Worlds Apart: A Comparison of Living Environments and Public Health Outcomes in Indianapolis and Carmel

An Analysis by Carly Waite, Senior Human Biology B.S. Candidate at Indiana University Bloomington

Figure I: An Infographic Utilized in “Worlds Apart: Gaps in Life Expectancy in the Indianapolis Metro Area” demonstrating the maldistribution of life expectancies between Indianapolis and the surrounding suburbs

 

Introduction

For my Senior Capstone Research Project, I researched whether gaps in access to healthy living spaces and lifestyles could explain discrepancies in public health outcomes. I chose to focus this topic in the lens of the cities of Indianapolis and Carmel, which is a very affluent suburb of Indianapolis, and the most wealthy community in Indiana. I chose these locations and this topic because I was born and raised in the city limits of Indianapolis. Because of my background living in a diverse community, as well as my aspirations to become a physician, I am passionate about combating inequities in public health outcomes. A common perception amongst inhabitants of the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area is that the suburbs have better access to healthier living environments than a large portion of the population in the city limits. Some examples of determinants of healthy living spaces include access to green spaces and fresh produce, access to healthcare, and access to clean water and air.

I decided to investigate this topic early in the semester during Dr. Wasserman’s lecture that assessed gaps in life expectancy between zip code 46225 in Indianapolis and zip code 46033 in Carmel, as outlined in “Worlds Apart: Gaps in Life Expectancy in the Indianapolis Metro Area,” published by the Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis. This topic resonated heavily with me, as it confirmed the inequalities I am passionate about ameliorating. In fact, I plan to enter the public policy realm later in my career, with the hopes of advocating for under-served populations. I believe that selecting this topic as my senior capstone subject builds a foundation for this aspiration. In the following essay, I will be contextualizing by providing a brief history of Indianapolis and Carmel, giving a deeper explanation of the social determinants of health, and detailing the history of the prevalence of systemic racism in Indianapolis. In the next section of this blog post, I will provide quantitative and qualitative evidence of discrepancies, or a lack thereof, in access to healthy living spaces and public health outcomes. A specific focus will be placed on comparing the zip codes utilized in the “Worlds Apart” article previously mentioned. Lastly, I will discuss various means of lessening the existing gaps between Indianapolis and the surrounding suburbs.

To understand the scope of this issue, and subsequently to develop possible solutions, it is important to understand how living environments can affect health. To do so, understanding the social determinants of health is quite necessary. The social determinants of health are defined as socioeconomic conditions that influence subsequent differences in health outcomes. Because of this, medical care is not enough to ameliorate overall health and reduce health disparities. It is imperative to identify the root of the problem, which is where and how people live, and why. Upstream social determinants, including economic resources, education, and systemic racism, lead to downstream determinants, which entail human behaviors. This concept parallels much of what has been taught in this section of Human Biology 400: human health is tightly linked to environmental health. The premise of the social determinants of health demonstrates how unhealthy environments can be correlated to less than ideal public health outcomes, which have historically disproportionately affected people of a lower socioeconomic status and minority communities.

Next, I will briefly survey the histories of Indianapolis and Carmel. Indianapolis was founded in 1821. Because of its ideal central location, the state capital was changed from Corydon to Indianapolis in 1825. The city was plotted outward from Monument Circle, which remains at the heart of the city center. By the beginning of the Civil War in 1861, Indianapolis had become a major rail center, hence the unofficial nickname “The Crossroads of America.” This connection to the rest of the United States led to major population growth during the middle and late 19th century. In the following decades, Indianapolis shifted into a major automobile manufacturing hub; however, the industry eventually left the city, subsequently overturning its centrality to the Indianapolis economy. Contemporarily, Indianapolis remains an important financial, business, and industrial hub. The city has a population of approximately 876,384 citizens, without including the surrounding suburbs. Regarding demographics, white people constituted the majority of the population until the black population increased during the Great Migration, continually increasing in the years following. The city is 60.9% white, 28.6% black or african american, 3.4% asian, and 7.1% individuals of other races or ethnicities. Indianapolis is 10.5% hispanic or latinx^[1].

