2000115-Strengthening-Communities-with-Neighborhood-Data

Recommendations

Info

Progress in Data and Technology 109 7. For additional information, see https://webfiles.uci.edu/kday/public/index.html. 8. For guidance on conducting community surveys, see Chris Hampton and Marcelo Vilela’s “Conducting Surveys” at The Community Toolbox (http://ctb.ku.edu/en/tablecon tents/sub_section_main_1048.aspx). Comey et al. (2013) also provides an overview of survey data collection and criteria for selecting a reputable survey research firm and issues to consider when designing and conducting a neighborhood or school climate survey. 9. To learn more about the research findings from the Project on Human Development in Chicago Neighborhoods, see Great American City: Chicago and the Enduring Neighborhood Effect by Robert J. Sampson (2012). 10. For an example of research using the L.A. Fans survey, see Clark (2012). 11. For additional information, see The Reinvestment Fund, “Limited Supermarket Access (LSA) Analysis Mapping Tool,” at http://www.trfund.com/TRF-LSA-widget.html. 12. See Tauberer (2012) for an in-depth history of open data. 13. For additional information, see Philip Ashlock’s blog post, “International Coordination for Local Collaboration” (March 5, 2010), at http://open311.org/blog/. 14. For additional information, see Google Developers at https://developers. google.com/transit/gtfs/. 15. For additional information, see http://housefacts.me/. 16. One of the hosting institutions, the Advanced Policy Institute at the University of California, Los Angeles, joined NNIP in 2002. The institute was reorganized as UCLA’s Center for Neighborhood Knowledge and closed in 2009. Another host, the Center for Urban and Regional Affairs at the University of Minnesota, joined NNIP in 2007. A description of the Minnesota Neighborhood Information System is included in the chapter 2 essay by Wascalus and Matson. 17. The Chicago Neighborhood Early Warning System became Chicago’s Community Information Technology and Neighborhood Early Warning System at. http:// www.newschicago.org/about.php, but the data have not being updated since 2003 due to funding. 18. These cities include Chicago (two organizations), Indianapolis, Los Angeles, Minneapolis, New Orleans, and New York. 19. After the closing of the Fannie Mae Foundation, DataPlace was spun off to an independent nonprofit in 2007, which subsequently closed in 2009. The Urban Institute is no longer associated with the site. 20. For additional information, see http://www.policymap.org. 21. For a mid-decade review of the data delivery systems in Milwaukee, New Orleans, Providence, and Los Angeles, see Treuhaft et al. (2007). 22. See the NNIP Website Scan at http://www.neighborhoodindicators.org/library/ catalog/nnip-web-site-scan-july-2014 (2014) for specific examples. 23. For more information, see the Open Indicators Consortium website at http:// www.openindicators.org/portal. See also “Weave Beta 1.0 Announcement” at http://info. oicweave.org/projects/weave/wiki/Weave_Beta_10_Announcement. 24. The site was developed with the university’s experience with their well-regarded Integrated Public Use Microdata Series site, which focuses on distribution of microdata.
110 Strengthening Communities with Neighborhood Data For additional information about the National Historical Geographic Information System, see http://www.nhgis.org. 25. For additional information about the Open Government Platform, see http:// opengovplatform.org/. References Beaghen, Michael, Tucker McElroy, Lynn Weidman, Mark Asiala, and Alfredo Navarro. 2012. Interpretation and Use of American Community Survey Multiyear Estimates. Research Report Series (Statistics #2012-03). Washington, DC: US Census Bureau. Califano, Catherine, Kennen Gross, Lance Loethen, Scott Haag, and Ira Goldstein. 2011. Searching for Markets: The Geography of Inequitable Access to Healthy and Affordable Food in the United States. Washington, DC: US Department of the Treasury. Carr, L. J., S. I. Dunsiger, and B. H. Marcus. 