza 
Request Amount: $99,985      Award Amount: $99,985 
El Centro de la Raza will provide extensive outreach, education, and referrals for Latinos and other
multi-cultural program participants to relevant pre-apprenticeship programs in Port-related industries, 
such as the construction trades, in order to obtain permanent employment. This project will focus on
communities surrounding El Centro de la Raza's new Federal Way office. This falls under the Port's
workforce development authority and will primarily focus on construction industries. 
Partners in Employment 
Request Amount: $100,000     Award Amount: $100,000 
Partners in Employment guarantees economic security and mentorship to newly-arrived refugees and
immigrants in South King County. This project will have two tracks, one that provides support services
for immigrant job seekers impacted by Covid-19 in the aviation industry, and the other continuing the
youth green jobs training program started in summer 2020 under the Port's opportunity motion. 
Puget Sound Welcome Back Center 
Request Amount: $90,839      Award Amount: $90,839 
Puget Sound Welcome Back Center will prepare 30 internationally educated engineers for jobs in
construction related fields near Port of Seattle. Even though many have college degrees, they lack
proper credentials to work in the U.S. in their chosen profession. This project removes those barriers by
providing resources in Port-related industries, including test preparation courses as part of the licensure
process for construction related fields, and strategic training and certifications such as concrete field
technician, CAD training and construction management courses. 
Washington Maritime Blue 
Request Amount: $99,995      Award Amount: $99,995 
Washington Maritime Blue will operate the Maritime Youth Accelerator Project, which aims to provide
culturally-relevant skills-based learning to prepare young people for livable-wage jobs in the maritime

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          19.

field. The project is specifically designed for youth of color and opportunity youth from underserved
communities who have an interest in learning about the maritime sector and in designing/developing an
entrepreneurial project. Washington Maritime Blue has a mission to carry out Washington State's
Strategy for the Blue Economy delivered by Governor Jay Inslee's Maritime Innovation Advisory Council. 

FEEDBACK FROM COMMUNITY ADVISORS ON EVALUATION PANEL 
Shortly after the completion of the evaluation process, the two community advisors were asked for their
feedback on the process, with the goal of utilizing this information to strengthen future processes. 
Each advisor was asked these questions: 
Please tell us about your experience participating on the grantmaking committee. 
What would you change? 
Did you have enough time to review proposals? How much time would be ideal? 
Were the oral presentations useful? Why? 
How could the grantmaking process be improved next time? 
What else would you like to share with us? 
Please tell us about your experience participating on the grantmaking committee. 
Both advisors found this to be a great experience overall. 
The impact of Covid-19 is real and [for the Port] to initiate a funding process like this was
remarkable. 
This program is a great milestone and provides needed funding resources for the region. It is a great
example for other philanthropies in the region. 
Institutional barriers exist in the Port's current systems and practices. But, what made this process
successful was that the Port staff who were engaged in this cycle possessed some understanding of
racial equity, were community-minded, wanted to be supportive of communities, know how the
Port operates and wanted to do the right thing within the institutional limitations that exist. 
Having community advisors helped provide external feedback and ensure a balance to the process.
We were able to keep a community perspective anchored in questions being raised and issues being
discussed. I worry that, if, in the future, community advisors do not have community connections
that are as deep as this year's advisors', that could risk the strength of the program results. This
year's advisors were the result of relationships of OEDI leadership. It will be important to continue
building an ongoing network of prospective community advisors. 
The analysis framework and evaluation procedures were magnificent. The cities that are prioritized
for the fund are cities that need support the most. 
Proud to support immigrants, refugees, Native people and others through this program. 
We [all the review panelists] come from different backgrounds. Having community input and
experience is essential. We each have different thought processes and thinking. This adds value to
the team. 
It was key to have had someone like me with a personal background of immigrant and refugee
experience, an understanding of calamities experienced by workers in South King County and
professional experience in the workforce field. My first job here was at the airport. From there, I
built up experience working with community organizations that support airport employees and

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          20.

could bring my knowledge about workforce training, working with labor, working with frontline
workers, etc. 
Twenty-seven proposals was a lot  a lot of information. But, I learned a lot and was grateful for
that. 
This experience added value to my professional growth. 
What would you change? 
Wished there was an opportunity to do some community centered racial equity training at the
beginning of the grant review process. Communities of Opportunity and Best Starts for Kids do this.
This provides opportunities for peer-to-peer conversations and also brings Port in line with
grantmaking that is going on in the broader community. 
Didn't know that this was a paid [stipended] opportunity. That was a gift. 
Would have loved, in the beginning, some sort of what-do-you-hope-to-accomplish-with-these-
funds conversation. Not what is written in the RFP, but more about what the strategic direction /
bigger picture is. 
Thought it went well. There were some missed emails in the beginning (because of a mix-up about
email addresses) but, overall it was smooth. 
Provide more time during the overall process. 
Did you have enough time to review proposals? How much time would be ideal? 
It would have been good to have a few days' break in between. There was a lot of information and
material to read. Need more space [in the schedule] so that the information can be absorbed. 
Yes, there was enough time. (But that may be because I do this for a living.) 
It would have been great to have gone all the way digitally. SharePoint is a great way for reviewing
documents. (GoogleDocs is riskier.) 
Were the oral presentations useful? Why? 
Both advisors said that, yes, these were very useful. 
It was helpful to hear the [applicants'] needs. 
Appreciate seeing people in person. Like that they take the time to present their proposals and talk
with the review panel about why their work is important. In these presentations, applicants can talk
more personally about why their work makes an impact. This helps us [all the review committee
members] in decision-making. 
Technology is always a headache and could have been better. Would have recommended a more
stable platform [instead of Microsoft Teams] as well as a guide on how to use the technology so that
applicants can show up as their best selves. Would recommend Zoom: a lot of people are using it
now, so have familiarity with it, and one doesn't need a license to use it. If you [the Port] pay for a
premium [Zoom] subscription, you get a phone number that can be used as a back-up. 
How could the grantmaking process be improved next time? 
It was helpful to have had opportunities to discuss things as often as possible. There were good
backs and forths. This helped with understanding how information landed. 
Relationships and people make a good RFP process. 
Overall, the thoughts and support I received as a community advisor was wonderful. Thank you from
my heart. 


South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          21.

What else would you like to share with us? 
Had a really good time. 
For someone who is new to government processes, orientation and on-boarding can be helpful. This
can include guidelines about relevant topics like the workforce field, economic development, etc. 
The orientation went well. 
Suggest working more time into the schedule to give more space for taking in information. 
Worry that the micro-moments of discussion about equity will be lost when it gets to the
Commissioners. Hope this will be lifted up at the Commission meeting [on December 15]. 
Minneapolis has a [city] commission with appointments that include an airport employee who is a
refugee. The city sees the value of engaging someone who might not otherwise have the
opportunity to serve at this level. This gave me confidence that I was able to participate
meaningfully in a process like this. This helped me develop a new skillset. 
There is a lot of bureaucracy that can delay processes like this. Would like to see some sort of public
testimony connected to the process. 
* * * * * 














South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          22.

PART 2: LEARNINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 
With Port of Seattle's first South King County Fund cycle completed and close to $1 million in grants
awarded to 10 community-based organizations serving South King County's near-airport communities,
there is much to applaud. A new program was designed and launched in a matter of months to support
economic recovery efforts in a region economically devastated by the Covid-19 pandemic. Port
leadership, interdepartmental collaborations and committed, hard-working staff all contributed to
getting this new program off the ground. Now, as we look towards the next program cycle, there is also
much to act on in order to more fully realize the intent of the Fund. The many learnings and
observations from this first cycle as well as accompanying recommendations for strengthening this
program are documented in this section of the report. These learnings, observations and
recommendations are all rooted in the question: How can South King County Fund most effectively fulfill
its vision of being an equity-driven, community-centered program for developing equity-based
partnerships and providing resources and support in historically underserved near-airport communities? 
The Port committed boldly to equity with the creation of the Office of Equity, Diversity and Inclusion to
lead the charge on transforming Port policies, practices and processes and operationalizing equity.
OEDI's work is helping to create a culture within the Port to strengthen its ability to take a lead role in
regional and national efforts to achieve equity and social justice. South King County Fund is a concrete
articulation of the Port's vision to build equitable partnerships and meaningfully engage with
community. Its desire to be a better neighbor, as demonstrated through this expansion of opportunities
for near-airport communities that experience the greatest inequities and disparities, is welcomed by
those communities. 
This focus on equitable partnerships with community is also welcomed by staff, who are working hard to
make Port systems more equitable and to identify ways to more meaningfully engage with community
members. But, as the Port has moved through this first year of implementing SKC Fund  of working to
realize its intent to advance equity, prioritize community input and increase access for
underrepresented communities  several tensions have come to light that make the path to achieving
equity challenging. Some of these tensions arise as a result of the Port's charter as a special-purpose
government, others because of policies and practices that were not originally designed with community
members in mind. We raise the issues of these tensions here within the context of the South King
County Fund program to encourage deeper conversations and to find solutions to them. But, it should
be noted that other Port programs also interact with external communities and have sought different
ways to work with community partners. For example, in Duwamish Valley, a creative approach has been
engaged, and the Port is developing robust community partnerships through its work with the
Duwamish Valley Port Community Action Team (PCAT). 
To start, as a special-purpose government, the Port's work is dictated by statutes which are, by their
nature, restrictive in scope. In practice, the Port can only conduct work that is dictated by existing
statutes and does not necessarily have freedom to step beyond them. Although the Port Commission
approved principles for South King County Fund that include prioritizing community input to inform Port
decision-making (Motion 2019-10; June 25, 2019), the Fund's foundational statue (RCW 35.21.278) does
not explicitly authorize the Port to step fully into the space of community-centered work. This surfaces
the Port's deep worries about possible statutory violations, and cautious adherence to this
interpretation pushes against the Fund's ability to bring community members in to work alongside Port
staff to shape the design and implementation of the Fund. 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          23.

