2000115-Strengthening-Communities-with-Neighborhood-Data

The Potential and the Way Forward 395
We also see a positive sign in the increasing pressure from funders and
the public at large for data-driven decisionmaking by all the institutions
involved in local governance. In the 1990s, government and civic leaders
had little direct exposure to how data might influence collective behavior
locally. Since then, as discussed in chapter 4, there have been more examples
of the effective use of data in performance management. We think
it is the coupling of these examples (showing that it is possible to make
a difference) with the interest in making real progress in societal issues
that have fueled increased pressure for accountability. This pressure is
clearly being applied to a broad spectrum of nonprofits [with calls for
transformations in culture; see Morino (2011)] as well as to government
agencies. And although the focus now is on performance management,
we think it will come to be understood that more effective data-driven
situation analysis and policy analysis and planning are as important to
outcomes as the persistent tracking of results.
We also recognize the major advances in policy applications and
methodology are well beyond what might have been expected in the
early 1990s. It is in these areas, however, that we believe that the most
additional progress needs to be made. It is not assured that progress in
this field will be as rapid as it could or should be, considering the urgency
of the issues at hand. Major barriers remain to be overcome.
First, although no authoritative inventory of status in communities
across the nation exists, conversations with a sizable number of local
contacts convince us that civic leaders in many places are not yet wellinformed
about the benefits of an enriched local data environment. Even
though interest is growing, NNIP partner institutions operate in only
three dozen US metropolitan centers, a small fraction of the total. 1 The
cities most well-known for innovative open data policies and practices
are the largest cities. Relevant work is being done in other places, but the
fragmentary information we have obtained suggests that although more
local institutions are working with data, this work often lacks coherence
and momentum.
Second, even in the places that have seen the most promising work
with cross-sector administrative and geographic data, the future is not
clear. It is not clear that the most advanced practices (e.g., extensive
property data systems and integrated data systems with linked information
on individuals and families) will be sustainable over the long
run. They involve difficult technical work in a real and risky political
environment. We cannot be certain they will be brought to scale, sustained,