Evaluation of the Strong Cities, Strong Communities (SC2) Teams Pilot: Final Report. 3. SC2 Pilot Implementation

Each SC2 pilot city had a distinct history of growth and decline and faced a unique set of challenges. Cities were at different stages of readiness for change and city leaders and stakeholders varied in their visions for the future. Given this variability, SC2 teams took different approaches to implementing the pilot. Adding to the variability, each pilot city had a unique mix of team members and city leadership. How those partners worked together during the implementation helps explain the level of success the pilot cities achieved. This chapter details the key players in the implementation process, their roles, how activities were selected for the implementation period, how implementation evolved over time, and what was accomplished by the SC2 teams.

• 3.1 Key Players and Roles

  • Key players in the pilot implementation included the SC2 team leads, city leadership, and the team members. Their roles in the implementation are detailed below, followed by a discussion of how they communicated with one another.

• 3.2 SC2 Team Communication

  • To accomplish their work, SC2 teams engaged in three types of communication: internal SC2 team communication, communication between team members and their respective home agencies, and communication between the SC2 teams and their partner cities. The methods of communication in each city and for each agency varied by what each team felt was most productive, as well as by the resources available to the host city. Nonetheless, general patterns were discernible for each communication type.

• 3.3 Implementation of the SC2 Pilot

  • The early months of SC2 pilot implementation involved the development and refinement of a work plan in each city, the assignment of specific tasks to team members, and initial work on those assignments. The work plan represented a detailed strategy for how a SC2 team would attempt to address its city’s priority areas and needs. Pilot cities took different tacks in selecting specific activities for implementation. These different approaches included holding planning sessions with city and community leaders, meeting one- on-one with city leadership, and refining existing city strategic planning documents. ²⁰ All SC2 teams used findings from the OAT assessments as the starting point for the planning process.

    The pilot cities varied in how quickly they were able to move from planning to implementation, ranging from as quickly as three months to as long as six months. The two cities that were able to begin implementing activities most quickly were those whose mayors had clear visions for the engagement and a defined set of priorities for the SC2 team. By contrast, in the three cities where it took six months to finalize the work plan and begin implementing activities there was no clear prioritized focus for the engagement and a limited sense of what activities team members should undertake. This led to lengthy planning phases in which agenda items were slowly added and refined. Team members noted that delays in some cases were due to not being sure of whom in the city they would and should be working with, which resulted in members feeling their way through that determination.

    Some cities sought to balance short-term and long-term strategies. Two of the cities included “quick-win” activities in their work plan—small-scale activities or “low hanging fruit” that could generate early success while complex activities continued to be developed. A quick-win example is the development of a community behavioral health resource guide in one city.

    As implementation proceeded, many team members settled into their roles and made progress on the activities assigned to them. There were times, though, when planned activities were found to be infeasible or new opportunities arose that were likely to be more beneficial to the community than the originally planned activities. In one city, for example, a project to notify residents electronically about city land use decisions was dropped when it was determined that the SC2 team could add little value to the project, while an exploration of redevelopment opportunities for a navy base was added.

    SC2 teams made decisions during implementation to stop projects for several reasons, including SC2 team or city staff turnover, an inability to get traction on a project due to a lack of city involvement or opposition from a city representative, poor timing, the determination that a project was simply not viable, or a lack of resources to complete a project. In one city, for example, a team member assigned to focus on several health care projects disengaged from the pilot when it was determined that the city did not have a health or human services departments to implement the projects. In another city, criminal justice projects were stopped when the local police chief expressed a lack of support for the work. In another city, a significant workforce development strategy focused on the area around a proposed hospital was dropped when the construction of the hospital was delayed.

    Team members also identified new opportunities once they had a better understanding of city needs, reacted to emergent needs, and changed direction when initial opportunities proved infeasible. For example, in one city workforce development strategies were left fairly general in the work plan. This allowed the SC2 team to conduct multiple stakeholder interviews to better define city needs before proposing more specific activities. Ultimately, the SC2 team helped create a multi-partner collaboration to develop strategies for alignment of workforce development efforts. In a second city, a team member stepped in when the city realized it would have to lay off over 100 police officers—the team member found a solution in the repurposing a Community  Oriented Policing Services (COPS) grant to retain the officers.