Conversely, Carmel was initially founded as Bethlehem, Indiana in 1837 as a fur trading center within what was wilderness at the time. The town officially incorporated and adopted the name Carmel in 1874, since there was another town in Indiana named Bethlehem. By 1882, the Monon railroad, which is now the Monon pedestrian trail, connected Carmel to Indianapolis. This led to a major population increase. By 1974, Carmel was voted to be a city. The city experienced two more subsequent phases of rapid population growth during the twentieth century. The first, beginning in the 1970’s, occurred as Carmel’s reputation of safe neighborhoods, employment opportunities, and highly rated school systems reverberated throughout greater Indianapolis. The second population boom occurred in the wake of the reinvigoration of the downtown area, which birthed the Arts and Design District and the City Center. In addition to the improvement of the downtown district, Carmel has seen the construction of 140 roundabouts since 1998, for which the city is known nationally. With respect to demographics, Carmel currently has a population of approximately 101,068 individuals. According to census data, Carmel is 83.4% white, 2.7% black or african american, 10.3% asian, and 3.6% individuals of other races or ethnicities. Carmel is 3.7% hispanic or latinX^[2].

To fortify an understanding of the disparities between Indianapolis and Carmel, it is essential to acknowledge the role systemic racism played and continues to play. As an anecdotal example, Indiana Avenue (near where the Walker Theater is today) used to be the mecca of black culture in Indianapolis during the early to middle 20th century. The community was rich with black-owned businesses, black creatives, professionals and culture. In 1939, the Indianapolis Police Department began raiding establishments that had begun to attract white people in addition to their black clientele. This led to a decrease in the influx of money into the local economy, causing a decline in local revenue. In addition to police raids, discriminatory practices such as redlining^[3], blockbusting^[4], and the segregation of Indianapolis Public Schools (until 1968) were at play, which further prevented the community from thriving at its full potential. Furthermore, Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis continuously bought land from the area, converting it into parking lots and academic buildings largely inaccessible to the surrounding predominantly black inhabitants. The University’s fragmentation of the area was one of the final blows that led to the demise of the beautiful Indiana Avenue community. This was followed by the construction of I-70 and I-65, which physically divided black communities beyond Indiana Avenue. During this time, Indianapolis became further segregated, despite legal desegregation: white flight^[5] to the suburbs occurred following black people moving into previously white neighborhoods during the late 1950’s. From 1970 to 2016, suburbanization in Indianapolis led to white, educated and middle to upper class households leaving Indianapolis and moving to suburbs, such as Fishers and Carmel. This migration most likely caused the major population increase in Carmel during the 1970’s, which was previously mentioned. Racist practices such as redlining and blockbusting, which were still practiced at the time, prevented black households from moving to the newer suburban communities. As a result of white flight, the areas left behind saw a decrease in revenue, funding, and opportunity. Contemporary gentrification^[6] further deepens the damage.