Similarly, work that the Port engages in must demonstrate a benefit to the Port. This extends to funding
that it provides to external entities. While the statute that defines port economic development
programs (RCW 53.08.245) calls for contracted programs to report on "tangible benefits realized by the
port, the workers, businesses, and the public," adhering to the approach of primarily prioritizing benefits
to the Port ensures that the Port is protected and that statutory requirements are not violated. But, this
is at odds with the desire to implement a community-centered process because, from an external
perspective, this approach indicates that the Port as a beneficiary is more important than the
community as a beneficiary. In this way, the community's needs are seen as less vital, which undermines
a process that wants to be community-centered. 
Additionally, the policies and practices that have successfully established the Port as a major economic
engine of the region do not align well with its desire to be community-focused. With the type of work
the Port typically undertakes, its procurement processes are, understandably, geared towards large
contracts with large companies  companies that likely have experience bidding on projects at the Port
or elsewhere. In its procurement work, the Port has worked hard to create processes that meet its
definition of "fair and equal," but equal is not the same as equitable. This tension can place entities new
to the Port  such as nonprofit agencies and smaller organizations that are the constituencies of South
King County Fund  at a significant disadvantage because they lack the experience, resources and
capacity to navigate the Port's complex procurement system, a system that is unlike grantseeking
processes they are more familiar with. 
Lastly, there is an inherent tension between the Port's desire to engage with community and the
perceived risks around engagement  most specifically, related to expansive worries about current and
future conflicts of interest, decision-making authority and accountability  which limits its ability to work
inclusively and in meaningful partnership. In any setting, engagement must be anchored in trust. The
Port must trust that community members will be thoughtful and mindful, conscientiously embrace their
role as an advisor or partner, want to represent their community well, and hold their responsibility
seriously. Embedded in this must be an allowance for community members to have the freedom and
space to make recommendations, to have deep conversations and to work alongside Port staff as
equals. Issues like conflicts of interest are real matters that should be addressed, but this can be
accomplished through open conversations, clear expectations and established processes for
acknowledging and addressing them if and when they arise. Worries in and of themselves should not
stand as barriers to engagement. 
Ultimately, all of these issues can be addressed through policy solutions and systems changes. But, first,
the Port must weigh existing practices against the perceived risks of new processes and systems. It must
build internal agreement about which risks are worth taking in the interest of moving the Port forward
in its pursuit of equity. What most benefits the Port and what most benefits community are, in all
likelihood, not one and the same. But, these goals should not be held as inherently contradictory to one
another. Authentically engaging and centering community in all aspects of South King County Fund will,
certainly, feel like new and unchartered territory to the Port. But, the Port is filled with creative staff
with great capacity to think openly about solutions. Certainly, there are opportunities within the
parameters of the Port's statutes for work that lets SKC Fund meet its intent to build community
partnerships without fully sacrificing benefits to Port operations. 
* * * * * 


South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          24.

The recommendations that follow are organized by category/theme. Some are quick fixes, easily
implementable in the next cycle. Others will require more work and internal agreement on how to go
about implementation. We hope that these learnings and recommendations help further inform the
development of SKC Fund's strategic direction and policy goals as well as the planning and
implementation of future cycles. 

POLICY, STRATEGY AND SYSTEMS CHANGES 
Create better access for small organizations and businesses. Because South King County Fund is a
program that has been developed to build equity-based partnerships and provide resources and support
in historically underserved near-airport communities, there is sensitivity to ensuring that community
members and groups that historically sit farthest away from resources not only learn about South King
County Fund, but also feel welcomed to apply. Continuing to think creatively and expansively about how
SKC Fund could increase access to best serve its communities will help to better position it as a tool for
strengthening communities. 
Recommendations 
Consideration of both a minimum and maximum amount  for example, "We invite requests
between $20,000 and $100,000"  would signal that both smaller and larger projects are
welcomed and equally competitive. In the evaluation process, grants panelists should be
mindful that funding requests for a smaller amount should not be valued any less than a
request for the maximum amount. A well-thought-through $30,000 project can be as
impactful as a well-thought-through $100,000 project. 
Creating two categories of funding  for example, a $10,000 to $50,000 seed-funding
category and a $20,000 to $100,000 general-project category  could open up opportunities
for investing in organizations to develop new work. Seed funding could be focused on pilot
projects and would give community groups the resources they need to get a new idea off the
ground. It should be noted that this approach should not be exercised as a way to limit small
groups to the smaller fund category. Rather, this tiered approach can create an entry point
into SKC Fund and support community capacity building so that groups can develop projects
and collect learnings, and then, in a subsequent year, apply for the larger amount of funding
when they are ready to more confidently expand their work. 
Expand applicant categories. Decision-makers should have a conversation at the policy level
to determine the way(s) in which the Port wants to contribute to regional economic
recovery. As a program rooted in equity, South King County Fund can serve as a vehicle to
bridge existing gaps for communities that are struggling to regain economic stability, which
could mean inviting applicants beyond those in the nonprofit sector. If the decision is made
to include sectors such as small businesses, new SKC Fund guidelines specific to the eligibility
and expectations of that sector will need to be developed. The addition of one or more
sectors may also require separate timelines and/or evaluation processes. 
Simpler award contracts can be used for smaller award amounts to make the contracting less
arduous for awardees. 
Get the money out more quickly. If the focus of the Fund continues, at least for the foreseeable future,
to be on economic recovery, there should be consideration of moving dollars out into the community

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          25.

more quickly. Our region's economy has suffered deeply since the arrival of Covid-19, and it will take
time and significant resources to get it back on its feet. Entities, like Port of Seattle, that have resources
that can strengthen community stability can make an important difference in how quickly communities
particularly those that were already far from economic justice even before the pandemic  rebound. 
Recommendation 
Consider frontloading the dollars and spending down the majority of the balance of the $10
million sooner than later so that funds can contribute meaningfully to regional economic
recovery. 
Consider multi-year funding in the next five-year phase of the SKC Fund. Although the 2020 cycle was
developed to provide awards that would be expended over a one-year period, questions have arisen
about the possibility of providing awards that would be distributed over two or three years' time. This
would offer more stability to awardees in implementing their projects and give them time to secure
continued funding once their Port award runs out. 
However, implementing a multi-year funding process requires thoughtful strategic planning, adequate
infrastructure and staff capacity, and a consistent funding stream. Because a move in this direction
should not be rushed, multi-year funding should be considered for the next five-year phase of SKC Fund,
assuming that there will be dollars available beyond this first $10 million. Deliberations should be
focused on the following questions: What is the strategic longer-term direction of the Fund? Will
economic recovery continue to be a priority? Will it revert back to the three environmental pillars and, if
so, when? 
There is no one-size-fits-all approach to multi-year funding. Some funders give grantees the choice to
receive the award over one, two or three years' time so that the organization can have the flexibility of
allocating the dollars in the timeframe when they need them most. Others distribute monies on a set
schedule: for example, 50% each in Years 1 and 2 or a descending percentage of funding (50% in Year 1,
30% in Year 2 and 20% in Year 3) to guide the grantee in having to secure additional resources as the
grant period moves forward. 
Recommendations 
Work strategically now to determine what the next five-year phase will look like and,
assuming that there will be a continuation of the Fund, plan for implementing a multi-year
funding approach in the next five-year cycle. 
Talk to other funders that do multi-year funding to identify best practices and assess viability.
Best Starts for Kids, Group Health Foundation, Murdock Trust, Satterberg Foundation and
Washington Women's Foundation are among local funders committed to multi-year support. 
Clarify geographical parameters: "Near-airport communities" is not a term clearly understood by all.
Generalized or vague terms about geography can be confusing. The SKC Fund guidelines publicly noted
that it supports "near-airport communities," and, internally, there was an understanding that six cities
(Burien, Des Moines, Federal Way, Normandy Park, SeaTac and Tukwila) were prioritized. But,
community members who live in cities or neighborhoods that are impacted by the airport also selfidentify
as being in a near-airport community. This also holds true for the term "South King County," an
area that is not specifically defined by cities or borders. 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          26.