    A promising feature of the SC2 approach is its flexibility for adding unplanned activities. The local stakeholders interviewed commonly said that it was impossible to know at the outset exactly how the city would most benefit from the SC2 team. Leaving room in the work plan for emergent opportunities and using an adaptive approach to implementation is therefore needed. SC2 teams and cities seemed to be most successful when they adjusted their plan as opportunities arose, circumstances changed, and planned activities were found to be impossible to implement. In several cities, many key SC2 team accomplishments were unrelated to tasks outlined in the work plan; rather, the accomplishments involved responding to opportunities to address perceived barriers through the collaborative effort of the city and the SC2 team.

    ---

    ²⁰  The site profiles provide specific details on each site’s process for developing their work plan (see Appendix A).

• 3.4 Range of Activities Conducted

  • SC2 teams conducted a range of activities in keeping with the goals of the SC2 pilot and in response to the priorities of the pilot cities. Activities varied across pilot cities due to the individual priorities of the cities, the makeup of the SC2 teams assigned to each city, and the capacity of the cities to address economic development opportunities and challenges. Notwithstanding this local variation, SC2 team activities generally fell into one or more of five categories, summarized in Exhibit 6.

    Exhibit 6: Common Types of SC2 Team Activities

    	Activity Type	Description
    1.	Providing responsive, transactional assistance to address specific problems	Team members helped to trouble shoot specific problems by: Connecting city staff with federal and/or state resources Identifying where flexibility exists within federal funding and regulations Helping to short-cut federal red tape Providing assistance with process Offering ad-hoc technical assistance
    2.	Building relationships between local stakeholders and state and federal employees	Team members connected local stakeholders with federal or state representatives to resolve long-standing community problems.
    3.	Brokering local or regional partnerships	Team members connected individuals from different local or regional entities to align plans or services, share resources, and develop mutually beneficial collaborations.
    4.	Temporary addition of technical capacity	Team members took on project tasks to help further strategic ideas the city staff did not have time to implement.
    5.	Program and plan development	Team members took responsibility to develop a program or facilitate/contribute to a planning process

     

    Following are examples for each activity type to provide a sense of the range of activities completed by team members.

    1. Providing responsive, transactional assistance to address specific problems. Activities included in this category involved team members troubleshooting specific problems at the local level. Team members connected city staff with federal and/or state resources, identified where flexibility exists within federal funding and regulations, helped to short-cut federal red tape, and offered ad-hoc technical assistance. In one city, for example, a team member worked with HUD leadership, city leadership, and the city’s Housing Commission to identify a source of funds to demolish a long- vacant public housing complex. Though a long-standing priority of the mayor’s, previous attempts to use Community Development Block Grant funds for demolition had been blocked by the city council. The team member identified that the city could apply for emergency HUD funds to support the removal of the blighted property and identified the data that would be needed to prove that demolition was needed to address health and safety risks linked to the abandoned property.

       Additional activities of this type included:

       • Researching HUD policies to find flexibility for a city to utilize Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funding for land reuse projects
       • Organizing a training session for downtown property owners on working with the General Services Administration to encourage more federal agencies to locate in the downtown area
       • Working with city officials and representatives from the Federal Aviation Administration to release funds for demolition at the local airport
    2. Building relationships between local stakeholders and state and federal employees. These activities involved team members connecting local stakeholders with state and federal representatives to resolve long-standing community problems. As an example, team members in one city convened a broad spectrum of state and federal representatives to explore the implications of a planned high- speed rail project. The stakeholders met to discuss the impacts of the route, the interconnectedness of their activities, and how they might best collaborate going forward.

