Oregon Benchmarks: A Wake-up Call

A well-established, internationally-recognized, model community measurement project could lose funding and go away because the people who should be using the information have been ignoring the data. Today's headline is brought to you from the Statesman Journal reporting on the Oregon Benchmarks project, but the message resonates loudly with other communities who have been through or are potentially facing the same short-sighted decision-making under pressure of tight budget demands.

From the Statesman Journal:

Oregon has been a global leader in measuring its successes and failures. Unfortunately, too few people have been paying attention, especially in state government and the Legislature. Now the state is on the verge of ending its innovative self-grading system, known as the Oregon Benchmarks. Fortunately, there's a proposal to keep the benchmarks alive ...

Take a look at the Oregon Benchmarks here. It's a good report. It ought to be used more. It deserves better.

But if something that's been in place for 20 years is under such budgetary pressure, what level of concern are we facing in our own local communities? How are we insulating ourselves from these kinds of financial threats? What are we doing to establish the ROI of our projects? How are we diversifying our funding streams?

Read more ...

Funding Community Indicators Projects

We briefly touched on the problem of funding community indicators projects last year when a news article reminded us of the difficulty in obtaining and maintaining financial partners for this work.

Here's a recent example of the tough time some folks are having in securing funding for their indicators projects. The line I cringed at what this one: "The mayor noted that usually such projects get DECREASING amounts of money from year to year, lest they become a permanent burden on the budget."

I suspect that, especially in this economic climate, many of us are thinking about the financial sustainability of our community indicators efforts. We know that even talking about data can make people less likely to open their wallets.

Our organization has been publishing a community indicators report annually since 1985. We've seen a number of shifts in funding patterns in the community, but have managed to maintain funding for indicators (even when every other project we do has taken hits.) I'd be interested to hear from you, the readers, if it would make sense to begin a conversation among ourselves about challenges and effective strategies in funding community indicators projects. All those interested in joining that conversation, please make your interest known by replying to this message.

Thanks!

Read more ...

Update from Yampa Valley

A few years ago I had the opportunity to work with Audrey Danner of Yampa Valley Partners on a Civic Indicators project for the National Civic League, and I think she's one of those really good people that you get to meet every now and then if you're both really good and pretty lucky.

That being said by way of introduction, I was a little disappointed in the Routt County Commission's decision not to remain as a financial partner in the work of Yampa Valley Partners. However, the discussion about the funding decisions and the desirability of government buy-in to local community indicators work is spot on, and I thought I'd draw your attention to this news article describing the situation.

We all face funding issues from time to time, especially as local governments struggle with multiple priorities and considerable needs. (Ironically, it's often our community indicators work that points out where those needs are and how significant they are to the community, which makes it bittersweet when those needs are prioritized ahead of the research/planning functions we provide -- if only we were less competent at placing these issues on the community agenda!)

But this response by Audrey Danner is right on message:

Audrey Danner, Yampa Valley Partners executive director, said her board plans to continue its services despite its funding setback. The most discouraging issue, she added, is losing Routt County as a partner, not its money.

“Our local government funding is very important, and it’s discouraging we will not have Routt County funding us next year,” Danner said. “It is not only about funding, though. It is about partners coming together for their communities … and being effective as a regional group when we make decisions.”

If you're in the Yampa Valley region in Colorado, please consider supporting Yampa Valley partners. (Audrey doesn't know I'm saying this.) Even if you're not, pay attention to what they're doing -- they're a shining light showing how a rural area can come together around shared issues for the community good.

Read more ...

Clay County Florida Launches New Indicators Project

Clay County, Florida, is developing its community indicators project. They began by launching a community survey to develop a scope for community visioning efforts, to be followed by a more formal visioning process and then indicators to measure progress towards that vision.

The survey was provided through two local newspapers,My Clay Sun and Clay Today, as well as on a new website, ClayQOL.com.

Ray Avery, chair of the citizen's committee behind the process, had this to say:

“I believe we are at a critical time in the life of Clay County,” said Ray Avery, chair of the Clay Quality Council Steering Committee. “I believe it is time for our citizens to determine a shared vision for our future and develop the tools to track our progress. The development of our own Clay County Quality of Life Indicators is a first step to develop the baseline from which to measure our progress toward the vision we set. ...

“I am still learning about this program but from all I have read, this approach makes good common sense and I am very excited about the prospect of our entire community including business leaders, community leaders, faith groups, civic organizations, educators, environmentalist and residents from all walks of life in Clay County coming together to establish a vision for the future and establishing indicators to measure our progress. For this to be an ongoing success it is essential that our entire community participate.”

More about the project is available here, here, and here.

I was also interested in reading the responses to this blog article about the survey -- the sponsors were up front about where the money was coming from to support the effort, and this seems to raise suspicion among some residents.

Which leads me to my question for this group -- community work costs money. How do you create financially sustainable community indicators projects while maintaining both actual impartiality and the perception of absolute integrity in the process?

In Jacksonville, potential contributors are vetted against a series of criteria before being allowed to give money to the project, but the success of this effort may be driven in part by a trusted, proven process with a lengthy community history before the first project sponsors were brought on board to defray rising costs. How do you launch an effort which has to establish its reputation while raising funds to cover its costs?

Read more ...