The Port now has its Equity Index as a tool for helping to bring more of a shared understanding about
community members' lives in the South King County region. Using the Index as the launch-point for
articulating South King County Fund's priorities would help applicants determine if their work fits within
the Fund's framework. For example, when talking about the SKC Fund's focus on near-airport
communities in South King County, it would be a clearer message to say that the Fund supports the
South King County communities near the airport where data shows that those communities experience
the greatest inequities and disparities. Rooting the Index in this way would also better center equity as
the driver for what the Fund supports. 
Recommendation 
Use language like this: "Near-airport communities with Index rankings between seven and
ten will be prioritized for funding." 
Think about "community" not only from a geographical perspective, but also from a
perspective that acknowledges the populations most important to the Port. For example, in
addition to using the Index to prioritize the cities and neighborhoods with the greatest
needs, also identify specific groups  like drayage truck drivers, service workers, small
businesses or other workers or businesses associated with the airport  that are among the
target constituencies for SKC Fund. Providing examples of types of projects related to these
populations would help applicants have more clarity about whether their own projects are
eligible for funding. 
Clarify Port-related terms. It was not clear to all applicants what was meant by "benefit to the Port" and
"Port industries." The narrowness of this focus ensures that South King County Fund dollars are invested
in projects that bolster the Port's mission and operations, but SKC Fund applicants, even experienced
grantseekers, struggled with defining how their projects benefit the Port because, typically, grant
applicants are not asked to propose projects that benefit the funder. 
Because the Port's procurement practices prohibit provision of technical assistance to applicants, it is
critical that such terms and requirements are clearly understood by prospective applicants so that they
can determine whether their project meets SKC Fund's parameters. 
Recommendations 
Better articulate these two terms, and extend a hand to applicants to make sure they
understand how to correctly respond to questions about how their projects align with Port
interests and priorities. 
Consider removing the "benefit to the Port" term from the narrative questions entirely, and
instead list a set of broad, predetermined benefits that applicants can choose from. 
Convene community members to work with the Port to brainstorm examples of projects that
both benefit the community and benefit the Port, and then include these examples in the
RFP. 
Address inequities inherent in the RFP process by moving to a grantmaking framework. The RFP
process for SKC Fund is a procurement process that is geared towards business contracts and designed
to solicit proposals from for-profit entities. These practices are not relevant within a grantmaking
framework and not appropriate in working with nonprofit organizations. A nonprofit group applying for
Port funding for the first time will likely not understand Port terminology or practices, which puts them

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          27.

at a disadvantage in competing for awards. Ways in which a procurement process is not at all like a
grantseeking process include the following: 
Guidance and support for applicants, such as technical assistance as well as direct communication
with program managers, are not allowed in the Port's procurement practices. 
CPO practices are rooted in its definition of "fair" and "equal," where, for example, communications
must be shared uniformly, with either everyone or no one. But, practices designed to be equal are
not the same as those designed to be equitable. 
The contract negotiation process is complex and not appropriate for the size of grants being
awarded through SKC Fund. 
Requiring nonprofits to, essentially, bid for a contract rather than apply for a grant opportunity
demonstrates that the Port does not understand the world in which nonprofit organizations operate and
is not meeting community groups where they are. 
Recommendations 
Establish a grantmaking process. Inequities in the RFP process are referenced throughout this
document in the context of multiple recommendations. Implementing these
recommendations as a whole would lead the Port to creating a grantmaking process that is
accessible and more suited to reaching and engaging the underrepresented communities
that are the intended audience of South King County Fund. 
Communities should be engaged in co-designing this process to ensure that it is equitable
and accessible. 
Hire a consultant with expertise in community grantmaking to work collaboratively with the
community and the Port to establish this process. 

PROGRAM INFRASTRUCTURE 
Maintain regular communications within the core team. The early weeks of the development of the
2020 cycle were hectic, with many people involved in myriad conversations  combinations of OEDI
staff, External Relations staff, SKC Fund consultants, CPO staff, Legal counsel and, for a short time,
External Relations' community engagement consultants. These conversations focused on brainstorming,
program design, decision-making and updates important to the evolution of the design of the RFP and
related materials. 
Eventually, a schedule of weekly meetings was established with the two program managers (from OEDI
and External Relations) and the two SKC Fund consultants. Other people, such as the marketing and
communications program officer, joined in when relevant. 
Recommendations 
Keep up the practice of weekly meetings with the core program team. These were frequent
enough to keep abreast of updates, yet allowed time for action items to be executed in
between. These sessions were helpful for thinking through issues and solving problems. And,
as the year progressed and the External Relations SKC Fund program manager moved
towards launching the SKC Fund Environmental Grants Program, these weekly meetings

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          28.

helped the two program managers ensure consistency across the full South King County Fund
program. 
Because Sharepoint was a new platform for OEDI, there were technical issues around
permissions for the consultants to access documents, which made providing feedback much
more complicated and slowed things down. Everyone involved in development of materials
should have access to the document being crafted so that there is confidence that everyone
is reviewing the most current draft. Making folder-specific allowances for external team
members (like the consultants) to access and edit documents would facilitate greater
efficiencies. 
Maintain administrative continuity to support program growth and development. In these early cycles
of the Fund, it is important to have continuity so that work does not start over again each round. There
is continuity on the program management side, but this continuity needs to also extend to
administrative oversight, specifically CPO. The SKC Fund's CPO contract administrator, Carol Hassard,
understood and was committed to the intent of the Fund and worked supportively and flexibly with the
team to help achieve the Fund's goals. This was a new type of program for the Port, with new processes
that needed to be folded into existing Port practices. Carol was patient and helpful, and navigated the
newness of this fund very well. She handled everything with grace and did a good job making room both
for flexibility and for protecting Port practices. 
Recommendation 
Having Carol remain in her role as the CPO contract administrator assigned to South King
County Fund would help maintain continuity and support the growth of SKC Fund as it
evolves. 
If, in the future, consultants are engaged, include them at the table throughout. Having so many
people involved in different aspects of program development necessarily meant that there were many
meetings involving some, but not all, team members, and much time was spent getting caught up on the
outcomes of a recent conversation. For the SKC Fund consultants, this meant that they were often not
included in key conversations where, for example, Legal was providing feedback about drafts of the RFP
that the consultants had earlier drawn up for review. As a result, the consultants needed staff to catch
them up and talk them through all of Legal's comments and concerns so that they could then make
needed updates. Ultimately, this was resolved and the consultants were invited to sit in on key
meetings, which streamlined work and allowed the consultants to respond to questions in real time. 
Recommendation 
Consultants need to be integrated into all relevant work groups right at the start and be
engaged throughout. Consultants should be given access to Sharepoint documents that are
relevant to their work so that feedback and editing processes are efficient. 

TIMELINE 
Establish role-clarity and plan for the next cycle well in advance. Many Port stakeholders  most
actively, OEDI, External Relations, CPO and Legal  were invested in the successful creation and launch
of this first cycle of SKC Fund. As would be expected for any startup process, many things moved in

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          29.

many directions at the same time. There was lack of clarity in the early weeks related to
communications and about the division of responsibilities, but these resolved as work became more
streamlined. For example, even though the consultants' scope of work covered all the phases of the
cycle, including the application process, it became clear that management of the applications would fall
within CPO's purview and run through CPO's existing procurement structure. 
Working with departments that are specific to a singular aspect of program implementation requires
coordination because, often, their schedules need to be accommodated and delays can have a ripple
effect. For example, the press release needed quotes from Commissioners and approval from
Commission communications staff, and this took longer than anticipated. This impacted translations of
press materials as changes were made to copy after translations had already been completed. This
meant that translators needed to update materials several times and resulted in extra coordination
efforts. 
With the completion of the first cycle and the learnings that emerge from it, practices will necessarily
iron out. Schedules and responsibilities for all the phases of the process  from community engagement
through contracting  should be articulated in advance to ensure time-efficiency and smooth
implementation. 
Recommendations 
All relevant parties should be engaged as early as possible (at least four to six months prior to
launch) to begin planning for the next RFP: CPO, to identify its application-process
requirements and timeline; External Relations, to develop a robust outreach and community
engagement plan that includes multifaceted strategies to reach target communities; and
OEDI and External Relations to secure resources needed for the work to be successful. 
Establish an internal working schedule that everyone agrees to and collectively sticks to.
Clarify roles (who owns what) and tighten workgroups (does everyone need to be involved in
everything?). Coordinate on items that need advance attention. 
Make space for community engagement. Because of the unexpected shift of SKC Fund's funding
priorities, the need to move quickly to get dollars out to communities that needed them and the
challenges of implementing engagement strategies for a new program in a pandemic environment, the
decision was made to forgo community engagement for this cycle. 
Recommendation 
The timeline should be adjusted to incorporate the time needed for community engagement.
Planning for engagement should begin at least four to six months prior to the RFP launch,
and implementation should start as early as possible to allow for sufficient time to inform,
prepare and support communities to apply for funding. 