       Additional activities of this type included the following:

       • Initiating discussions between city stakeholders and a representative of the DOE’s Clean Cities Program to explore the adoption of clean alternative fuels for the city’s fleet vehicles
       • Connecting federal, state, and regional stakeholders to identify ways for city transportation projects to continue without violating historical preservation requirements
       • Coordinating conversations between city stakeholders, the Department of Energy’s National Lawrence Livermore Labs, and the Department of Agriculture’s Agricultural Research Serve Western Regional Research Center to discuss a potential collaboration to support technology transfer for the development of an agriculture technology cluster in a pilot city
    3. Brokering local or regional partnerships. For this activity, team members connected individuals from different local or regional entities to align plans or services, share resources, or develop mutually beneficial collaborations. For example, a SC2 team lead in one pilot city facilitated a meeting to determine workforce needs and align curriculum across educational institutions. The meeting convened representatives from the newly created National Additive Manufacturing Innovation Institute, educational institutions in the area that serve high-skilled and mid-skilled workers for the emerging additive manufacturing sector, representatives from the area NASA facility, and a local manufacturing organization.

       Additional activities of this type included the following:

       • Creating a collaborative team of local stakeholders to increase employment among veterans through various approaches, including offering career fairs and establishing a partnership with the United Way
       • Developing a framework for a city’s transportation department and a regional passenger rail provider to jointly allocate transportation funding for specialized and para-transit service delivery, and engaging local health sector stakeholders in the initiative
       • Connecting a nonprofit business development corporation with public and private stakeholders in one city to encourage the corporation to locate a new minority business development center there
    4. Temporary addition of technical capacity. These activities involved team members taking on project tasks to help further strategic ideas the city did not have the time or resources to implement. One city relied on a team member to conduct a broad survey of community health resources and providers that it would otherwise not have been able to complete due to staffing limitations, thus allowing the city to develop a series of improvements to the provision of community health services.

       Additional activities of this type included the following:

       • Developing a map of existing and potential infrastructure for a rural broadband system in the region around a city, and securing funding for its development
       • Reviewing a city’s short-range transit plans and contributing to a report on best practices for local transit agencies
       • Exploring housing opportunities for participants in a city’s violence intervention program
    5. Program and plan development. Activities in this category involved team members taking responsibility to develop a program, facilitate a planning process, or contribute to a planning process. As an example, team members in one city assessed the feasibility of expanding the area’s value-added food sector through a public market or kitchen incubator, helped develop a related strategic plan, exposed local stakeholders to other innovative food organizations in the region, and identified potential sources of funding for the effort.

       Additional activities of this type include the following:

       • Assisting a city with strategic planning related to career, technical, and adult education
       • Helping a city develop a plan for infill development, including securing technical assistance from the EPA and creating a strategy for engaging a private sector task force
       • Working with potential private funding sources to explore the development of an innovation district strategic plan to encourage economic growth in a city

• 3.5 Summary of Reported Key Accomplishments

  • While the SC2 teams undertook a vast number of activities, not all activities were completed, and among completed activities only a subset were regarded as key accomplishments by stakeholders interviewed for this study. The evaluation team’s discussions with pilot city stakeholders and team members examined what the SC2 teams were able to accomplish during the timeframe of the evaluation—the first 18 months of pilot implementation (September 2011–March 2013). We asked stakeholders to describe what they perceived to be the SC2 teams’ key accomplishments in each city, focusing on accomplishments that addressed city priorities. Based on the study team’s data collection and analysis, we identified 40 key accomplishments during the evaluation period.

    Key accomplishments most commonly arose from activities in which SC2 teams provided responsive, transactional assistance to address specific problems (activity type 1 above). The frequency of these accomplishments appears due to the large number of city priorities that fell into this category, as well as the relative ease with which a team member could address isolated problems simply by tapping into readily available resources or connecting with senior representatives at their home agency. The next most common activity type to lead to key accomplishments was activity type 3, brokering local or regional partnerships, followed by activity type 4, adding temporary technical capacity to city staff. The success of activities that brokered local partnerships may be related to the ability of federal stakeholders to inspire the formation of new partnerships in a way local stakeholders cannot; the success of activities that added technical capacity is likely due to the significant time team members dedicated to those activities. The activities that less often led to key accomplishments were program and plan development (activity type 5) and building relationships between local stakeholders and state and federal employees (activity type 2). The relatively few accomplishments that arose from these activity types seems due, respectively, to the length of time required for program and plan development to be completed and the small number of city requests for assistance in developing partnerships with state or federal  representatives.