2011. “Validation of Walk Score for Estimating Access to Walkable Amenities.” British Journal of Sports Medicine 45 (14): 1144–48. Center for Transit-Oriented Development and Center for Neighborhood Technology. 2006. The Affordability Index: A New Tool for Measuring the True Affordability of a Housing Choice. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. Chan, Sewin, Michael Gedal, Vicki Been, and Andrew F. Haughwout. 2011. The Role of Neighborhood Characteristics in Mortgage Default Risk: Evidence from New York City. NYU Law and Economics Research Paper No. 11-36. New York, New York: New York University. Chandler, Arnold, G. Thomas Kingsley, Josh Kirschenbaum, and Kathryn L. S. Pettit. 2006. The Potential of Parcel-Based GIS in Community Development and Urban Land Management. Boston, Massachusetts: Lincoln Institute of Land Policy. Clark, William A. V. 2012. “Moving and Staying in Los Angeles Neighborhoods: Money Matters but So Does Family Composition.” CityScape: A Journal of Policy Development and Research 14(3): 115–136 Comey, Jennifer, Peter A. Tatian, Lesley Freiman, Mary Kopczynski Winkler, Christopher Hayes, Kaitlin Franks, and Reed Jordan. 2013. Measuring Performance: A Guidance Document for Promise Neighborhoods on Collecting Data and Reporting Results. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Coulton, Claudia J. 1999a. Public Assistance Records: A Source for Neighborhood Indicators. National Neighborhood Indicators Partnership Report. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. ———. 1999b. Vital Records: A Source for Neighborhood Indicators. National Neighborhood Indicators Partnership Report. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Coulton, Claudia. 2008. Catalog of Administrative Data Sources for Neighborhood Indicators. Washington, DC: Urban Institute. Day, Kristen, Marlon Boarnet, Mariela Alfonzo, and Ann Forsyth. 2006. “The Irvine– Minnesota Inventory to Measure Built Environments: Development.” American Journal of Preventive Medicine 30 (2): 144–52. Detroit Blight Removal Task Force. 2014. Detroit Blight Removal Task Force Plan. Accessed July 6, 2014. http://report.timetoendblight.org/index.html
Page 1 and 2:
Efforts to address the problems of
Page 3 and 4:
ABOUT THE URBAN INSTITUTE The nonpr
Page 5 and 6:
iv 4 A 5 Using 6 Using 7 Advances C
Page 8 and 9:
Acknowledgments We would like first
Page 10 and 11:
1 Introduction to the Field The Inc
Page 12 and 13:
Introduction to the Field 3 into an
Page 14 and 15:
Introduction to the Field 5 to set
Page 16 and 17:
Introduction to the Field 7 in chap
Page 18 and 19:
Introduction to the Field 9 improve
Page 20:
Introduction to the Field 11 Streng
Page 23 and 24:
14 Strengthening Communities with N
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28:
Page 29 and 30:
Page 31 and 32:
Page 33 and 34:
Page 35 and 36:
Table 2.1. (Continued) City/Metro N
Page 37 and 38:
Page 39 and 40:
Page 41 and 42:
Page 43 and 44:
Page 45 and 46:
Page 47 and 48:
Page 49 and 50:
Page 51 and 52:
Page 53 and 54:
Page 55 and 56:
Page 57 and 58:
Page 59 and 60:
Page 61 and 62:
Page 63 and 64:
Page 66 and 67:
ESSAY From Tornadoes to Transit How
Page 68 and 69: Institutional Context 59 profession
Page 70 and 71: Institutional Context 61 graphic, h
Page 72 and 73: Institutional Context 63 department
Page 74 and 75: Institutional Context 65 This infor
Page 76 and 77: Institutional Context 67 By identif
Page 78 and 79: Institutional Context 69 embedded i
Page 80: Institutional Context 71 8. For mor
Page 83 and 84: 74 Strengthening Communities with N
Page 109 and 110: 100 Strengthening Communities with
Page 117: 108 Strengthening Communities with
Page 144 and 145: 4 A Framework for Indicators and De
Page 146 and 147: A Framework for Indicators and Deci
Page 158 and 159: 5 Using Data for Neighborhood Impro
