1. Shared Prosperity Workgroup March 6, 2014 10:00 – 11:30AM GREATER MSP Shared Prosperity Work Group1

2. Agenda 10:00 – 10:05: Introductions 10:05 – 10:20: Today’s objectives & moving forward 10:20 – 10:50: Break out groups i. Stakeholder engagement (Peter) ii. Audience (Julia) iii. Indicator categories (Mary Kay & Val) 10:50 – 11:20: Full group discussion 11:20 – 11:30: Wrap up Shared Prosperity Work Group2

3. Meeting Objectives Get feedback on outreach process and audiences Gather your input and direction on indicator categories Shared Prosperity Work Group3

4. Regional Success Measures: Project Recap  We have the opportunity to draw upon all of our work to date and establish a shared set of key metrics. WE ARE NOT STARTING FROM SCRATCH!  A dashboard where we all look to answer the most basic question: How are we doing?  Help leaders converge around a set of metrics that are: Objective Comprehensive (economic, social, environmental) Compact (20-25 key measures in 5-6 categories) Benchmarked against peer regions Clearly and consistently communicated Place equity measures on the same plane as other metrics such as economic growth. Endorsed and used by organizations region-wide MEASURE REVIEW ACT

5. Last Modified 2/4/2014 11:43 AM Central Standard Time Printed Like most best practice regional indicators, San Diego’s are organized into categories ▪ San Diego’s indicators are prominently displayed on the homepage of the regional economic development organization ▪ Oriented to tell story of region’s talent, e.g., talent has its own category, above economy ▪ Engaging, at-a-glance display both simplifies message and invites viewer to explore PRELIMINARY SOURCE: SanDiegoBusiness.org/Research; Io.inc, McKinsey Cities Initiative

6. Last Modified 2/4/2014 11:43 AM Central Standard Time Printed 6 London’s set of indicators is focused on sustainable development, which it defines broadly SOURCE: London Sustainable Development Commission

7. Regional Success Measures: Project Recap Consensus accelerator The benefits of a shared dashboard for leaders in the public, private and nonprofit sectors would be immediate and significant. The new consensus around key metrics will help us manage growth, focus investment, set strategic priorities and act more quickly in areas requiring cross-sector collaboration. Regional Economic Development Strategy Establishing regional indicators is one of the six action items identified in the region’s 3-5 year competitiveness strategy. The new indicators will provide a data-driven, comprehensive answer to the fundamental question “how are we doing” and enable a new range of collaborative endeavors central to execution of the strategy. Global best practice High-performing regions around the globe use indicators to develop and maintain a common understanding of what’s critical to their success. In our region, the indicators will be used to benchmark against national and international peers and, over time, produce valuable trend data on our region’s performance.

8.  Choose 1 of the small groups  30 minutes gathering your feedback to: 1.Refine the stakeholder engagement process 2.Identify potential audiences and how they would use the indicators 3.Develop indicator categories  Bring discussion back to the larger group. Shared Prosperity Work Group8 How do we get there?

9. Shared Prosperity Work Group9 Why Is Stakeholder Engagement Important to this Project? Establishing regional consensus on a high-level, shared set of indicators is a primary deliverable of this project. LEADERSHIP TECHNICAL LEADERSHIP CONSENSUS BUILDING Regional Priorities Process, Goals, Outcomes METRIC IDENTIFICATION & SELECTION COMMUNICATION ADOPTION & UTILIZATION Engaging regional leaders is a priority because who uses the new dashboard and how are as important than how it looks and what it measures.

10. Shared Prosperity Work Group 10 Why Is Stakeholder Engagement Important to this Project? Coordinated MEASUREMENT Shared PRIORITIES Collective ACTION VALUE Strategic Change The shared dashboard is a critical step toward regional product improvement Greater regional competitiveness &

11. Shared Prosperity Work Group11 Who will be engaged? 1 Confirmed users of the shared dashboard Groups that may utilize the indicators Groups with existing regional indicators Groups with an interest in some, but not all areas of the dashboard (economic; environmental; social) GREATER MSP Board Itasca Project Members Partner Advisory Council ULI MN UofMN CURA MPRCC Wilder Foundation 2 3 PRIORITY

12. Shared Prosperity Work Group 12 How Will Groups Be Engaged? CONVERGEDESIGN COMMUNICATE MARCHJULY DECEMBER Evaluate & Share Evaluate & Share  What is the “market” for this “product”  What are the 5-6 categories all leaders in our region should track?  What models from outside the region resonate most?  What 3-4 metrics will we use to measure each category?  How should our dashboard look and function?  How should we communicate the roll-out of the product?  What are your reactions to draft dashboard?  Who will be involved in the roll-out of the dashboard & how?