    In terms of content areas, activities that produced key accomplishments most commonly related to economic and business development, transportation, health, land use, and public safety. The frequency of these accomplishments appears related to the activity types, with most economic and business development and transportation projects involving responsive, transactional assistance. A smaller number of activities related to housing, neighborhood revitalization, and the environment led to key accomplishments . The infrequency of accomplishments in these content areas appears to simply reflect little emphasis on these areas by pilot cities.

    Exhibit 7 summarizes the 40 key accomplishments. This is not an exhaustive list of what the SC2 teams achieved, especially given the limited timeframe of the study, but presents those accomplishments that stakeholders most frequently cited during conversations with the evaluation team. For an expanded list of accomplishments, see the Strong Cities, Strong Communities Initiative’s First Annual Report. ²¹

    Exhibit 7: SC2 PilotKey Accomplishments

    SC2 city	Key Accomplishments as Determined by SC2 Team Members, Pilot City Representatives, and Evaluation Team	Content Area of Accomplishment
    Chester	EPA team members established a partnership between city leadership and faculty at Temple University. With the EPA as facilitator, a 15+ member graduate student team worked on regional planning and design projects within the city at no cost, developing a downtown revitalization plan.	Land Use and Revitalization
    	A team member from HUD was able to determine how to repurpose grant money to demolish the Chester Arms Hotel building, an immediate safety hazard that had become unstable due to hurricane damage.	Land Use and Revitalization
    	A team member from HHS worked with Keystone Mercy Health Plan (a major regional health-care provider) and Widener University to establish the Healthy Chester Coalition, a council of nonprofits and faith-based community institutions whose goal is to coordinate services to meet Chester's health care needs collaboratively and effectively.	Health
    	The SC2 team facilitated a new relationship between the city and Widener University. Evidence of this relationship included bringing Widener into the Healthy Chester Coalition, starting discussions between the school district and Widener about Widener's charter school and Chester's education coalition, and helping establish a partnership with the Chester Police Department.	Health
    	The SC2 Team helped facilitate an investment by a Philadelphia-based food bank, Philabundance, to open a supermarket-style food bank. The $4.5 million project broke ground in late September 2012 and will provide the first new grocery store in the City in over a decade. Financing from two Community Development Finance Institutions (CDFIs)—the Nonprofit Finance Fund and The Reinvestment Fund (TRF)—was critical to helping Philabundance move forward.	Economic and Business Development
    	DOT team members negotiated agreements with regional transit authorities (Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority/Amtrak) to allow a business to rent out retail space at their Chester station, and began conversations with Amtrak about opening an Amtrak train line to Chester.	Economic and Business Development
    	General Services Administration (GSA) team members introduced the city to the GSA's acquisition program, allowing it to acquire new school equipment for Chester schools (including 60 low-cost computers for students) and 4-wheel-drive vehicles for the city.	Community Development
    Cleveland	Team members convened regional and local government stakeholders to form the Strategic Workforce Alignment Group (SWAG). SWAG developed a set of collaborative actions to improve the alignment of workforce employment, training, and education programs in the region with the needs of employers for skilled workers in key sectors.	Workforce Development
    	HUD team members brokered an agreement between the city and DOT-Federal Highway Administration to allow construction work for Cleveland’s neighborhood development strategy to continue, developing work-arounds to deed restrictions on city-owned properties.	Land Use and Revitalization
    	Team members provided indirect technical support as the city applied for EPA funding to clean up a 5-acre brownfields site called "Dike 14" and incorporate it into the Lake Front Nature Preserve. They also helped gather and address public comments, so that clean-up could commence.	Environment
    	Through SC2, NASA and the Manufacturing Advocacy & Growth Network created the Adopt a City program, which awarded nine small and medium-sized manufacturers 400 hours of NASA subject matter assistance and access to $450K in low-interest loans from the City of Cleveland or Cuyahoga County to solve technical challenges.	Economic and Business Development
    Detroit	Team members provided indirect technical support as the city applied for $25 million in funding to expand Detroit’s public transit by building the "M-1" Woodward Avenue Light Rail line, a streetcar line connecting the Detroit People Mover network with Amtrak's Southeast Michigan Council of Governments’ commuter rail.	Transportation
    	Team members helped establish a Regional Transit Authority, reviewing the region's transportation planning process, providing advice and expertise on ways to improve it (including how to conduct transit corridor planning studies), and serving as a knowledge base for advocates for Regional Transit Authority legislation.	Transportation
    	Team members brought together the city and the Youth Violence Prevention Forum, who had previously not coordinated their efforts. As a result of meetings with the Forum, the city started concentrating its board-up and blight removal efforts in areas where students frequently travel to school, improving the safety of those routes.	Public Safety
    	Team members identified a way to repurpose HUD funding in order to demolish Douglass Homes, a dilapidated former public housing project that was a major blight on the city's skyline.	Public Safety
    	Team members from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), DOJ, and ED worked with Code for America and the Knight Foundation to launch Text My Bus, a service that provides real-time travel information so that Detroit Department of Transportation passengers will not have to wait at bus stops for long periods, where they might be exposed to crime. Team members identified a way to repurpose funding from another grant for Text My Bus, and identified other sources of funding, to make the project sustainable over the next two years.	Public Safety
    	DOJ team members were able to determine a way to repurpose a COPS grant to retain 120 police officers, maintaining public safety as a top priority and preventing layoffs.	Public Safety
