2000115-Strengthening-Communities-with-Neighborhood-Data

Institutional Context 23
they want to update a previous study of an issue. Building an adequate
system necessarily entails some cost, but it is almost sure to represent
a net savings compared with the resources so many local groups now
spend trying to collect data with such unsatisfying results. Leaders,
including local philanthropies, see the cost-effectiveness of investment
in local professionals who understand their environment and will be
there over time to interpret and advise people who live in their cities.
The remainder of this section explains more about institutions that have
taken on this local data intermediary role and discusses their three basic
functions in more detail.
Types of Institutions Serving as Local Data Intermediaries
As the logic of having a local data intermediary becomes understood in a
city, NNIP experience suggests that one or a small number of local entities
(e.g., university institutes or nonprofits with data expertise) commit
to developing the capacity to perform this work. Civic leaders (i.e., governing
coalitions) mobilize the core funding for local data intermediaries
and agree on the local institutions to serve in that role. Two features
of these selections are noteworthy.
First, most NNIP partners are outside of government. One might
think a municipal agency (probably the city planning department)
would be selected for this work, but that has not happened so far in
NNIP experience. Two reasons explain the benefits of having a nongovernmental
organization function as the data intermediary. Some city
charters do not permit their agencies to perform the full range of data
intermediary functions. In addition, government agencies are seen as
more likely to be responsive to current elected officials than to broader
and longer-term communitywide interests. Nongovernmental organizations
are less likely to be “owned” by the current mayor or any political
faction, either in perception or reality. This neutral reputation of nongovernmental
groups enables them to more easily obtain data from, and
develop trusted working relationships with, a wide variety of data providers
and users in and outside of government. Such relationships can
last over the long term.
The second feature of interest is the variety of institutional types
that has been selected. NNIP experience suggests that basic institutional
type is less important in the selection than other features. The
local organization must have strong leadership and technical skills. It