RFP PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT 
Begin policy updates and refinements for the next cycle as early as possible. Moving thoughtfully and
intentionally from planning through evaluation of each cycle will help the Fund be better positioned to
more effectively and efficiently reach its goals. This is important for short-term updates, but especially

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          30.

important for larger-scale policy changes, which could require time for moving through series of internal
conversations with different departmental stakeholders, from OEDI and External Relations to Legal and
CPO to Commission. 
Recommendation 
Discussions about the policy direction of each subsequent cycle of the Fund should begin
early to allow the greatest amount of time possible to identify lessons learned from the
previous round and to design and advocate for policy refinements before the next cycle
launches. 
Invite community input as part of the RFP development process. The original plans for development of
the South King County Fund RFP included convening a community advisory panel to co-design the
program parameters and guidelines. This committee would have comprised community members from
South King County who collectively bring diverse lived, community and professional experiences.
Because the arrival of the pandemic resulted in a shift of the focus and timeline of the first cycle of
South King County Fund, it was decided that a community advisory panel or other similar community
engagement would not be activated for this economic recovery cycle. 
Recommendation 
Going forward, returning to the original intent to engage community members to co-design
and partner in the implementation of South King County Fund would contribute to holding
up the Fund's commitment to equity-based community partnerships. 

COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND OUTREACH 
Build upon the learnings from this first year, expand the framework of engagement and
operationalize its strategies. Engagement for the first SKC Fund cycle was interrupted because of the
pandemic, and the External Relations team had to pivot to an alternate plan, focusing community
engagement solely on the Environmental Grants program later in 2020. But, the important work of
building relationships and developing trust in the community should continue to be a priority. As we
embark on the second year of the Fund, the Port needs to be intentional and strategic about a holistic
approach to community engagement and the critical role it plays in moving the Fund closer to its intent
of being community-centered. 
It would be helpful for the team to develop a shared understanding of community engagement, its
continuum and how to authentically engage community members. Developing a relational approach
takes time, expertise and intentionality, and strategies and approaches need to integrate language,
culture and experience. Time needs to be invested in getting to know communities, recognizing their
strengths and understanding their experiences. Trust can be built when communities are invited to cocreate
, co-design, define needs and propose solutions. Expectations around engagement must be clear.
Above all, it is crucial to remember that no single strategy can effectively serve all communities, or even
all members of one particular community. 


South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          31.

Recommendations 
Build infrastructure for community engagement. In the shorter term, the Fund could
continue drawing on expertise from external consultants as internal staffing and resources
are solidified. The goal should be to fully transition the program internally so that, ultimately,
the Port holds community relationships. 
Engagement should be for SKC Fund as a whole and integrated across both the Economic
Recovery Grants and Environmental Grants Programs. Planning should take into account the
needs and timelines of both programs. While activities and strategies may need to be
customized for each program, there should be consistency in approach. 
Engagement should be meaningful, consistent and continuous throughout the year. Activities
that provide value to both communities and the Port should be scheduled year-round, not
just around grantmaking deadlines. This would help the Port build the relationships it needs
to be a true community partner. 
Community should be engaged in shaping program priorities and fund design. While the SKC
Fund grantmaking focus areas are established for the next three years  economic recovery
and environment  the Port would benefit by engaging with community to learn more about
community needs in this unique pandemic environment. This would help shape the priorities
within each focus area. Input from community could help the Port achieve a more
community-centered process. 
Expectations of community members' involvement must be clearly understood  by the Port
and community together. If all the work the Port does has to tie back to benefit the Port,
then it's not an authentic way of engaging community members. Community members can
easily see it as their being asked to be involved only to serve the Port, not to also strengthen
their communities. 

LANGUAGE ACCESS 
Look at language access in its entirety. At its essence, language access means that our communities
understand what we are saying, that we understand what they are saying and that they are able to
participate in the fullest possible way. There must be commitments not only to translate materials and
provide interpretation, but also to understand how communities prefer to receive information. 
Recommendation 
Each of our immigrant and refugee communities is unique, and language access, outreach
and engagement strategies need to be customized to best suit their needs. 
Reflect communities in materials and processes. Communities need to see themselves reflected in the
Port's materials and included in its processes. It is important to know the depth and breadth of
immigrant and refugee communities in South King County so that appropriate strategies are developed
to meet their needs. Translating top tier languages alone may not address the significant barriers faced
by smaller communities. And, sometimes it is important to translate materials not because there is
going to be significant utilization of those translated materials, but because having materials translated
into a specific language is an indication that that community is seen and acknowledged and that those

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          32.

community members matter. These are important considerations in a commitment to inclusion,
especially for communities that have been overlooked and underserved for a long time. 
Recommendation 
Look beyond the top tier languages when translating materials. While the top tier languages
are a good place to start, it is important to consider the needs of smaller cultural
communities and newer immigrant/refugee groups in South King County who face
considerable language barriers. Talking to community members and analyzing demographic
data to better understand the community landscape would help inform language access
planning. 
Build a language access infrastructure. For effective language access implementation, the Port needs to
build in systems, processes and intentional planning. This includes dedicated staff time, budget and a
consistent approach. 
Recommendations 
Identify staff who can manage all aspects of language access, including translation,
community review and interpretation. 
Grow the budget to allow for providing language access in more languages than currently
provided for all SKC Fund activities, from informing communities to providing technical
assistance to engaging with communities. 
Utilize the Language Access Toolkit as a guide. This toolkit, created by Seattle Office of
Immigrant and Refugee Affairs, is a very useful resource. It makes the process of finding
translators and community reviewers much easier and also provides translation templates,
tips on process and useful guidance on other aspects of the provision of language access. 
Plan ahead. Time needs to be built in for a process that ensures good quality translation and
interpretation. For translations, there are multiple steps involved: identifying translators and community
reviewers; preparing the document for translation; completing the translation; integrating feedback
from community reviewers; and formatting the final document. This process can take anywhere from
four to eight weeks. For interpretation, this includes identifying interpreters, scheduling them and
preparing them for their assignment. 
For the first cycle of SKC Fund, Universal Language Service, a company that was already contracted with
External Relations, was able to provide translators in all of the languages we needed. What took more
time than expected was multiple changes to copy. When one sentence changes in a document, all
translated materials need to be updated. Many changes in copy after translations were initially
completed made the translation process more complicated and coordination challenging. 
Thorough planning is essential not only to accommodate the time needed for translation and related
community review, but also to make space for unanticipated delays. Operationalizing language access,
becoming fluent in the process and having ongoing relationships with translators and interpreters will
allow the Port to be more able to implement a quality language access program. 


South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          33.

Recommendation 
Build in enough cushion in the language access timeline to allow for turnaround for each step
and for unanticipated delays. At a minimum, allow four to eight weeks for the translation
process. For interpretation, plan one month ahead to secure interpreters. 
Messaging should be simple and easy for communities to understand and for translators to translate.
Language is cultural, and not all words and terms are easily translated across languages. 
Recommendation 
Use plain language when creating communications materials. Plain language is
communication your audience can understand the first time they read or hear it. Avoid using
jargon and bureaucratic language. 
Use a skilled translation company to save time and resources. While Universal Language Service was
able to deliver translations on time for everything but Arabic, the quality of translations was not
satisfactory and major edits were needed in Arabic, Russian, Spanish and Ukrainian. This meant 
increased coordination time and additional money for expedited services. 
Recommendation 
Identify another translation company that provides quality translations across all languages.
The Language Access Toolkit created by the Seattle Office of Immigrant and Refugee Affairs
offers a list of translation companies to explore. (Consultants have had good experience
working with NWI Global.) 
Use community reviewers to ensure that the translation is contextual and relevant. Translators
sometimes default to literal or academic translations, and community reviewers (professional
translators who are also steeped in community work) are able to correct for that and ensure that the
words being used have appropriate cultural meaning and context. Some terms that we use commonly in
English cannot be translated literally and maintain the same linguistic intention as its English
counterpart. For example, "open house" can become literally translated as "vacant house." The SKC
Fund community reviewers worked hard to address nuances and get the contextual translation right.
They were very responsive and patient with all the changes, and delivered their reviews on time. 
Recommendation 
Continue utilizing community reviewers to check for accuracy, tone and syntax in translated
materials, even though it requires an investment in time and resources. 
Offer interpretation for all engagement activities. Even though interpretation was not heavily utilized in
this cycle, it must continue to be offered. Interpretation at information sessions ensures that
information is accessible to everyone, regardless of English proficiency. Community groups and
organizations often rely on a grantwriter or volunteer to write their applications in English, but may be
able to better articulate their project in a language other than English during the oral presentations. 
Recommendation 
Embed language access in all community engagement processes and activities. As the Port
continues to grow its engagement with diverse communities, offering interpretation and
communicating in-language will demonstrate its commitment to access. 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          34.

Build a pool of community-based interpreters and translators. While it is certainly easier to work with
one representative from a large translation company, working with local, community-based translators
and interpreters who are steeped in community has many benefits. It draws on skills within the
community, builds community capacity and lifts up opportunities for community members who are
invested in ensuring that communications are relevant and contextual. 
In this cycle, payments for community-based interpreters and community reviewers were administered
by consultants. Looking ahead, the Port should set up processes to pay these vendors directly on a pertransaction
basis. 
Recommendation 
Consider utilizing local, community-based translators and interpreters and build a list for
ongoing use. Working with community reviewers is time-intensive and involves dedicated
coordination and logistics, but the results are well worth it. 