13. Shared Prosperity Work Group13 Who’s on the Project Team? Val Vannett GREATER MSP Mary Kay Bailey Partnership for Regional Opportunity Julia Silvis Itasca Project Todd Graham Met Council Todd Klingel Minneapolis Regional Chamber of Commerce Peter Frosch GREATER MSP POTENTIAL ADDITIONS Wilder Foundation - MN CompassDEED University of Minnesota Great Plains Institute for Sustainable Development Minneapolis Federal Reserve

14. Shared Prosperity Work Group14 Small Group Worksheet Why don’t we have a shared dashboard today? How can we strengthen the process? What other groups may want to utilize the dashboard? GREATER MSP Board Itasca Project Members Partner Advisory Council Regional Chamber Boards Reg. Council of Mayors Metropolitan Council Metro Cities Wilder Foundation UofMN Private Colleges Private Public 3 rd Sector Add to this initial list

15. Audience: Who Shared Prosperity Work Group15 Our goal is to create a set of indicators that a broad variety of leaders and stakeholders from around the region will find relevant to them: – Business leaders/CEOs – Residents – Public officials (elected and staff) – Philanthropy/non-profits

16. Audience: Examples from other regions Shared Prosperity Work Group16 Philadelphia – an academically-led coalition – Housed in Temple University – Advisory members include academics, local non-profits, and a few business leaders Boston – – In their own words: “Non-profit organizations, program officers at foundations, city agencies, students, and practitioners all use our data to tell important stories that will inform future policies and development in Boston” Sacramento – land use focus – Public officials, particularly those who touch land use and transportation decisions – General public – Developers, real estate professionals

17. Audience: How Shared Prosperity Work Group17 We envision the audience will use these indicators to help them make decisions regarding their own programs and priorities, e.g., – Three non-profits form a partnership to move a sub-group of indicators important to all of them – A CEO bolsters testimony he is giving to the legislature using facts from the indicators – A program director at a non-profit alters their RFP focus to address an issue of concern – A family is prompted to changing their volunteering by a sobering indicator May not directly seek to impact metrics, i.e., may or may not use the indicators as a progress metric for their own efforts Many organizations, we imagine, will continue to collect goal-specific, actionable indicators of unique relevance to them and their stakeholders – this set of indicators is not meant to replace existing efforts

18. Audience: Examples of how other regions use indicators Shared Prosperity Work Group18 Seoul uses competitive indicators to increase pride in the region, market itself to businesses, tourists and potential new residents (all their indicators are externally-created rankings) San Diego uses metrics to define and also market itself as a great place for high-tech talent Philadelphia uses its indicators to illuminate differences between regional geographies. They issue reports, policy briefs, and provide interactive mapping software for partners to access indicators to support their own causes Seattle uses its indicators both to create a common understanding of who and what the region is, and to measure performance of the government on specific metrics Atlanta uses indicators to track progress towards shared regional goals

19. Audience: Discussion Questions Shared Prosperity Work Group19 What is your reaction to the audience we describe? – Should it be more broad? More narrow? How can we speak about the indicators in a way to draw in desired audience members? – Whom else would you like to see included in the audience description? How do you envision the audience using indicators? E.g., – Increasing public awareness/urgency – Building consensus among regional leaders on challenges, assets and solutions – Supporting more effective management of their projects or programs What implications do you see in the audience and their use of indicators for – Categories – Specific metrics: Actionable, informative, surprising? – Communications: Frequency, reach, level?