The extraordinarily detrimental effects of white flight and systemic racism in Indianapolis becomes abundantly clear when comparing the quality of Carmel Schools to Indianapolis Public Schools, as well as the funding that goes into the school systems. For example, the Indiana Supreme Court Case Bonner vs. Daniels in 2008 charged that Indiana had failed to maintain a minimal level of quality in its schools. Since the 1970’s, Indiana has relied less heavily on local property taxes to fund schools in comparison to neighboring states. The state funds a large share through income and sales taxes compared to surrounding states. In 2010, property tax caps were introduced, causing revenue to potentially fall behind what schools and government need to support the services schools in Indianapolis require. Since 2010, a Republican majority in both houses of the Indiana Legislature led to the removal of various programs that previously provided areas of high poverty levels with extra money. Indiana’s funding formula considered Carmel schools as the least needful, which led to $5,411 being awarded per student to the school system, the eighth lowest in the state. On the contrary, it judged Indianapolis Public Schools as the most needy, awarding $7,630 per student, the fourth highest in the state. This difference amounts to $2,219 per student. While this difference may seem drastic, the difference in the two communities should be noted. Carmel families rank among the wealthiest in Indiana in annual income, with a median income at over $60,000. Indianapolis Public Schools rank fifth from the bottom among 290 school districts with a median family income of about $20,000. There are numerous benefits of the extra income in the Carmel community that the school system reaps. Local referendums for tax increases contribute a significant amount of additional funding to the school district, which Indianapolis Public Schools does not receive. In addition, extra income entails access to private tutors, extracurricular learning opportunities, and a sense of stability that lower socioeconomic status families are unable to provide. Since 2011, the funding gap between the two school systems has actually decreased as it was deemed too wide and unfair by legislators. I am not convinced that the total extra amount of $2,219 is enough for Indianapolis Public Schools to graduate its students equally as prepared for college and the workforce as Carmel, especially when the following statistics are considered:

Figure II: Obtained from “The Basics of School Funding in Indiana: Difficulty Defining Fairness.”

 

Figure III: Standardized Testing Differences Between Carmel and Indianapolis Public Schools. Obtained from “The Basics of School Funding in Indiana: Difficulty Defining Fairness.”

 

It is abundantly clear that students in Indianapolis Public Schools are underserved, and are being failed. If the current funding gap was enough, perhaps more equal outcomes would be evident. Because of this, I argue that the funding gap should be increased. Unfortunately, a lack of funding for public schools in Indianapolis is one of various discrepancies in living space quality between Carmel and Indianapolis. The following section will detail several of these inequalities.

Living Environments in Carmel and Indianapolis

In the following paragraphs, the living environments of Carmel in zip code 46033 and Indianapolis in zip code 46225 will be analyzed. This will include responses to a survey of perceived water quality, air quality, access to fresh produce, and access to green space. Additionally, I interviewed the Executive Director of the Patachou Foundation. The Patachou Foundation is an organization that grows fresh produce on urban farms in Indianapolis, and serves healthy scratch-made meals made from the farmed produce to youth in underserved Indianapolis communities through schools. The synopsis of the interview will be included following the analysis of Carmel and Indianapolis living environments.

Regarding water quality, I obtained data on particulate matter including Arsenic, Barium, Copper, Lead, Nitrate, and Zinc, which are common indicators for water quality. From Figure IV, I was surprised to find that there is actually more particulate matter in Carmel’s water, according to government-provided figures. It should be noted that both cities met all required healthy thresholds for particulate matter.

Figure IV: Water Quality Report Particulate Matter Data for Indianapolis and Carmel

The water quality data for Indianapolis was gathered from the Citizens Energy Group 2020 Water Quality Report. Additionally, the water quality for Carmel was obtained from the City of Carmel Utilities 2020 Water Quality Report.

With respect to air quality, according to the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute County Health Rankings, in 2019, Marion County (Indianapolis) samples contained 10.4 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic liter. Conversely, Hamilton County (Carmel and Fishers) samples contained 9.0 micrograms of particulate matter per cubic liter, as demonstrated in Figure V.

Figure V: Air Quality Measurements according to the Air Quality Index

 

Furthermore, Using a TEMTOP air quality measurement device provided by the Indiana University Human Biology Department, I collected my own air quality samples in addition to the government-provided air quality data.. I decided to collect my own data because I was interested to see whether my air sample data agreed with the government-provided data on air quality for both cities. I was wary of the data provided by the government because of the history of misreporting such data, as exhibited during the Flint, Michigan water crisis. Because of this, I collected air quality measurements from the zip codes provided in the “Worlds Apart” article previously mentioned, 46033 (Carmel) and 46225 (Indianapolis). Surprisingly, as demonstrated in Figure VI and Figure VII, zip code 46225 in Indianapolis had an air quality index of 31, which is considered good air quality, and zip code 46033 in Carmel had an air quality index of 60, which entails moderate air quality.