COMMUNICATIONS 
Develop greater synergy related to communications. Having both program managers and consultants
work together with the External Relations communications team on communications messages and
materials meant that the work was integrated. Marketing and Communications Project Manager Omie
Drawhorn was great to work with and was very responsive to all the requests made of her. At the same
time, because SKC Fund is a partnership of OEDI and External Relations, having OEDI's Engagement and
Communications Program Manager Jay Doran participate in these conversations would create more
synergy and contribute to growing this collaboration. 
Recommendation 
OEDI and External Relations communications teams should work together to refine the SKC
Fund brand and develop communications materials together to ensure that the voices of
both departments are well-reflected. 
More attention is needed in thinking about branding. SKC Fund is a new program and needs to develop
a vision for how it wants to present itself externally. Its website was developed while the RFP was being
developed, which did not allow for sufficient time to be spent on thinking strategically about branding.
For a period, there were a lot of people touching the communications content, and it wasn't clear who
owned the voice of the Fund. 
Recommendation 
SKC Fund would benefit from the OEDI and External Relations teams setting aside time to
think strategically about the overall branding of SKC Fund as well as the individual brandings
of the Economic Recovery Grants and the Environmental Grants programs. Formulating an
identity of the overall Fund while articulating the voices of the two programs within it would
help community members better understand how this work fits in together and how it aligns
with the Port's mission. 


South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          35.

Public-facing information should be oriented towards the user. Most people accustomed to searching
for information on the internet have an expectation that relevant information is found on an
organization's or program's website. As such, from the typical user's perspective, the SKC Fund website
would be expected to serve as the hub for all information related to its programs. At the Port, this is
complicated by the fact that CPO houses all information related to its procurements in VendorConnect
and considers that portal the only official home for an RFP. In this first cycle, potential applicants went
to the SKC Fund website for context about the program  about its history and vision  and view the
guidelines. They then had to use the VendorConnect link available on the website to download the full
set of RFP documents. Requiring the user to toggle between two sites in order to gather all the
information needed creates an awkward experience. 
Recommendation 
All public-facing information should be designed to be user-friendly, practical and accessible.
All information posted to VendorConnect should be mirrored on the SKC Fund website in real
time to ensure easy access to information for all interested applicants. Because these two
systems are managed by two bodies  VendorConnect by CPO and the program website by
OEDI and External Relations  a seamless process needs to be developed to ensure that
release of new information and documents is coordinated so that they appear at the same
time in both systems. 
Communications need to be tailored to different audiences. There is a certain language that the Port
uses to talk about itself that may be appropriate for the business sector, but which is intimidating and
inaccessible to community members. All communications should always be tailored to its target
audience, and communications with community members should be clear and direct, devoid of jargon. 
Recommendations 
Rewrite existing copy that is currently used to describe the Port and its work to be more
user-friendly to people unfamiliar with Port terminology or with the Port's operations. 
Simplifying the language will make translations easier. Many of the terms used in describing
the Port are difficult to translate into non-English languages. 
Stakeholder lists need to be grown and diversified and communications strategies expanded. OEDI
and External Relations must build on their existing communications mailing lists to reflect the breadth
and diversity of South King County. Communities receive information and news in a variety of ways, not
just through traditional sources, and communications strategies should be based on their preferences.
Ethnic media outlets play a very important role in disseminating in-language information through print
and online publications, radio, television and social media. But, strategies should expand beyond ethnic
print media to also include faith groups and religious institutions, social and cultural networks and
trusted messengers. 
Recommendation 
Conduct a thorough mapping of South King County to identify community-based
organizations and groups, faith leaders and religious institutions, leaders from new and
emerging communities, and community connectors. Reach out to leaders and organizations
to ask if they would like to be added to the SKC Fund email list. 
Expand ethnic media strategies to include television, radio and online channels, in addition to
print media, to broaden reach into South King County communities. 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          36.

EVALUATION PANEL 
Evaluators must bring diverse perspectives and equity focus. The five people who sat on the review
committee were personally committed to equity and brought a meld of professional, community and
personal experiences. This combination helped to put equity f ront and center.
Port staff brought their knowledge of Port parameters and industries, helped shape the discussion about
what types of projects were viable for funding and helped clarify how the Port could benefit from a
given project. The community advisors helped Port staff expand their understanding about community
needs, priorities and organizations, and provided insights about the impact proposed projects would
have in the community. One community advisor brought his experience in community grantmaking to
provide context about what was valuable and important right now for community members. The other
community advisor brought his experience in workforce development and in working with immigrant
and refugee communities to help Port staff understand what types of projects are workable, practical or
extraneous. One Port staffperson brought deep experience with and knowledge about airport workers
(many of whom are immigrants, refugees and people of color) as well as vendors and retailers (in
particular, small businesses). There was deep respect within the group for each individual's
contributions and perspectives. These diverse views and experiences combined with each committee
member's individual commitment to equity kept the Fund rooted in its equity intent. 
It should be noted that having community advisors sitting alongside Port staff brought the community
into the room, and centered and elevated community voice throughout the process. 
Recommendations 
To support SKC Fund's equity intent, it is critical that all evaluators be practiced in using an
equity lens and apply it in their grant evaluation work. 
When recruiting Port evaluators, think strategically about the perspectives they bring from
their Port work  knowledge of airport business, direct experience with Port employees and
vendors who are from airport communities, etc.  and how their experience intersects with
the parameters and priorities of the Fund. 
A committee size of five to seven people is ideal. Five members was a good size for the evaluation
panel. Large enough to have diversity of perspectives and experiences, small enough to be able to
effectively make decisions. 
Recommendations 
Adding two additional community advisors  for a total of seven evaluators  would further
expand the diversity, perspectives and knowledge base of the group while maintaining the
efficiency of the process. 
Build a list of potential community advisors for SKC Fund. Ask advisors from the 2020 cycle
for recommendations. 
Community advisors' participation should continue to be compensated. Both community advisors
played an invaluable role in the review process, and it was important to recognize their time and
contributions by compensating them. Committee members put a great deal of work into reviewing 27

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          37.

proposals and attending 27 oral presentations. As SKC Fund becomes better known, future cycles could
draw larger numbers of applicants and entail even more time spent in review. 
Recommendation 
Find a vehicle for providing stipends to community advisors that are not tied to a consultant
contract. For example, partner with a private foundation to act as a fiscal sponsor to pass
through funds for stipends. 
Community advisors should be able to participate fully. Inviting community members to participate on
the evaluation panel, but not giving them an official vote on recommendations disrespects their
contributions. They are providing their insight and expertise, and should be awarded the opportunity to
carry their contributions all the way through to making recommendations to the Commission. If the Port
is interested in deeper engagement with community members, it needs to trust that people who
participate on an evaluation panel will conduct their work with integrity and hold themselves
accountable to the process, the Port and the community. 
Recommendation 
Give all members of the evaluation panel  Port staff and community members alike  equal
votes. 
Sufficiently informing and equipping community advisors respects their time and participation.
Community advisors would have benefited from receiving the Evaluation Guidance documents in
advance of the orientation. Community advisors were not informed by CPO about stipends until October
13, almost two-and-a-half months after they confirmed their interest in participation. It was understood
that stipends would be disbursed from the consultant budget (consultants made recommendations
regarding stipend amounts) and that CPO would be the main point of contact after the initial
recruitment by OEDI. However, OEDI's responsibility for communicating with advisors about stipends
was not clarified until fairly late in the process. 
Recommendations 
All orientation materials should be sent in advance of the orientation meeting to allow
advisors the opportunity to review them. 
CPO and OEDI roles regarding community advisors need to be better delineated. The
confirmation email to community advisors should include all details regarding their role,
including stipends. 
Use a strengths perspective  rather than a deficit perspective  to talk about the nuances of the
program when orienting community advisors. The orientation focused on risks related to conflict of
interest and guidance on what evaluators should not do, and missed some essential discussion about
the values of SKC Fund and what equity means in the context of the Fund. Having a values conversation 
with the whole panel at the orientation would help set the foundation and create alignment around the
mission of the Fund and inspire evaluators to think thoughtfully and critically as they go through the
review process. 
Instead, much of the orientation was focused on how to be aware of legal concerns that might arise
related to community members' participation on the panel  for example, if a grant evaluation panelist
is serving on the board of directors of an applicant organization. But, this concern also extended into the

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          38.

