The Responsive City: Engaging Communities Through Data-Smart Governance

Copyright © 2014 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved.

Published by Jossey-Bass

A Wiley Brand

One Montgomery Street, Suite 1200, San Francisco, CA 94104-4594\hb www.josseybass.com

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, scanning, or otherwise, except as permitted under Section 107 or 108 of the 1976 United States Copyright Act, without either the prior written permission of the publisher, or authorization through payment of the appropriate per-copy fee to the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc., 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923, 978-750-8400, fax 978-646-8600, or on the Web at www.copyright.com. Requests to the publisher for permission should be addressed to the Permissions Department, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 111 River Street, Hoboken, NJ 07030, 201-748-6011, fax 201-748-6008, or online at www.wiley.com/go/permissions.

Limit of Liability/Disclaimer of Warranty: While the publisher and author have used their best efforts in preparing this book, they make no representations or warranties with respect to the accuracy or completeness of the contents of this book and specifically disclaim any implied warranties of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. No warranty may be created or extended by sales representatives or written sales materials. The advice and strategies contained herein may not be suitable for your situation. You should consult with a professional where appropriate. Neither the publisher nor author shall be liable for any loss of profit or any other commercial damages, including but not limited to special, incidental, consequential, or other damages. Readers should be aware that Internet Web sites offered as citations and/or sources for further information may have changed or disappeared between the time this was written and when it is read.

Jossey-Bass books and products are available through most bookstores. To contact Jossey-Bass directly call our Customer Care Department within the U.S. at 800-956-7739, outside the U.S. at 317-572-3986, or fax 317-572-4002.

Wiley publishes in a variety of print and electronic formats and by print-on-demand. Some material included with standard print versions of this book may not be included in e-books or in print-on-demand. If this book refers to media such as a CD or DVD that is not included in the version you purchased, you may download this material at http://booksupport.wiley.com. For more information about Wiley products, visit www.wiley.com.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data

Goldsmith, Stephen, 1946-

The responsive city : engaging communities through data-smart governance / Stephen Goldsmith and Susan Crawford.

pages com

Includes bibliographical references and index.

ISBN 978-1-118-91090-0 (hardback); ISBN 978-1-118-91121-1 (pdf); ISBN 978-1-118-91093-1 (epub)

1. Internet in public administration—United States. 2. Public-private sector cooperation—United States. 3. Cities and town—United States. 4. Digital media—United States I. Crawford, Susan, 1963-II. Title.

JK468.A8G63 2014

352.3'821602854678—dc23

2014019126

Foreword

There is no better way to improve the lives of billions of people around the world than to improve the way cities work. For the first time in human history, the majority of the world's people live in cities. By 2050, 75 percent will. As more and more people move to cities, more and more of the world's challenges—and solutions—will be concentrated there, too.

The rise of cities coincides with a technological revolution that is empowering local leaders to find innovative new ways to better serve the public. At the center of that revolution is our growing ability to use data to improve the services that government provides. Governments have long been in the business of keeping records, and increasingly they are using those records—billions of data points—to improve everything from emergency response to education to transportation.

I have a rule of thumb: if you can't measure it, you can't manage it. And I brought that approach with me from the private sector to New York's city hall. Our administration looked for ways to use data—and to collect more data—to help us better serve New Yorkers.

In 2003, we launched 311, a nonemergency government information and services hotline available to New Yorkers twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Not only did 311 make it easier for New Yorkers to get information from the city—and to file complaints—it also gave city government more information on what New Yorkers were concerned about and helped us keep track of how well we were doing at addressing those concerns.

We also created data systems to measure agency performance and hold ourselves accountable for results. And we took a page from the private sector and brought predictive analytics to local government, using city data to help foresee the challenges of the future—and took action to address them today.

Harnessing and understanding data helped us decide how to allocate resources more efficiently and effectively, which allowed us to improve the delivery of services—from protecting children and fighting crime to repairing potholes and inspecting buildings—while also saving taxpayer money.

Cities and mayors everywhere are recognizing the powerful role data can play in bringing more transparency, accountability, and efficiency to government—and Bloomberg Philanthropies is helping to support this work. For instance, in 2013 the city of Chicago was one of five winners of the Mayors Challenge, an ideas competition for cities, for its groundbreaking idea to use data to help city government prevent problems before they develop. Chicago is quickly setting a new standard, which other cities will surely follow.