    Fresno	The FTA and the EPA team members facilitated a conversation with local stakeholders that resulted in the re-routing of Fresno's Bus Rapid Transit line to better align with the location of Fresno’s planned high-speed rail stop and its downtown commercial district, fostering economic growth.	Transportation
    	The FTA and the EPA team members convened local, state, and federal stakeholders working on various elements related to high-speed rail and downtown revitalization. As a result, the proposed high-speed rail stop was moved to a more strategic location in the downtown commercial district and the city applied for and received a grant to improve a pedestrian mall in the district.	Transportation
    	The HUD team member identified the Building Neighborhood Capacity Program grant opportunity for the city and helped assemble the partners needed to submit a successful application. The grant was received and is being used to support the city's expansion of its neighborhood revitalization efforts into two neighborhoods, Southwest and El Dorado Park.	Land Use and Revitalization
    	By identifying a funding source, providing indirect technical support, input, and advice throughout the process of the city's grant application, and connecting the city to federal experts on historical preservation, team members helped Fresno secure a $16 million TIGER (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) grant to advance the city's vision for Fulton Mall, reconstructing the mall's 18-block area and revamping vehicle traffic lanes to increase its businesses' accessibility and visibility.	Land Use and Revitalization
    	Team members identified grant funding from the Department of Agriculture and IBM Smarter Cities Challenge to substantially advance Fresno’s planning for bringing broadband to the downtown area and establishing technology for remote sensors tracking water and pesticide use on farms within Fresno.	Economic and Business Development
    	Team members assessed the feasibility of expanding Fresno’s value-added food sector (including the development of a downtown "food hub," public market, or "kitchen incubator"), helped to develop the city's plan, exposed them to other Northern California innovative food organizations, and identified potential sources of funding for the effort.	Economic and Business Development
    	The SC2 team helped Fresno and community stakeholders align the city’s current plan to end homelessness with the new federal Opening Doors policy to end all forms of homelessness through strategic provision of housing, job, and services for homeless individuals.	Housing
    Memphis	DOT team members provided indirect technical support as the city successfully applied for a $14.9 million TIGER grant for its Main Street to Main Street Multi-Modal Connector Project, which will improve transportation in downtown Memphis and develop bike and pedestrian trails.	Transportation
    	Team members from DOJ coordinated the multiple federal initiatives in Memphis working on youth violence prevention, including Shelby County’s Defending Childhood initiative, the work of the National Forum on Youth Violence Prevention, and a federal civil rights investigation on unfair treatment of African American youth.	Public Safety
    	Team members helped the city successfully present a case to the GSA chief of staff to have the GSA relax certain building regulations for the city, allowing federal offices to remain in, or move to, downtown Memphis.	Land Use and Revitalization
    	HHS team members researched Memphis' current and future health needs, creating "A Profile of the Uninsured in Memphis" and a "Detailed Memphis Health Profile" to prepare the city for an increase in insured Memphians generated by Affordable Care Act in 2014.	Health
    	Team members trained city officials and a local community development organization on how to set up and fund a Community Development Financial Institutions Fund (CDFI) to support small businesses, including identifying several relevant Treasury grant programs. As a result, the River City Capital Investment Corporation, a local CDFI, was formed.	Economic and Business Development
    	DOT team members cut red tape to finalize the purchase of the American Queen Riverboat as part of an effort to develop the city's tourism industry.	Economic and Business Development
    	Team members inventoried the city's strategic plans and reports, drafting a narrative around how these initiatives fit together and drafting a communication strategy for getting the word out about the city's development efforts.	Economic and Business Development
    	Team members connected Community Lift with the Delta Regional Authority (DRA), leading to a $250,000 DRA grant to bring free broadband access to the South Memphis neighborhood of Frayser.	Economic and Business Development
    New Orleans	Team members connected the city with leadership at DOT, which resulted in identifying a mechanism for pooling DOT and HUD grant money to enable the completion of a streetcar project.	Transportation
    	Team members connected city officials with experts at HUD and the state to get the city's $52 million soft-second mortgage program off the ground, cutting red tape and solving lingering technical problems that had stymied the effort.	Housing
    	Team members sought expert advice from HUD that allowed the city to release disaster relief funds in order to regularly maintain abandoned lots, instead of having to wait to do so only once a year.	Housing
    	Team members brought together prison, drug court, city, and state officials to establish and coordinate the implementation of a permanent supportive housing voucher preference program for individuals returning from substance abuse treatment or prison.	Housing
    	Team members help the city avoid recapture of $20 million in housing funds by reconciling poorly-kept records and clarifying the status of the funds.	Housing
    	Team members identified and convened local stakeholders involved in providing mental health services to create a behavioral health council. The council then worked with the city to draft a comprehensive, regional plan for behavioral health, including a needsassessment and a regional guide to behavioral health resources.	Health
    	A team member from DOJ helped identify a successful murder reduction strategy in Milwaukee that became a model for New Orleans, leading to the creation of the Mayor’s Strategic Command to Reduce Murder. The Command serves as a means for state and local law enforcement officials to share information and coordinate responses to murdersin the city.	Public Safety
    	Team members facilitated conversations between city, state, and federal government representatives to extend the time frame for submission of reimbursement claims from community health clinics, avoiding reductions in health services to the community.	Health

