April 2004

Philadelphia is on the leading edge among U.S. cities in the creation of data tools that can significantly improve decision-making with regard to social services for children.  This newsletter has chronicled the development and use of comprehensive data products created by Philadelphia Safe and Sound (see articles here and here).

While it continues to improve the data tools it has created, Safe and Sound is addressing an even greater challenge:  institutionalizing these tools into routine decision-making by policymakers, philanthropies, service providers and others. 

There are many important instances of agencies using data to improve decision-making in Philadelphia.  For example, geo-mapping of social services by Safe and Sound is helping the city pinpoint optimal locations for new after-school programs.  But getting government and non-profit entities to use data as a matter of routine – to fully institutionalize the use of data – is an ongoing effort.  Safe and Sound shares what it has learned in the paper Using Data Tools in the Decision-Making Process, presented at the Urban Seminar Series at Harvard University.  The following summarizes many of these lessons.

Maximizing the use of the data tools is affected by three major factors:

• Some policymakers and city officials are hesitant to fully embrace these tools because of the public reporting and accountability the tools make possible.  They may also be concerned about possible misinterpretation and misuse of the data.
   
• Data tools are limited by data availability.  This limits the types of reports that can be produced and the questions that can be answered. 
   
• Complex tools, such as Geographic Information Systems (GIS) mapping, require significant resources and expertise in order to maximize their utility.  Agencies are often hemmed in by staggering operational responsibilities and may not have the staff and other resources to develop the policy, planning and analysis capacity necessary for this new generation of tools. 

The use of data tools will not be institutionalized unless 1) potential users embrace them as an effective method of improving service; 2) the tools are user-friendly for decision-makers; and 3) potential users are equipped to use them to their full extent.

Gaining the acceptance of potential users
 

• Manage risk where data reveals poor results.  Certainly, support from the highest levels of city government is essential to the development and institutionalization of citywide data tools.  And in Philadelphia, Mayor John Street has been willing to move forward with these tools despite short-term political risks associated with poor results that may be documented by tools like the City’s Report Card.  But it has been more difficult to generate a common level of institutional support throughout City government.  Safe and Sound addresses resistance to publicizing “bad” results by showing trend data that clearly demonstrates a historical track record across multiple years and administrations.  This provides perspective about the level of entrenchment that exists around some indicators and avoids the unfair identification of “scapegoats”. 
   
• Broaden the scope of accountability.  Data tends to make any current administration more publicly responsible for demonstrating some type of effective response and impact.  Safe and Sound broadens the scope of accountability for indicator results beyond an individual program, agency or city administration.  The focus should be on the well-being of the people, and thus on all of the people within that community. 
   
• Achieve and promote success.  Identifying and promoting ways in which the data tools have been successful can encourage stakeholders and decision-makers to institutionalize and expand the use of the tools.
   
• Identify data tool “champions”.  A persuasive way to encourage City officials to embrace the data tools is to identify one or more of their peers who have used the tools to improve performance and outcomes.  In Philadelphia, Secretary of Public Health John Domzalski has been a leader in the use of GIS to improve outcomes in targeted areas.
   

Easing accessibility of the tools
 

• Present data tools in a user-friendly format.  Safe and Sound developed tools with considerable input from City agency staff and other prospective users from academia and the non-profit and philanthropic communities.  Focus groups of current and potential users help Safe and Sound continually improve the usability of its tools.
   

Ensuring that decision-makers are equipped to use the tools
 

• Develop a centralized data warehouse.  Although great progress has been made in developing Philadelphia’s GIS mapping system, there is still no standard mechanism for City departments to routinely map and share relevant data.  For example, teen pregnancy data is maintained by the Department of Public Health.  If the Department of Human Services is interested in focusing on teen pregnancy prevention efforts, it has no easy way to directly examine distribution of teen pregnancy within the City.  A warehouse of spatially related social service data would solve the problem.
   
• Designate responsible agency staff.  Each social service department must assign appropriate staff to cross-agency teams.  The teams consist of both research and information technology staff to build the GIS mapping network and to analyze and recommend action based on the data.
   
• Education/training of city staff.  In many instances, agency staff must be trained to 1) use the relevant software and access data from the central data warehouse, and 2) apply GIS spatial research methods to particular questions or problems.

Philadelphia, with the help of Safe and Sound, has made the commitment to consistently inform its decision-making with outcome and performance data.  The data tools Safe and Sound has produced promise meaningful systems change – to use existing dollars and resources more effectively to fundamentally change the way the City approaches the goal of improving the lives of its children.

The paper “Using Data Tools in the Decision-Making Process” was authored by JoAnn Lawer, president and CEO of Philadelphia Safe and Sound; Charles R. Lyons, consultant to Safe and Sound; and Marsha Zibalese-Crawford, Ph.D., associate professor at Temple University and consultant to Safe and Sound.  The paper was presented at Harvard University’s Urban Seminar Series on Institutionalizing Systems Change: Spotlight on the Sites, December 4-5, 2003.  To see a Word document version of the complete paper, click here.  For more information on this website on Philadelphia Safe and Sound, click here.  For more articles on this website on data driven processes, click here.