future, to potential conflicts of interest: Perhaps a community member sitting on the evaluation panel
doesn't have any current conflicts of interest, but is actively involved with an organization that might
possibly apply to SKC Fund or for other Port funding in the near future. Panelists were cautioned to think
about this from the most conservative angle: Even if there was no expectation that this might happen,
panelists should speak up to avoid putting the Port in a situation of possibly being compromised.
Evaluators were also cautioned against bringing their existing knowledge of organizations to the
evaluation process to avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest. This is counterintuitive. Evaluators
with a deep knowledge of organizations in their communities are valuable because they can provide
insights that the Port may not have. 
An orientation is best used for bringing all the panelists together to begin building a working relationship
around the goals of the program. And, while panelists must be made aware of issues like maintaining
confidentiality and possible conflicts of interest, a strengths-based approach to the conversation is more
constructive: Not what is it that we shouldn't or can't do, but what we can do together to reach our
collective goal. Encouraging conversation  What is the vision of the work we are here to achieve? How
do we each approach equity work and how will we bring our respective knowledge and expertise to this
group effort to inform decision-making? How can we work together to identify and overcome bias? etc.
would inspire the panelists and support them in beginning to nurture relationships with each other. 
Recommendations 
Program managers should begin the orientation by inviting evaluators to establish a shared
vision: why they wanted to participate, what they hope for, etc. 
Orientation should include a deeper discussion on SKC Fund goals and intent. Engaging in a
high-level discussion around funding priorities, what equity means within the context of the
Fund, what types of projects and which communities the Fund is intended to serve, etc.
would inform and inspire evaluators and create alignment as they embark on this process. 
Help the reviewers know what to expect through each step of the review process. With one
cycle now completed, there is more information to draw from about how the process might
unfold. 
Humanize the language used in the presentation: Legal and technical language should be
avoided wherever possible. 
Have more concrete examples to illustrate what conflict of interest looks like in real life.
Provide examples for instructions like "Document any questionable interactions with a quick
note or memo." 

TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND INFORMATION SESSIONS 
Prohibiting technical assistance limits the ability of applicants to submit quality, competitive
proposals. The Port has a policy that organizations interested in responding to an RFP cannot contact
Port staff during the application process. This no-contact period begins on the day that the RFP is
publicly released. The two exceptions to interactions with Port staff are the information sessions and
questions submitted through VendorConnect. This practice is rooted in the Port's idea of fairness:
Information cannot be provided to a single individual because that could put that person at an
advantage over other applicants, if those other applicants are not privy to that same information. So,
therefore, contact with all prospective applicants is, essentially, non-existent. 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          39.

This approach is flawed, and can result in poorer quality proposals. By not providing individualized
information to any one organization  for example, helping an organization correctly understand what
types of expenses are allowed to be supported by Port dollars or understand how the Port defines
"benefit to the Port"  that applicant is left on its own to make assumptions about whether its project
actually aligns with Port priorities and, as a result, could wind up proposing a project that is not
competitive for funding. This is a waste of time for both the applicant (who has to pull the proposal
package together) and the evaluators (who have to review and assess a project that isn't actually viable
for funding). 
Recommendation 
Technical assistance services can be designed without creating unfair advantage to
applicants. It is common practice for grants program officers to answer questions to help
clarify applicants' understanding about fund priorities and proposal questions. Providing this
information to applicants helps them design projects and write proposals that are aligned
appropriately to the guidelines, or realize that their scopes of work do not align well and
decide to not submit a proposal after all. Some funders will also review proposals drafts, with
the same intent to make sure that everyone's understandings about expectations are in sync.
In this approach, the idea of fairness is rooted in lifting up each applicant so that each can
meaningfully compete for funding. The Port can offer such technical assistance  help
organizations understand application and budget questions, talk through proposal ideas, etc.
while making it clear that the Port will not write proposals for applicants. The former is not
equivalent to the latter. 
Use a more user-friendly platform for virtual community meetings. The Port uses Microsoft Teams for
internal meetings, but Teams creates barriers to participation for external stakeholders: It is not
intuitive, can be difficult for many people to log on to, it routinely bumps people off, and continues to
have technical problems. 
Recommendation 
A more commonly-used video-meeting platform like Zoom would make it easier for
community members to participate in things like information sessions and oral
presentations. While there were security concerns about Zoom in earlier 2020, these have
been addressed. So, SKC Fund should consider using Zoom for all of its remote external
stakeholder meetings because of its familiarity to most community members, its ease of use
and its stability. 
Address inequities in VendorConnect. The Port has invested significantly in VendorConnect and uses it
as the hub where all funding opportunities are held. If this is the system that community-based
organizations are required to interface with, then the Port must acknowledge and remedy the built-in
inequities that exist within this system. 
The VendorConnect user interface and requirements are extremely challenging. Prospective applicants 
need to go through multiple steps in order to ask a question during the application period. They must
establish a VendorConnect account and additionally become a plan holder to the solicitation (a process
that SKC Fund consultants found confusing and complex). VendorConnect administrators need to
approve the plan holder request which can take up to 48 hours. Finally, at that point, applicants may ask
questions. Responses can be received only through VendorConnect. These steps are a lot to ask of

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          40.

prospective applicants that might ultimately decide, after getting their questions answered, that they
are not eligible or their project doesn't fit well with the Fund's guidelines. 
There was visible frustration on the part of attendees at all of the information sessions as they struggled
to register with VendorConnect, and a significant amount of time was spent explaining the system to
attendees. The Information Session Feedback survey responses reflected that 47% of the respondents
found the system "difficult-very difficult" to use. For example, the solicitation page is poorly organized
with tabs that need to be more visible. SKC Fund's VendorConnect page has an overwhelming 25
documents, which include nine exhibit documents, seven amendments, three question-and-answer
publications, information session recordings and documentation, etc. 
Insisting that prospective applicants interact with the Port only through VendorConnect for official
materials creates an immense barrier for applicants and undermines the Fund's vision to create greater
access. This issue goes back to what has been discussed earlier  in the interest of being "fair and
equal," the Port has systems that are inequitable. 
Recommendation 
Address inequities inherent in the VendorConnect system. Convene a focus group of
community members experienced in grantseeking to inform and guide its design. 
Information sessions should have a welcoming feeling. Information sessions are the first experience
with the Port for many community members  their first experience with the processes and the people
of the Port. These sessions should be designed not only to provide information about the RFP, but also
to set a tone for welcoming participants and presenting the Port as an accessible entity. While Carol
Hassard and Alison Beason were warm presenters, the content itself was formal and dry. 
Recommendation 
Information sessions should be considered an engagement opportunity and structured with
an eye to relationship-building, with messaging that communicates to participants the Port's
interest in engaging and partnering with communities. 
Information sessions should supplement and not simply mimic the written RFP. Information sessions
that only talk through that which is written in the guidelines are not helpful to participants. There is no
point to attending an information session if participants are presented with information that they
already learned by reading through the guidelines. What prospective applicants look for when attending
an RFP information session is deeper understanding about the grant program. For example, more
detailed information about Port industries would have provided more context for applicants and helped
them better understand what types of projects the Port is looking to fund. One quarter (25%) of
respondents to the Information Session Feedback survey reported that "the information did not provide
them with what they needed to prepare a proposal." 
Participants also often come with their own questions, but CPO's restrictions about how questions can
be received  that they must be officially submitted through VendorConnect, which is a complex process
to navigate  limits the dynamic conversation that can help participants get the information they need
to decide whether and how to move forward. 


South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          41.

Recommendations 
Information sessions should be more dynamic, and should include a deeper dive into the
intent of the Fund, a fuller explanation of Port industries and a clearer articulation of what is
meant by "benefit to the Port." 
Port staff should have the agency to respond to all questions  not just the simple,
straightforward ones  that are posed during the information sessions, and not require
participants to have to post them later through VendorConnect. 
Improve response times to application questions. Responses to questions submitted by prospective
applicants had to undergo multiple layers of reviews  by CPO, OEDI, External Relations and consultants
before they could be approved by Legal and then posted by CPO. These multiple steps resulted in
delays that upended the timeline published in the guidelines that stated that questions received prior to
each Friday at 5:00pm would generally be answered and published in VendorConnect by the following
Friday. The first set of questions took over two weeks from compilation to response to approval to
publication. Turnaround time improved with the next two question-and-answer publications, although
the third (and last) document was released on September 25, just days before the September 30
deadline. Information Session Feedback survey responses spoke directly to these delays: 25% of
respondents said they "did not get a response to their question submitted through Vendor Connect." 
Recommendations 
It would be most helpful to applicants for questions to be answered and posted as they come
in. When that is not possible, the Port should adhere to a commitment to respond within five
business days out of respect to the applicants. 
Directly email the response to the list of registered plan holders in addition to post the
question-and-answer publications on VendorConnect. This could be done within a day or two
of the question being asked and would save prospective applicants the work of having to go
to VendorConnect each time to look for the response. 
The CPO, OEDI and External Relations team needs to be entrusted with the authority to
respond to most questions because this is the core team that knows the program best. Legal
should be engaged only when needed. Communications efficiencies across these
departments need to be established to ensure that applicants' questions are addressed in a
timely manner. 
Unsuccessful applicants should be offered debriefs soon after the review process is completed. For
applicants that are unsuccessful in receiving a grant, receiving a debrief from the funder helps them
become better at submitting proposals in the future. At the Port, these debriefs are informed by the
strengths and weaknesses articulated by the evaluators during consensus meetings and could contribute
to helping community organizations strengthen their grantseeking skills. 
Recommendation 
These debriefs are best held soon after the award decisions have been made (concurrent to
contract negotiations with successful applicants) so that information is fresh on everyone's
minds, applicants and funders alike. This should be seen as a capacity building exercise that
supports unsuccessful applicants to improve their ability to craft strong, competitive
proposals. 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          42.