    ---

    ²¹  White House Council on Strong Cities, Strong Communities, Strong Cities, Strong Communities First Annual Report, April 2013.

• 3.6 Implementation Challenges

  • As Exhibit 7 shows, team members made significant gains in helping cities address their priorities in a short amount of time. However, the following challenges at times impeded progress:

    1. Staff turnover. Some projects were delayed or ended because of a change in staffing or a loss of leadership at either the city or the federal level.
    2. City capacity. Pilot cities faced capacity challenges that limited their ability to make the best use of federal assistance offered by the engagement. These challenges included small city staffs, city staff with insufficient time to allocate to the pilot, and a lack of structure to support certain activities.
    3. Federal difficulty adapting to new roles required by the pilot or moving beyond historical conflicts with cities. A small number of team members had difficulty either adapting to a role in which the city directed the activities and federal representatives played a supporting role, or moving beyond previous problematic relationships with cities, especially in cases where an agency’s historical relationship with the city was one of monitoring and compliance.
    4. Turf battles. In pilot cities, some city stakeholders did not welcome federal assistance and as a result chose not to interact with the SC2 teams. Similarly, tensions at times existed between regional and Washington, DC-based federal team members, with regional staff regarding the engagement as a critique of their existing approach to working with a city.
    5. Misaligned team member expertise and city priorities. As noted in Section 2.4, there was not always perfect alignment between the skills of a team member assigned to a city and the skills demanded by the city’s priority areas. This lack of alignment led to less effective partnerships than might have been achieved otherwise.

    The next chapter further explores how these implementation challenges, as well as other factors, affected the ability of SC2 teams to address city priorities.

View full report

Download

"rpt_SC2FinalReport.pdf" (pdf, 2.78Mb)

Note: Documents in PDF format require the Adobe Acrobat Reader®. If you experience problems with PDF documents, please download the latest version of the Reader®