 

Figure VI: My air quality measurement in Indianapolis

Air quality index of 31, good air quality

Figure VII: My air quality measurement in Carmel

Air quality index of 60, moderate

 

Next, I will examine the volume of grocery stores in zip code 46033 in Carmel and zip code 46225 in Indianapolis. In zip code 46225, there is one Aldi, and three convenience stores. This amounts to 0.242 grocery stores offering fresh produce per square mile. Conversely, the 46033 zip code contains a Needlers Fresh Market, a Walmart supercenter, a Whole Foods, an Aldi, The Fresh Market, and a Fresh Thyme, as well as multiple convenience stores. This amounts to 0.333 grocery stores offering fresh produce per square mile. It should be noted that many of the grocery stores in zip code 46033 sell much higher quality fresh produce than the singular Aldi in zip code 46225 most likely offers. Furthermore, the nicer grocery stores in zip code 46033 undoubtedly offer various organic produce products. When considering the whole of Marion County, 9% of the population has limited access to healthy foods. By contrast, 4% of the population of Hamilton County has limited access to healthy foods.

As previously mentioned, I interviewed the Executive Director of the Patachou Foundation, Matthew Feltrop. I decided to interview Matthew because I noticed a tour of a garden in Broad Ripple, a community in Indianapolis, while I was walking down the Monon Trail. It turns out that the garden is owned by the Patachou Foundation, which is an organization that grows fresh produce on urban farms in Indianapolis. After researching the importance of access to healthy, unprocessed foods, I thought that learning about the foundation would strengthen my understanding of how public gardens can improve communities.

From our conversation, I learned that the Patachou foundation was founded in 2013 by the owner of the Patachou restaurant group, Martha Hoover. The impetus for the organization, according to Matthew, was quite simple. The Patachou restaurant group had always been connected to the community. Because of this, after 27 years of running the Café Patachou restaurants, Hoover decided she wanted to focus efforts to give back to the community instead of donating to multiple organizations. Initially, the foundation shared kitchens to serve its produce; now, the foundation has its own central location near 46th and Keystone. Since 2013, the foundation has served over 250,000 meals. Contrary to my initial beliefs, the garden is not actually a public, community garden. The Patachou foundation actually grows the produce themselves; however, the public can access the garden for educational tours, similar to the one I came across when walking the Monon Trail. I learned that the Patachou foundation has three locations in which it grows fresh produce: at its central office at 46th and Keystone, at the microfarm on the Monon trail in Broad Ripple, and at an external farm located outside of the city. To my surprise, due to its constraints, the microfarm on the Monon actually grows its produce for a restaurant called Public Greens, which is located in close proximity to the microfarm. This location is used more as an educational space for the public and the youth that they serve. The external location, however, is used to serve fresh produce to schoolchildren in underserved communities in Indianapolis in addition to educational tours. Moreover, the foundation is planning a workforce development program for high schoolers, which will introduce a farm stand that will be accessible to neighborhoods near the central office.

The gardens grow a variety of produce, including leafy greens, tomatoes, carrots, onions, beans, herbs, fruiting plants, peppers, zucchini, and what is known as “the three sisters”- corn, beans and squash. Growth of the three sisters is a traditional Native American practice, which the foundation uses as an opportunity to teach about indigenous growing practices in addition to teaching about how to grow the various other produce items. The urban microfarms inherently encounter problems such as ecosystem changes, pests, and elevated temperatures. Despite this, the microfarms are able to attract a variety of pollinators.