PROPOSAL REVIEW 
Allow time for proposal review. After proposals were submitted and CPO processed the applications,
evaluators had approximately one week to review 27 proposals before the oral presentations began.
The schedule in those following weeks was very tight, packed with long days. Oral presentations took
place over six days' time and consensus meetings over eight days' time  all within a span that stretched
less than four weeks. All evaluators were dedicated to supporting the Fund and had made room in their
schedules for the work. Nevertheless, it would have been beneficial to have permitted them more time
to read and review proposals. Evaluators could have used breaks between the long days of
presentations and consensus meetings to give them a chance to step back and process information. 
Recommendations 
Allow at least two weeks' time for proposal review. 
Space meetings out more to allow for breaks. 
Oral presentations need logistical support and a user-friendly meeting platform. Oral presentations
were a required step of the application process, and were conducted virtually because of the pandemic.
Conducting these meetings virtually offered more flexibility in terms of scheduling because no one had
to worry about travel-time. Interpretation support was offered to all applicants. OEDI's Bushra Zaman
provided great administrative support by scheduling each applicant's oral presentation. Bushra was
extremely organized and her assistance was deeply valued by the team. 
But, as was noted earlier about the information sessions, using Microsoft Teams was not ideal for this
process: It is not intuitive, it can be difficult for many people to log on to and it continues to have
technical problems. Some members of applicant organizations had trouble logging into their meeting
and, at first, there was no call-in number assigned to the meetings. This wasted precious time  and,
undoubtedly, created anxiety for the applicants  as members of the applicant team tried to get onto
the video call. (All applicants were granted their full 30 minutes after everyone logged on.) As soon as
this oversight was realized, Bushra set up call-in numbers to accompany the video-links and sent out
updated meeting links. 
Recommendations 
Identify a staffperson to manage all aspects of logistics related to coordinating the oral
presentations, including scheduling, relevant communications with applicants and requests
by applicants for interpretation during the oral presentations. 
When in-person meetings become possible again, continue to offer virtual meetings as an
option. 
Call-in options should always be included for video calls. 
Maintain the open-ended structure of the oral presentations. The goal of the oral presentations was to
be a complement to the written proposal, to help evaluators gain a deeper understanding of the project
and the organization. Oral presentations should be viewed as an equity tool: Some organizations, such
as those that serve immigrant or refugee communities and which are led by people for whom English is
not a primary language, may feel limited by having to tell their story only through written English. Oral
presentations that are supported by interpretation (if it is requested) allow applicants an additional
opportunity to tell their stories in their own words. 

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          43.

In this first rou nd of SKC Fund, applicant organizations could use their 20 minutes any way they wished,
which gave them room to focus on what was important to them. Some prepared slides; some had each
team member do a mini-presentation; some wanted to simply engage in conversation. Having
organizations determine what they present, rather than requiring them to respond to set questions that
are asked to every applicant, allowed for the organization's personality and culture to come through and
for clearer insight into how the organization demonstrates the values they say they are committed to.
Applicants were happy for the opportunity to engage in a dialogue with evaluators, and the evaluators
appreciated the opportunity to ask clarifying questions. Some applicants had written proposals that
were not especially strong, but they were able to shine in their oral presentation. These conversations
humanized the process for both applicants and evaluators alike. 
Recommendations 
Continue the practice of conducting oral presentations to ensure equity for all applicants. 
Keep oral presentations open-ended, rather than prescriptive, as an approach to encourage
people to more fully tell their stories. 
Evaluation criteria should be reviewed and, if needed, updated. Now that the first round of the SKC
Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program has been implemented, program managers should review the
evaluation criteria to see if refinements need to be made to the categories to ensure that they guide
evaluators to identify the strongest projects. The current five categories  organization; target audience;
project scope, funding and impact; project implementation; and connection to Port-related industries 
could logically be consolidated to four, or even three, categories. This consolidation could make the
evaluation consensus process more efficient. 
When assessing this, however, it is important that the practice of not weighting one category more than
another should continue to stay in place as a tool to ensuring equity: Keeping all categories equally
weighted creates a more equal playing field where an organization that has deep experience in a given
program but is new to serving a particular population can be considered alongside an organization that
has deep roots serving a specific immigrant community but is expanding a program to include a new
scope of work. 
Recommendations 
Review existing criteria categories, assess for more logical groupings and consolidate them, if
appropriate. 
Continue the practice of weighting each evaluation category equally. 
Streamline evaluation practices. Conversations during the consensus phase were rich, as the evaluators
talked through strengths and weaknesses of the projects. These meetings were held in two parts: the
first set of consensus meetings included all five members of the grant review committee, with
community advisors providing feedback (but not official recommendations) about each project, proposal
by proposal; the second set included only the three Port staff, who also went proposal by proposal to
voice their adjectival scores (outstanding, good, acceptable, marginal and unacceptable) for each of the
five evaluation categories. This demarcation of meetings was because only the Port staff were allowed
to vote on recommendations for awards. 
While this appeared to be an appropriate hybrid model that brought together the Port's traditional
evaluation process (that typically involves only Port staff) with a review process that includes

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          44.

participation from community advisors, in practice it was awkward and time-inefficient. Discussion
about each proposal during the second set of meetings (with only Port staff) recalled and repeated the
respective discussion from the first set of meetings, and the most distinctive way that the second set of
meetings differed from the first set was that the Port staff articulated their adjectival scores.
Collectively, this was time consuming. 
Recommendations 
Consolidating the two sets of meetings would prevent repetition and redundancy. Going
proposal by proposal, the community advisors could provide their feedback, the entire group
could talk about strengths and weaknesses and then the Port staff could vote their adjectival
scores. Although the community members don't have a vote, having the evaluation
discussions occur with everyone all at once is more efficient. 
On occasion, there will be a project where evaluators unanimously agree that it excels in all
review categories or one that it is unacceptable in all categories. If there is clear unanimity,
there does not need to be lengthy conversation about these proposals: For the record (and
to protect against protests and audits), there should be a short discussion that leads to each
evaluator's scores being documented (all outstanding or all unacceptable) with summary
notes to justify these scores. Substantive conversations can, instead, be reserved for the
majority of proposals where there is less uniformity across the evaluator's scores so that
evaluators can be thoughtful about coming to consensus. 
It was revealed during the consensus conversations that different Port grant or award
programs have different decision-making processes. There should be a review of evaluation
processes conducted by other similar Port programs to see if there are best practices that
can be gleaned to strengthen SKC Fund's processes. 

CONTRACT NEGOTIATION 
Make improvements to the contract negotiation process. The contract negotiation process is complex
and, while that might be suitable for large contracts, it is overly long and not appropriate for the size of
grants being awarded through South King County Fund. Contract negotiations began right after the
recommended projects were approved by the Port Commission on December 15, 2020 and evolved into
a drawn-out process that extended for months. Getting through contract negotiations is, necessarily,
time-intensive: each negotiation has to occur individually, and the Port's current process for SKC Fund
awards actively involves the awardee, the program manager, CPO and Legal. Even in the best cases, this
required multiple backs and forths of communications between all of these people. That it took time to
negotiate all of the contracts was in part related to staff capacity: Both the SKC Fund program manager
and the CPO contract administrator have full loads of work that prevented them from being able to
focus solely on quickly negotiating and executing these contracts. 
But, these delays were also the result of the Port's concerns about project activities, concerns that
centered largely on projects' direct connections to Port operations and whether they fit within Port
parameters. In some cases, there were specific project budget line items that could not be paid for with
Port dollars, and the SKC Fund program manager supported the awardee organization as it made budget
refinements to align with Port allowances. In all cases, the Legal department took a critical and
conservative eye to reviewing all scopes of work, assessing risk and interpreting how it saw a project

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          45.