Across so much of the work we do with cities—from our innovation delivery program helping New Orleans reduce gun violence to our work with cities around the world to reduce carbon emissions—we see data enabling new and creative approaches. Of course, driving change in cities requires more than just data. It also requires strong managers and creative problem solvers—and Stephen Goldsmith is both. I was lucky to have him join me at city hall as a deputy mayor during my third term in office, and he helped us take our efforts to improve city services to new levels.

In the chapters that follow, Goldsmith and his talented coauthor, Susan Crawford, demonstrate how local leaders are changing the way governments work. Through case studies from New York City, Boston, and Chicago, they explain how data mining, empowered public servants, mobile apps, wireless devices, technically supported citizens, and social media can produce a dramatically more responsive city. And they show how these tools can be used by both elected and community leaders to drive change and improve a neighborhood's quality of life.

Cities will increasingly define the future, in America and around the world. And cities that capitalize on the technology revolution will lead the way. This book helps point the way forward.

June 2014

Michael Bloomberg

Former mayor of New York City

Introduction

Urban government in the United States today is at a critical juncture. Never before over the last century has there been such a need to change the way city hall works. And never has there been such an opportunity to do it. The century-old framework of local government—centralized, compartmentalized bureaucracies that jealously guard information and adhere to strict work rules—is frustrating and disappointing its constituents, whose trust in government is at an all-time low. Residents in many cities despair of getting the services they need from city hall, especially in places where financial stresses are making governments even less responsive than in the past. Yet local government has the means to completely reverse this trend toward despair. That opportunity comes from digital technology: new ways of gathering, storing, and analyzing data; new modes of communication; and the new world of social networks. With these digital tools, citizens and their officials can revolutionize local government, making it more responsive, transparent, and cost-effective than it has ever been.

A confluence of technology advancements now promises broad and constructive change in local government, altering everything from the way workers perform basic functions to the way citizens engage with government. Social media and data science are spurring a sense of renewed civic engagement, which will cause broad changes in government.

This book is about that revolution and the people who are leading it. Specifically, it is about the insights and skills they are applying to digital governance and the institutional obstacles that they have overcome. In the chapters that follow, you will see precisely how data-smart, responsive governance has paid off in a variety of cities, and you will see how the pioneers whose stories we present achieved that payoff.

One of us (Goldsmith) has worked for decades in and for cities—as a community volunteer, prosecutor, mayor, deputy mayor, and federal official involved with service to cities. The other (Crawford) has been involved in technology policy as a Washington lawyer, White House advisor, and law professor. In our careers, we have watched American cities face countless challenges, from riots to staff layoffs to bankruptcy. We have also seen cities experience a renaissance in safety, economic growth, and livability. Consistently, though, through good times and bad, there has been a steady rise in residents' complaints about uncaring bureaucrats and unresponsive city halls.

We know that cities can do better. We both teach graduate students at Harvard University who have grown up in the digital era: Goldsmith as the director of the Innovations in Government program at Harvard Kennedy School and Crawford as a codirector of Harvard's Berkman Center for Internet and Society. We and our students see the great opportunities digital technology offers local government. Harvard's Data-Smart City Solutions initiative, funded by grants from Bloomberg Philanthropies, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, and the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, features the accomplishments of public and civic leaders who use data to produce effective governance. We hope, through this book and our ongoing work, to help those digital possibilities become reality.

Though we discuss technology throughout this book, technology is not our main subject. Rather, this is a book about the leaders—public, nonprofit, and community—who have forced changes in the status quo by capitalizing on the power of the new tools.

We know the digital age that has so changed every aspect of life can also fundamentally improve local government and raise the civic spirit of our people and the officials who serve them. But experience has shown us that this great advance cannot begin without major changes in governance: bureaucratic structures must be upgraded to accommodate the new technologies and their uses. As the digital city hall replaces one based on paper, cities will have to jettison the structures of governance that have served them for more than a hundred years.

