1. Competitive Design
Internal Use Only

2. What will I take away from this presentation?
See how the State of Missouri compares to Midwestern peers in terms of key economic and talent factors, and how Missouri DED compares on jobs created and investment attracted
Share Colorado’s experience in creating and executing a new strategy
Understand how these findings will inform DED’s transformation efforts
Internal Use Only

3. PwC’s Work with Missouri DED
Internal Use Only

4. Who are our competitors?
Our analysis compares the State of Missouri – and Missouri DED – with thirteen Midwestern peers and four leaders from around the U.S.
Ken notes:
We selected a handful of states around the U.S. to use as models
I’ll elaborate on more of my experience in Colorado toward the end of the presentation
Peer state
Other leader
* Selected data was not available for Illinois at the time of presentation
Internal Use Only

5. Results of Our Peer Benchmark
Internal Use Only

6. This presentation tells two stories…
How does the State of Missouri compare to peer states in terms of key economic and talent factors?
Story 1
State-Level Comparison
How does Missouri DED compare to peer agencies in terms of jobs created, investment attracted, and workforce outcomes?
Story 2
Agency-Level Comparison
Internal Use Only

7. State-Level Comparison
We begin with Story 1…
How does the State of Missouri compare to peer states in terms of key economic and talent factors?
Story 1
State-Level Comparison
Internal Use Only

8. GDP Growth (2007-16 CAGR) by State
Missouri trails on GDP growth, and Michigan’s more recent GDP growth has outstripped Missouri’s considerably
GDP Growth ( CAGR) by State
Missouri trails considerably on GDP growth, and Michigan’s more recent GDP growth has outstripped Missouri’s considerably
Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
Internal Use Only

9. Missouri lags peers in job growth; several peers have seen rapid job growth post-recession
Source: Economic Policy Institute (EPI) analysis of U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) Local Area Unemployment Statistics data
Internal Use Only

10. Missouri is among the low-to-mid range for wage growth in the last year, and its growth was only half of Tennessee’s and Arkansas’
Source: U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis (BEA)
Internal Use Only

11. Missouri also struggles on key talent factors, like labor force quality and availability – showing room for improvement
What we assessed
Labor force quality and availability (2017)
Labor force productivity (2017)
Migration of college-educated young people ( )
Adults with associate degree or higher (2017)
STEM graduates living in-state (2015)
Ken comments:
We looked at a handful of talent factors to get a sense of Missouri’s ability to attract and retain residents with an Associates degree or higher, and those with a focus on STEM
Missouri benefits from having a stronger education system and pipeline (in general) than many of its Midwestern peers, though outmigration after schooling is certainly an issue to be addressed
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; U.S. News & World Report; The Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System.
Note: Talent Factors Score is calculated by taking the sum of rankings from multiple dimensions. All dimensions are weighted equally (13 points each).
Internal Use Only

12. We continue with Story 2…
How does Missouri DED compare to peer agencies in terms of jobs created, investment attracted, and workforce outcomes?
Story 2
Agency-Level Comparison
Internal Use Only

13. Missouri lags behind the “leadership group” of Kansas to Wisconsin, which are more effective in creating jobs than other peers
Jobs Created (#) by ED Agencies as a Percentage of Missouri DED
(Weighted by Workforce Size)
2,721
7,863
6,511
10,668
3,591
21,861
5,278
9,411
25,678
22,848
37,356
17,373
27,171
2,721
7,863
6,511
10,668
3,591
21,861
5,079
9,411
25,678
22,848
37,356
17,373
27,171
Ken comments:
These numbers are weighted for the size of the total workforce in the state, and you can see each state’s effectiveness at creating jobs (compared to Missouri) in the percentages
The numbers within the columns are the actual jobs created by each state – but it’s the percentages that are more critical
For the final report, we will examine these numbers with other types of weightings, such as Jobs Growth and others
We will also introduce stats comparing efficiency of spend in terms of jobs created
NOTE: These figures are influenced by macroeconomic factors – like the resurgence of the auto industry. *Figures in columns indicate average number of jobs created per state over most recent three fiscal years (or closest data available). Figures are awaiting validation by peer state ED agencies and should not be treated as definitive. Sources: State ED Agency Annual Reports and related sources
Internal Use Only