supporting Port industries and/or benefiting the Port. From there, Legal made recommendations on
changes to scopes of work, which, concerningly, borders on program design. The more appropriate
approach would be for the SKC Fund program manager to work with the organization to refine its own
program design. 
After the December Commission meeting where awards were approved, a press release was sent out
announcing the awardees, and successful applicants were informed that they would be receiving a
grant. This, reasonably, set up an expectation that organizations would soon be able to start their
projects. But, by the beginning of April 2021  more than three months after Commission approval  
most, but not quite all, contracts had been signed. In addition to simply being time-consuming and
inefficient, this delay in contract execution has meant that partners were on hold  some for three
months  after they had been informed that they would be receiving awards. 
Recommendations 
Contract negotiations should begin right after the review process is completed and awards
have been approved. The SKC Fund program manager and CPO contract administrator should
be supported in prioritizing this work so that contracts can be signed within six weeks' time. 
SKC Fund program managers, working in partnership with the CPO contract administrator,
need to be empowered to negotiate the contracts, and Legal should intervene only where
there is a legal issue in question. For instance, where budget or project adjustments need to
be made  perhaps a workforce training program had proposed to include some dollars for
child care while participants are in a training workshop  the SKC Fund program manager is
well-positioned to identify these items and work directly and iteratively with the organization
to make adjustments. If there is uncertainty about whether an expense is allowable, Legal
can be consulted to clarify the issue. 
Legal's active involvement in SKC Fund's contract negotiation phase is rooted not in an
intention to push against community, but in its duties to protect the Port. The Port's work is
dictated by statute, and what most benefits the Port and what most benefits community are
often not one and the same. But, these goals should not be held as inherently contradictory
to one another. If the Fund is to realize its equity-centered vision, policies need to be
developed that establish ways to support the Port's purpose through an approach that
centers and benefits community. 
CONCLUSION 
South King County Fund is a significant new opportunity for Port of Seattle and a new way for the Port to
forge equity-based partnerships with neighboring communities. Thanks to the vision of the Port
Commission and the hard work of Port staff, this first year of the SKC Fund Economic Recovery Grants
Program is now supporting 10 organizations to implement projects that will impact the lives of many
people from communities that have been historically underserved. 
Even with the successes of this first cycle, though, the learnings reflect that there is much to be done to
strengthen and build up the program. This is to be expected because no program is perfect from the
start. Programs become strong and achieve their full potential because the people dedicated to it
practice reflection and continue to refine and improve the work. As noted earlier, the recommendations

South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          46.

made in this report are not all quick fixes; some will require long-term planning, if not systems changes.
But, the staff dedicated to South King County Fund have the thoughtfulness and the drive to push this
program to its full potential. As this first cycle is wrapping up, they are already working hard to make the
next round stronger: Even as this report was being drafted, some of the recommendations are being
discussed and strategies are being developed. It will be exciting to follow the Fund as it continues to
grow and evolve, to see where it will go. 


















South King County Fund Economic Recovery Grants Program 2020                                          47.

Appendix M






Non-represented Employees Compensation Program Review
Employee Survey Summary
September 2021

EMPLOYEE    The following pages highlight key
SURVEY     responses from the employee survey and
participant demographics.


2


WHY DO YOU WORK AT THE PORT?



Employees like their benefits, type of
work, and work-life balance most.
3

EFFECTIVENESS OF THE
COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Compensation Program      Highly     Somewhat    Neutral     Somewhat      Highly
Element            Effective     Effective                Ineffective     Ineffective
Pay for Performance Matrix        11.1%         32.5%        16.2%         22.3%          17.9%
Job Evaluation Process 
6.2%        27.3%      21.3%       24.8%        20.4%
Internal Evaluation
Job Evaluation Process 
9.3%        28.4%      26.3%       20.9%        15.2%
Market Pricing
Using Pay Grades to Link to
9.0%        37.4%      26.0%       17.4%        10.2%
Pay Ranges
Updating Pay Grades
Annually to Reflect Changes       13.6%         34.9%        22.8%         16.8%          12.0%
to Pay Rates in the Market
Other Pay Adjustments,
8.0%        24.5%      30.8%       18.7%        18.0%
including equity & retention                                                                                     4

WHAT SHOULD ANNUAL PAY
ADJUSTMENTS BE BASED ON?
Options
(A) Cost of Living (B) Employee Performance (C) Job Tenure (D) POS Financial Performance
Employees could select 1, 2, 3 or all 4 options

A + B
A + B + C
A + B + D
A + B + C + D
0                50               100              150              200              250
5

TRANSPARENCY IN THE
COMPENSATION PROGRAM
Most participants think program guidelines and decision-making
processes should be posted on Compass, individual salaries should
not
Responses for Women, People of Color, and Women of Color were consistent with
all participant responses



6

QUESTIONS FOR PEOPLE MANAGERS
Question

I understand what's expected of me     Fully        Mostly      Unsure    Not Really       Not at All
regarding staff compensation           53.0%       33.0%       9.0%        3.0%           2.0%
I have tools and resources to meet
Yes        Most       Some     Not Many        None
my responsibilities related to staff
26.0%      38.5%     23.5%      7.0%         5.0%
compensation
I Don't
I understand the compensation          Fully        Most                    Some
-                                Understand
program                           15.0%      50.0%                 29.0%
6.0%
How often am I asked about the        Rarely      Monthly                  Weekly          Daily
-
compensation program               76.0%      15.5%                  6.5%          2.0%
7


SURVEY PARTICIPANT DEMOGRAPHICS



Strong representation across different levels
of tenure.
8


SURVEY PARTICIPANT DEMOGRAPHICS



Strong representation across divisions.
9


SURVEY PARTICIPANT DEMOGRAPHICS



A significant number of people elected not
to share their Race or Gender.
10

Appendix M






Non-represented Employees Compensation Program Review
Focus Group and Employee Survey Comment Themes
September 2021

THEMES FROM
FOCUS GROUPS
AND      The following graphics highlight key themes
EMPLOYEE    from the focus group sessions and
employee survey comments.
SURVEY
COMMENTS
2

Annual Pay Increase
Use objective,
Include cost of
measurable factors for
living increase
performance
Separate
Tie cost of      Define and
pay for                                         Re-think       Eliminate
living to        reward good
performance                               performance     bias and
Consumer        job
and cost of                                       ratings        favoritism
Price Index    performance
living
3

Not dependent on                           Not dependent on
manager advocacy                            writing skills


Happens more often                                                        Consistent process
Job
Refresh
Faster turn-around                 Process                 Transparent process
time                                                                    and results

4

Women and people of color believe
Jobs held mostly by women are undervalued
Women must continually prove themselves
Pay    Women and women of color are underpaid
Equity      Everyone 
Believes pay for new hires is close to or greater than pay
for existing staff
Wants system changes that prevent pay inequities
Wants pay equity analysis done and results transparent
5

Independent from
the job refresh                                  More job matrixes
process


Individual                                                                         More development
contributor career                                                                     opportunities
paths
Career
Growth
Managers
Defined job levels                                                                accountable for
promoting staff
6

Manager Training &
Accountability
Performance      360o review with
review training     employee feedback
Training on        People         People          Trust
Training on      employee      management     managers     managers to
goal setting     coaching &      is a review          feel            make
development       factor       powerless      decisions
7

Appendix N



OFFICE OF EQUITY, DIVERSITY, AND
INCLUSION (OEDI) 


Terminology



1

Appendix N

Equity refers to the fair treatment, access, opportunity, and advancement for all people while striving to
identify and eliminate barriers that have prevented the full participation of communities historically
oppressed. Improving equity involves increasing justice and fairness with the procedures and processes
of institutions or systems and a fair, intentional distribution of resources.
Diversity: human differences, including but not limited to those based on race, culture, color, sex,
gender identity, national origin, nationality, geography, age, ability or disability, sexual orientation,
military or veteran status, socio-economic status, faith, political beliefs or other identities. Our definition
also includes diversity of thought, ideas, perspectives and values.
Inclusion: The act of fostering environments in which any individual or group can be and feel welcomed,
respected, supported and valued to fully participatean inclusive, inviting and welcoming climate that
offers respect in words and actions for all people.
Equality: The same amount of power, opportunities and resources are distributed to everyone with the
assumption that everyone starts in the same place and has the same needs.
Bias Prejudice toward one group and its members relative to another group.
Community Indicator The means by which we can measure socioeconomic conditions in the
community. All community indicators should be disaggregated by race, income, languages and foreignborn
populations, if possible.
Contracting Equity Investments in contracting, consulting, and procurement should benefit the
communities a jurisdiction serves, proportionate to the jurisdiction's demographics.
Explicit Bias Biases that people are aware of and that operate consciously. They are expressed directly.
Implicit Bias Biases people are usually unaware of and that operate at the subconscious level. Implicit
bias is usually expressed indirectly.
Individual Racism Pre-judgment, bias, or discrimination based on race by an individual.
Institutional Racism Policies, practices, and procedures that work better for white people than for
people of color.
Performance Measure Performance measures are at the county, department, or program level.
Appropriate performance measures allow monitoring of the success of implementation of actions that
have a reasonable chance of influencing indicators and contributing to results. Performance measures
respond to three different levels: 1) Quantityhow much did we do? 2) Qualityhow well did we do it?
and 3) Is anyone better off? A mix of these types of performance measures is contained within the
recommendations.
Racial Equity Race is no longer a predictor of life outcomes and outcomes for all groups are improved.
Racial Inequity Race is a predictor of life outcomes, e.g., disproportionality in education (high school
graduation rates), jobs (unemployment rate), criminal justice (arrest and incarceration rates), etc.

2

Appendix N

Structural Racism A history and current reality of institutional racism across all institutions, combining to
create a system that negatively impacts communities of color.
Workforce Equity The workforce of a jurisdiction reflects the diversity of its residents, including across
the breadth (functions and departments) and depth (hierarchy) of government.


















3

Limitations of Translatable Documents

PDF files are created with text and images are placed at an exact position on a page of a fixed size.
Web pages are fluid in nature, and the exact positioning of PDF text creates presentation problems.
PDFs that are full page graphics, or scanned pages are generally unable to be made accessible, In these cases, viewing whatever plain text could be extracted is the only alternative.