My discussion with Matthew about why urban farms are important for urban areas changed my preconceived notions about how they serve communities. I initially thought that urban farms were beneficial in ameliorating issues of food insecurity and food deserts; however, Matthew felt that urban farms and food insecurity do not always correlate so easily. Matthew focused our discussion of urban farms more in a lens of education, empowerment, and a potential means of extra income for low-income families. For the most part, Matthew felt that public gardens do not yield enough produce to actually make much of a difference in communities with regard to food insecurity. Alternatively, the importance lies more with simply interacting with the farm. They are important for empowering children and adults alike to grow their own food, connecting them back to where their food comes from, and developing the understanding that food does not have to come processed and pre-packaged. This is a piece that has been lost in our ever-complicated food system, which can be rediscovered and simplified through the empowerment of urban farming. With respect to earning extra income, urban families are able to sell extra produce to make their urban farm profitable and therefore sustainable. Urban farms creating economic opportunity was not a concept I had considered prior to my discourse with Matthew.

I asked Matthew if he thought that Indianapolis has enough public gardens, to which he replied that Indianapolis is not only lacking public gardens, but infrastructure to facilitate running them. He used Detroit as an example of an ideal city for public gardens. Matthew claimed that Detroit houses the most urban farms of any metropolitan area, amounting to approximately 800 in the downtown area. Detroit’s urban farms are facilitated by a sophisticated system in which produce buyers log in on one site and purchase produce so that the grower does not have to configure the distribution. Such a system does not exist in Indianapolis, nor does it exist in most other cities. The issue is not a lack of interest; on the contrary, it is a problem of fragmentation and lack of connectivity and organization. Because of this, most urban farms end up selling their produce in bulk to restaurants, rather than selling smaller parcels to individual buyers. Unfortunately, I learned from Matthew that oftentimes, simply giving the produce to people experiencing food insecurity does not make the urban farm economically viable.  To better the urban farm system in Indianapolis, introducing both a food hub and a degree of infrastructure is necessary to create opportunities for empowerment, education and economic growth. Perhaps once more infrastructure is introduced, using public gardens to tackle the food insecurity problem in Indianapolis will not seem as daunting.

When researching the amount of public gardens in both Indianapolis and Carmel, Matthew’s statement about the lack of infrastructure was confirmed. I was unable to find any public gardens in Indianapolis online. I was able to find one garden in Carmel, called “Plots to Plates Organic Gardens;” however, it does not appear to have a website.

Concerning access to green space, I used Google Earth to compare the amount of green space within zip codes 46225 in Indianapolis and 46033 in Carmel. I used the square meterage tool in Google Earth to calculate the total area of green space in both zip codes. I then calculated the total square meterage of both zip codes. To account for differences in size of the zip codes, I divided the total green space by the total area in its respective zip code to have resulting normalized comparable proportions. I then converted the square meterage to square mileage to better understand the proportions. It should be noted that private green spaces were not included, such as golf courses and private parks. Furthermore, spaces dense with trees were counted as green space in both zip codes. As demonstrated in Figure VIII, Indianapolis 46225 has 0.1321 square miles of green space in a total land area of 4.13 square miles, equating to 0.0320 square miles of green space per square mile. Conversely, as demonstrated in Figure IX. Carmel 46033 has 1.300 square miles of green space in a total land area of 17.985 square miles, equating to 0.0723 square miles of green space per square mile of total land area.

 

Figure VIII: Green Space in Zip Code 46225 in Indianapolis

Figure IX: Green Space in Zip Code 46033 in Carmel

 

In addition to Carmel’s clear abundance of green space in comparison to Indianapolis, the city is known for its many roundabouts and easily accessible pedestrian walkways. Regarding the former, depicted in Figure X, roundabouts are better for the environment than stop lights, and by extension, better for human health. Roundabouts entail less fuel emissions, less pedestrian and vehicle accidents, and they allow for plants to be grown on their interior. Regarding the latter, depicted in Figure XI, pedestrian walkways allow for a safe space for Carmel residents to exercise outdoors without risk of being hit by a vehicle. Because of the pedestrian walkways, Carmel is a certified bike-friendly community. Both of these variables contribute to Carmel’s nearly ideal healthy living environment, which undoubtedly yields the city’s better public health outcomes.