Page 160 and 161: Using Data for Neighborhood Improve
Page 168 and 169:
Using Data for Neighborhood Improve
Page 170 and 171:
Page 172 and 173:
Page 174 and 175:
Page 176 and 177:
Page 178 and 179:
New Insights on Neighborhood Change
Page 180 and 181:
Page 182 and 183:
Page 184 and 185:
Page 186 and 187:
Page 188 and 189:
Page 190 and 191:
Page 192 and 193:
Page 194 and 195:
ESSAY Neighborhood Data and Locally
Page 196 and 197:
Page 198 and 199:
Page 200 and 201:
Page 202 and 203:
Page 204 and 205:
Page 206 and 207:
Page 208 and 209:
Page 210 and 211:
Page 212 and 213:
Page 214 and 215:
ESSAY Cutting through the Fog Helpi
Page 216 and 217:
Page 218 and 219:
Page 220 and 221:
Page 222 and 223:
Page 224 and 225:
Page 226 and 227:
Page 228 and 229:
6 Using Data for City and Regional
Page 230 and 231:
Using Data for City and Regional St
Page 232 and 233:
Page 234 and 235:
Page 236 and 237:
Page 238 and 239:
Page 240 and 241:
Page 242 and 243:
Page 244 and 245:
Page 246 and 247:
Page 248 and 249:
Page 250 and 251:
Page 252 and 253:
Page 254 and 255:
Page 256 and 257:
Page 258 and 259:
ESSAY Creating and Using Neighborho
Page 260 and 261:
The Regional Equity Atlas Using Dat
Page 262 and 263:
Page 264 and 265:
Page 266 and 267:
Page 268 and 269:
The Bond Measure Is Approved Using
Page 270 and 271:
Page 272 and 273:
Page 274 and 275:
ESSAY A Solvable Problem Hidden in
Page 276 and 277:
Page 278 and 279:
Page 280 and 281:
Page 282 and 283:
Page 284 and 285:
Page 286 and 287:
Page 288 and 289:
Page 290 and 291:
Page 292 and 293:
7 Advances in Analytic Methods for
Page 294 and 295:
Advances in Analytic Methods for Ne
Page 296 and 297:
Page 298 and 299:
Page 300 and 301:
Page 302 and 303:
Page 304 and 305:
Page 306 and 307:
Page 308 and 309:
Page 310 and 311:
Page 312 and 313:
Page 314 and 315:
Page 316 and 317:
Page 318 and 319:
Page 320 and 321:
Page 322 and 323:
Page 324 and 325:
Page 326 and 327:
ESSAY The Dynamic Neighborhood Taxo
Page 328 and 329:
Page 330 and 331:
Page 332 and 333:
Page 334 and 335:
Page 336 and 337:
Page 338 and 339:
Sample Output Advances in Analytic
Page 340 and 341:
Page 342 and 343:
Page 344 and 345:
Page 346 and 347:
Page 348:
Page 351 and 352:
342 Strengthening Communities with
Page 353 and 354:
Page 355 and 356:
Page 357 and 358:
Page 359 and 360:
Page 361 and 362:
Page 363 and 364:
Page 365 and 366:
Page 367 and 368:
Page 369 and 370:
Page 371 and 372:
Page 373 and 374:
Page 375 and 376:
Page 377 and 378:
Page 379 and 380:
Page 381 and 382:
Page 383 and 384:
Page 385 and 386:
Page 387 and 388:
Page 389 and 390:
Page 391 and 392:
Page 393 and 394:
Page 395 and 396:
Page 397 and 398:
Page 399 and 400:
Page 401 and 402:
Page 403 and 404:
Page 405 and 406:
Page 407 and 408:
Page 409 and 410:
Page 411 and 412:
Page 413 and 414:
Page 415 and 416:
Page 417 and 418:
Page 419 and 420:
Page 421 and 422:
412 About the Authors served as dir
Page 424 and 425:
About the Essayists Riccardo Bodini
Page 426 and 427:
About the Essayists 417 community a
Page 428:
About the Essayists 419 effects of
Page 431 and 432:
422 Index alternative scenarios, fo
Page 433 and 434:
424 Index Center on Urban Poverty a
Page 435 and 436:
426 Index Community Development Blo
Page 437 and 438:
428 Index data (continued) oversigh
Page 439 and 440:
430 Index early warning systems, no
Page 441 and 442:
432 Index funders, data-driven deci
Page 443 and 444:
434 Index homeless students, chroni
Page 445 and 446:
436 Index Koschinsky, Julia, 307, 3
Page 447 and 448:
438 Index Minneapolis Inspections o
Page 449 and 450:
440 Index Neighborhood Early Warnin
Page 451 and 452:
442 Index OnTheMap, 81, 104 open da
Page 453 and 454:
444 Index privacy concerns (continu
Page 455 and 456:
446 Index Sawicki, David, 10n.2 sca
Page 457 and 458:
448 Index strategic investment init
Page 459 and 460:
450 Index Twin Cities (Minnesota) d
show all

2000115-Strengthening-Communities-with-Neighborhood-Data

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?