20. Indicator Category Development CRITERIA In aggregate, broad view of regional success (e.g. economic, social, environment) Relevant to every part of the region (e.g. urban, suburban, ex-urban) 5 – 7 categories which “bucket” 20 – 25 indicators total. Shared Prosperity Work Group20

21. Indicator categories in use by other US regions Shared Prosperity Work Group21 San DiegoCharlotteAtlantaBostonPhiladelphiaSeattleTotal regions using Economy  6 Environment  5 Demography/ People  4 Mobility/ Transport  4 Civic Vitality “Government”  “public engagement” 4 Health  4 Public Safety  4 Cultural life/Arts  3 Housing  3 Education  3 Talent  “quality workforce” 2 Other/Notes Quality of lifeCommunityTechnologyGov’t & Taxes; Terrorism, Land use Regs Financial stability; Service excellence NA

22. MSP Indicator categories Shared Prosperity Work Group22 COMPASSMN DashboardMRCC BVICURA/U Metro Consortium (Gauto) Initiatives using NOTES: Economy  Biz Climate  4 Education  Human Capital4 Environment  Quality of Life  4 Mobility (transp & internet) Transportation  Quality of Life Governance4 Workforce  Econ/education  Human Capital4Mix of education, labor force charc. Government/ Civic Engmnt  Governance3Voting, volunteerism, gvt efficiency Community Housing & economy  Social3Poverty, homelessness, wage inequality Public Safety  Quality of Life 3 Health  2 Housing  Quality of Life 2Homelessness, ppl pay more than 30% Quality of Life  Social2Cultural institutions hospital beds People/specifi c groups Aging, Children/Yout Early childhood, immigrants 1Does not include basic demographics OTHER: Thrive MSP 2040 indicator categories will be under the 5 outcomes: stewardship, prosperity, equity, livability, sustainability

23. Shared Prosperity Work Group23 Economy A thriving economy that encourages business growth & employment opportunities. A strong economy that encourages business investment and promotes opportunities for a competitive workforce. Education Minnesotans have the education and skills they need to achieve their goals. All Minnesota students graduate from high school and are prepared for postsecondary education Environment A clean, healthy environment with sustainable uses of natural resources. A clean and healthy environment that contributes to our state's well-being now and into the future. Improve energy efficiency while preserving the region’s environment. Mobility (transp & internet) Sustainable options to safely move people, goods, services, and information Minnesota will have safe, economic, energy-efficient alternatives to move people and goods throughout the state. Workforce Everyone has skills and opportunities to obtain well-paying jobs Government/ Civic Engmnt Efficient and accountable government services. Our state will foster a climate of inclusion that encourages active participation from everyone living in our community. Community Strong and stable families and communities. Promote places to live with easy access to jobs and services Public Safety People in MN are safe. People living in Minnesota or visiting our state will feel safe. Health Minnesotans are healthy. All people living in Minnesota will have optimum physical and mental health. Housing People at all income levels have housing opportunities throughout the state. Quality of Life The region has low crime rates, ample access to outdoor recreation and a variety of entertainment options. People/specific groups All young children throughout Minnesota enter school ready to learn. All children and youth will have caring relationships, enrichment activities, and the investment from their communities to grow into a successful adulthood. SOURCES: Minnesota Dashboard. Minnesota Compass. Business Vitality Index. Atlanta Plan 2040 Describing the “goals” of each category

24. Sample indicators by category Shared Prosperity Work Group24 Economy Annual change in Gross Regional Product; median HH income, UE rate, # of MN start ups that survive 5 years Education % of 3 rd graders proficient in reading, % of 8 th graders proficient in math, % students graduate HS on time Environment Days air quality rated good (or bad); lakes and streams meet water quality standards, Mobility (transp & internet) Transportation expenses as a share of income, share of workers who could commute to work with a 30-min or less transit trip, % of region’s population that has access to high-speed internet Workforce Labor force participation rates; Adults (age 25+) with bachelor’s degree/associates degree; Government/ Civic Engmnt % of eligible Minnesotans voted, bond ratings, Community Share of region’s residents living in concentrated areas of poverty Public Safety # Serious crimes per 1,000 people Health % of region’s residents who are obese Housing % of households paying more than 30% of income for housing (or 50% of income for combined housing and transportation costs) Quality of Life Share of population that resides within ½ mile of a local park People/specific groups % of low birth weights SOURCES: Compass, Business Vitality Index, Minnesota Dashboard, Metropolitan Council Discussion Draft 2012,

25. Small group assignment 1)Individually select 5 – 7 categories and what goal it is driving toward. (10 minutes) 2)In group synthesize categories & category “goal statements” (15 minutes) 3)What works & doesn’t work with this approach (5 minutes) Shared Prosperity Work Group25