Figure XI: Photo of Roundabout in Carmel

Figure XII: Photo of Walking Trail in Carmel

 

Public Health Outcome Comparison

In the following paragraphs, the public health outcomes of Hamilton County, which includes Carmel and Fishers, and Marion County, which is Indianapolis, will be compared. Unfortunately, I was only able to gather public health data for the entire counties, rather than the specific cities I researched. In addition to gathering public health data, I carried out a cross-sectional survey of N=225 individuals. The survey was posted to my social media accounts and sent to my classmates. As a result, it is likely that most of the people who responded to the survey are college-educated, middle to upper class white people. The purpose of the survey was to gauge public perceptions of discrepancies, or lack thereof, in access to healthy living spaces and public health outcomes between Carmel and Indianapolis. The survey results will be discussed following the analysis of public health outcomes.

Figure XIII: Public Health Outcome Data Comparing Hamilton County and Indianapolis

As shown in Figure XIII, In Marion County, 9% of the population has limited access to healthy foods. By contrast, 4% of the population of Hamilton County has limited access to healthy foods. Additionally, 27% of the population of Marion County are not physically active, while only 17% of the population of Hamilton County exhibit chronic physical inactivity. Furthermore, the life expectancy for zip code 46225 in Indianapolis (located just South of Monument Circle) is 69.4 years, which is less than that of Iraq (70 years) and Bangladesh (70 years). The life expectancy for zip code 46033 in Carmel (located just north of I-465 on the Northeast side) is 84 years, which is comparable to the life expectancies of Japan and Switzerland, countries which have some of the highest life expectancies in the world.

Regarding chronic illness rates, according to the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute County Health Rankings, obesity affects 33% of the population of Marion County, while obesity affects 26% of the population of Hamilton County. Moreover, according to in.gov, in 2016, in Marion County, the age-adjusted cancer mortality rate was 182/100,000; in Hamilton County, this number was 125.6/100,000. In 2016, the rate of hypertensive heart disease with or without renal disease was 15.1/100,000 in Marion County and 7.0/100,000 in Hamilton County. Finally, according to Indiana University Health’s Community Health Needs Assessment (2015-2019), the infant mortality rate for Marion County was 8.6/1000 live births, while the infant mortality rate for Hamilton County was 4.1/1000 live births.

Next, the results of the cross-sectional survey about public perceptions of discrepancies between Indianapolis and Carmel will be discussed.

Figure XIV:Survey Question One

            As demonstrated in Figure XIV, 78.5% of survey respondents believe that Indianapolis and Carmel residents do not have equal access to fresh produce. 19.3% of respondents feel that Indianapolis and Carmel residents have equal access to fresh produce. The third option was a free response, which 2.2% of respondents used to respond.

Figure XV: Survey Question 2

            As depicted in Figure XV, 74.3% of respondents believe that Indianapolis and Carmel residents do not have equal access to green space, while 23.4% believe they have equal access. 2.3% of respondents chose to respond to the free response option, which is visible above in the figure.

Figure XVI: Survey Question 3

            77.5% of respondents believe that air and water quality in Indianapolis is not equal to that of Carmel, while 18% believe the opposite. 4.5% of respondents chose to respond to the third option, as depicted above.

Figure XVII: Survey Question 4

            As shown in Figure XVII, 89.1% of respondents feel that Indianapolis and Carmel have unequal public health outcomes, while 9.5% believe the outcomes are the same. 1.4% of respondents chose to respond to the third option, which is demonstrated above in the figure.

Discussion and Conclusion

In addition to the first four questions of the survey, I included a fifth optional open-ended question, which was “how do you propose we solve any existing discrepancies between Indianapolis and Carmel?” I received 83 responses, some several paragraphs in length. Many of the responses were incredibly interesting, containing ideas I had not previously considered. Some of these responses will be included in the following recommendations for public policy implementation.