14. Kentucky is a clear leader in investment attraction, and Missouri trails the rest of its peers
$1.59
$1.80
$1.04
$1.03
$2.35
$1.06
$5.80
$2.12
$6.33
$4.92
$5.14
$2.29
$6.25
$1.59
$1.80
$1.04
$1.03
$2.35
$1.06
$5.80
$5.42
$2.12
$4.92
$5.14
$2.29
$6.25
Ken comments:
Here we can see another example of how investment attraction is going comparatively more slowly in Missouri
For the final report, we will examine this number with other types of weightings, such as GDP Growth, Manufacturing Investment Growth, and others
We will also introduce stats comparing efficiency of spend in terms of investment attracted
NOTE: These figures are influenced by macroeconomic factors – like the resurgence of the auto industry. *Figures in columns indicate average investment attracted per state over most recent three fiscal years (or closest data available). Figures are awaiting validation by peer state ED agencies and should not be treated as definitive. Sources: State ED Agency Annual Reports and related sources
Internal Use Only

15. Initial research into efficiency measures – like total incentive costs by state – shows that Missouri gets a lot for what it puts in
Ken comments:
Key here is what’s in the title – Missouri expends little in incentives, gets a good return GDP on the little that is spent.
Suggest highlighting the good no
Incentive Cost as a Percent of GDP (2015)
Source: Upjohn Institute data, supplied by DED. Includes tradable GDP. Data not available for all peer states (AR, KS, OH excluded).
Internal Use Only

16. Missouri significantly lags its peers on key federal workforce measures of employment rates…
Entered Employment Rate (Average of PY 2014 and PY 2015, %)
$1.59
$1.80
$1.04
$1.03
$2.35
$1.06
$5.80
$2.12
$6.33
$4.92
$5.14
$2.29
$6.25
$1.59
$1.80
$1.04
$1.03
$2.35
$1.06
$5.80
$5.42
$2.12
$4.92
$5.14
$2.29
$6.25
Nuance is not as much the rankings, but the fact that other states are simply more effective – even if MO serves more people or different types of people
Source: Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration
Internal Use Only

17. …and on average six-month earnings for those entering employment
Entered Employment Earnings (Average of PY 2014 and PY 2015, $/six months)
$1.59
$1.80
$1.04
$1.03
$2.35
$1.06
$5.80
$2.12
$6.33
$4.92
$5.14
$2.29
$6.25
$1.59
$1.80
$1.04
$1.03
$2.35
$1.06
$5.80
$5.42
$2.12
$4.92
$5.14
$2.29
$6.25
Source: Department of Labor, Employment and Training Administration
Internal Use Only

18. Organizational Comparison
Internal Use Only

19. Focus is essential to increasing job growth and investment
Missouri’s Department of Economic Development is responsible for more core functions than many of its peers
Business Attraction
Existing Business Support
Minority Business Development
Community Assistance
Most Peers
Some Peers
Workforce Development
Tourism & Film
Ken notes:
Alignment of resources is the most critical item to “get right” at this juncture
What are examples of Colorado’s and other states’ strategies? What is effective and ineffective about these?
Few Peers
Energy
Other core Missouri DED functions: Housing Development, Utility Regulations, Arts, Entrepreneurship
Internal Use Only

20. Colorado’s Story & Habits of Leaders
Internal Use Only

21. Colorado’s six pillars guide its economic development strategy and execution
Build a Business-Friendly Environment
Retain, Grow & Recruit Companies
Increase Access to Capital
Create & Market a Stronger Colorado Brand
Educate & Train
the Workforce of
the Future
Cultivate Innovation & Technology
Ken notes:
Tell story about where Colorado began (Already effective? Not so?) and where it went during Ken’s tenure
Was an effective EcoDevo machine already started or did they create it?
Internal Use Only

22. What’s Next?
Internal Use Only

23. Our upcoming assessment will examine several key research themes
Agency Functions and Structures
Staffing and Specialization
Revenues, Budgets and Expenditures
Strategy and Tie-Ins
to Workforce Development
Internal Processes and Performance Management
Relationships with
Other Stakeholders
Internal Use Only

24. Questions?
Internal Use Only