First, I propose solutions to gaps in access to fresh produce. As mentioned in my discussion about my interview with Matthew Feltrop, to build a better network of public gardens in Indianapolis, a site for vendors and buyers to connect should be implemented. Additionally, more grocery stores should be introduced to urban Indianapolis to lessen issues of food deserts and food insecurity. To facilitate transportation to grocery stores, Indianapolis should continually invest in mass transit systems taking food service into account.. An interesting idea one of my respondents suggested is a fresh produce food truck distribution system in the absence of grocery stores. Lastly, adding subsidies to fresh produce will further expand access, as this will make fresh produce more affordable.

With respect to green space and air quality, mirroring Carmel by introducing more pedestrian and bike lanes will allow people to exercise, experience green spaces, and travel from place to place easier. Furthermore, adding more public parks would greatly benefit the city and it’s residents. A few survey respondents had some interesting ideas for accomplishing this: one suggested using vacant lots to create green space. Another suggested adding more affordable high density housing to free up space to introduce more public parks. Lastly, tax incentives should be created for larger businesses in Indianapolis to invest in the community, minimize emissions, and use cleaner energy.

One of the roots of many problems Indianapolis experiences is the lack of investment into Indianapolis youth. As mentioned previously, higher funding or better allocation of funding for Indianapolis Public Schools is the key to bettering the city. To do so, it is essential to acknowledge how the history of systemic racism has had major ripple effects on the community. To begin to fix the damage, it is up to Indianapolis institutions to come together to support predominantly black neighborhoods with the same intensity with which they were destroyed in the past.

All of this comes down to engaging Indianapolis policy makers through direct communication and advocacy, voting, or going into public policy. It is up to Indianapolis residents to fix the problems that deeply plague our community. There is no clear, simple solution; however, if a great deal of time and resources are put into the city, I am optimistic that these issues can ultimately be fixed. If Indianapolis mirrors Carmel in this way, perhaps one day the Indianapolis Metropolitan Area will see true, policy-driven equality.

 

Works Cited

1. Braveman, P., Egerter, S., & Williams, D. R. (2011). The Social Determinants of Health: Coming of Age. Annual Review of Public Health, 32(1), 381–398. http://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth031210-101218
2. Community Health Needs Assessment . Indiana University Health. (2018, September 18).  Retrieved September 15, 2021.
3. County Health Rankings & Roadmaps. (n.d.). Retrieved October 4, 2021, from            https://www.countyhealthrankings.org/app/indiana/2021/rankings/marion/county/outcomes/overall/snapshot.IN.gov. (n.d.). Header. Air Quality Index. Retrieved September 15, 2021, from https://idem.meteostar.com/cgi-bin/aqi_rpt.pl.
4. IQAir. (n.d.). Live animated air quality Map (aqi, PM2.5…): AIRVISUAL. Empowering the World to Breathe Cleaner Air. Retrieved September 15, 2021, from  https://www.iqair.com/us/air-quality-map?lat=39.7889&lng=-86.2147&zoomLevel=10&placeId=aDYi8WEcMN5iHQk9c.
5. University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute. (2020). 2020 Indiana Report.  County Health Rankings & Roadmaps. Retrieved September 15, 2021, from https://www.countyhealthrankings.org/reports/state-reports/2020-indiana-report.
6. Worlds Apart: Gaps in Life Expectancy in the Indianapolis Metro Area. (n.d.). Richard M. Fairbanks School of Public Health at Indiana University-Purdue University Indianapolis (IUPUI), 1–12. https://doi.org/https://www.savi.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/Worlds_Apart_Gaps_in_Life_Expectancy.pdf
7. 2020 Drinking Water Report Indianapolis, Morgan Co., Westfield & South Madison.  (2020). Citizens Energy Group, 1–13. https://doi.org/https://www.citizensenergygroup.com/My-Home/Utility-Services/Water/Water-Quality/2020-Drinking-Water-Report-June29.pdf
8. 2020 WATER QUALITY REPORT. (2020). City of Carmel Utilities, 1–2. https://doi.org/https://www.carmel.in.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/18981/637576645718430000
9. State of Indiana. (n.d.). Welcome to Indiana. IN.gov | The Official Website of the State of Indiana. Retrieved October 4, 2021, from http://in.gov/.
10. Google. (n.d.). Google maps. Retrieved October 4, 2021, from   https://www.google.com/maps.
11. McCurdy LE, Winterbottom KE, Mehta SS, Roberts JR. Using nature and outdoor activity to improve children’s health. Curr Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care.  2010 May;40(5):102-17. doi: 10.1016/j.cppeds.2010.02.003. Erratum in: Curr                   Probl Pediatr Adolesc Health Care. 2010 Jul;40(6):152. PMID: 20381783.737/.
12. Ladapo, J., Mohammed, A., & Nwosu, V. (2017, May 22). Lead pollution in Flint,  Michigan, U.S.A. and other cities. Lead Pollution in Flint, Michigan, U.S.A. and Other Cities . Retrieved November 15, 2021, from                                                               http://www.ijese.net/makale/1899.html.
13. City of carmel. History | City of Carmel. (n.d.). Retrieved December 12, 2021, from                      https://www.carmel.in.gov/about-the-city/history.
14. Wikimedia Foundation. (2021, December 10). Carmel, Indiana. Wikipedia. Retrieved December 12, 2021, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmel,_Indiana.
15. A brief history of carmel, Indiana. American Legal Publishing Corporation. (n.d.).   Retrieved December 12, 2021, from   https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/carmel/latest/carmel_in/0-0-0-18.
16. Wikimedia Foundation. (2021, May 21). History of Indianapolis. Wikipedia. Retrieved   December 12, 2021, from https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Indianapolis.
17. Encyclopædia Britannica, inc. (n.d.). Indianapolis. Encyclopædia Britannica. Retrieved  December 12, 2021, from https://www.britannica.com/place/Indianapolis-Indiana.
18. U.S. Census Bureau quickfacts: Indiana; Indianapolis City … (n.d.). Retrieved December  12, 2021, from                                                                                                            https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/IN,indianapoliscitybalanceindiana/PST045219.
19. The ethnic cleansing of Black Indianapolis. New America. (2020, February 4). Retrieved  December 12, 2021, from https://www.newamerica.org/indianapolis/blog/indiana-avenue-ethnic-cleansing-black-indianapolis/.
20. Neighborhood change 1970-2016. SAVI. (2019, June 26). Retrieved December 12, 2021,  from https://www.savi.org/feature_report/neighborhood-change-1970-2016/.
21. Cavazos, S., & Elliott, S. (2015, January 5). The basics of school funding in Indiana:  Difficulty defining fairness. Chalkbeat Indiana. Retrieved December 12, 2021,  from https://in.chalkbeat.org/2015/1/4/21101788/the-basics-of-school-funding-in-indiana-difficulty-defining-fairness.
22. Google. (n.d.). Google earth. Retrieved December 12, 2021, from https://earth.google.com/.
23. Waite, C. M. (n.d.). HUBI-B400 Capstone Project Proposal.
24. Waite, C. M. (n.d.). HUBI-B400 Capstone Project First Entry.
25. Waite, C. M. (n.d.). HUBI-B400 Capstone Project Second Entry.

 

 

 

^[1] Hispanic/LatinX are not considered as races in the census. This percentage is accounted for in either the “white” or “other” category percentages.

^[2] Hispanic/LatinX are not considered as races in the census. This percentage is accounted for in either the “white” or “other” category percentages.

^[3] The practice of denying black people access to loans and other financial services was held up and endorsed by regulations and laws

^[4] The act of convincing homeowners to sell property at a cheap price due to the fear of minorities or people of a lower socioeconomic status moving into the area, thus profiting through reselling at an elevated price.

^[5] the phenomenon of white people moving out of urban areas into suburban areas to “escape” minority populations in urban areas

 

^[6] the process in which a lower socioeconomic status urban community is altered by more affluent people moving in, upgrading housing quality, and displacing current inhabitants in the process