In the past century, when the flow of information was slower and more limited, the best government could do to keep control and ensure quality was to define rules and enforce adherence to them. Today, with data flowing freely among employees and citizens, that rule-bound approach is an obstacle to effective action. City employees can act more quickly and creatively to resolve issues when their jobs are defined as problem solving rather than rule following. Instead of filing reports and waiting for overburdened supervisors to respond, workers can make their own decisions, aided by curated and organized data, and supported often by real-time advice from managers. The result is a smarter and nimbler government that better employs its resources and attention.

Some of the components of city hall's digital revolution are familiar from daily life. There are smartphones and tablets, which move data from file cabinets in city hall to workers out in the field—and in turn let those workers send back new information as soon as they have it. Apps enabled by global positioning systems (GPS) can reveal where employees are performing their work and how long discrete tasks take. That makes it possible to detect unusually good (or unusually bad) performance by an employee and send a notice to a supervisor in real time. Other key digital tools come from private enterprise: methods for storing, organizing, visualizing, and curating data to generate reliable insights and fast responses. These tools allow community groups and government officials alike to make discoveries about their neighborhoods that would elude even the sharpest analysis from the most highly trained specialist.

These discoveries are possible because the digital revolution encompasses more than how data is handled. It's also a radical expansion of the sources of information. To data that comes from government's usual methods—potholes reported, streets plowed, hours spent per complaint—residents themselves can now add massive amounts of information that governments could not, or would not, collect in earlier times. Anonymized data from E-ZPass readers or sensors in the street can reveal patterns in traffic or in the use of city resources. Twitter, Facebook, and other social media create a 24/7 window into what people are noticing, celebrating, or decrying. This combination of self-generated big data about people's behavior and their own contributions to social media is a rich vein of information about almost any problem a city government confronts. Of course, public servants themselves also generate such data, which they can now share easily with one another and with nonprofit organizations, community groups, media, and private companies. Only a decade ago, the 311 call center, that central always-on clearinghouse where citizens can phone in their requests for service and information, represented a major advance over the limitations of a fragmented government bureaucracy. Today the 311 center looks obsolete. The twenty-first century's equivalent of 311 won't be confined to phones or to service requests and questions. Instead, it will be a platform for citizens to engage city hall, and each other, through text, voice, social media, and other apps.

This book focuses on the emerging cadre of officials and civic activists who are using the new data tools to transform city government. We tell their stories, describing the transformations they have already managed to achieve. We also highlight the drivers of that transformation—organizational change to remove hierarchies and bureaucracies; the sharing of data in forms that make it understandable and useful to people in government and outside it; and, perhaps most important, leadership.

Leadership is essential because the new type of public servant we describe must break down three barriers to progress that business-as-usual bureaucratic government imposes. First, there is a narrow and technical definition of what constitutes good work by government employees; second, the vertical silos of the usual city government's organization block the free flows of ideas and information, making it ill suited to problems that don't fit into the verticals; and, third, the bureaucracy orients itself to performing and measuring activities (potholes filled, cases processed) rather than solutions to problems. To benefit from digital technology, in other words, government must get out of its own way. That requires that it set aside some of the structures, traditions, and habits that have accumulated over the past 125 years.

Reformers brought about those structures in response to the chaotic free-for-all that characterized city government in the nineteenth century. Eager to rid themselves of corruption, incompetence, and unreliability in city hall, Progressive reformers in the late 1800s enshrined rationality, professional standards, and the division of labor. Government was centralized and organized into separate functional areas (firefighters for fires, public health nurses for epidemics, trash collectors for sanitation). Workers were chosen for meeting clear standards rather than for their political connections, and they were given well-defined tasks and assessed on their performance. Managers told employees what to do; employees reported back to managers in a clear chain of command.

Clearly defined tasks were a crucial feature of the reforms of the nineteenth-century Progressives. And so government was focused on producing activities rather than solutions. Officials measured how many homeless beds, how much health care, how many potholes filled rather than actual reductions in homelessness, improvements in health and education, and the overall smoothness of the streets. Government was securely protected against any abuse of discretion through an orientation toward compliance with regulations, not toward results. While serving as chairman of the board of the Corporation for National and Community Service (the federal parent of AmericaCorps VISTA, Senior Corps, and many faith initiatives) one of us (Goldsmith) saw the unfortunate consequences of this orientation. If a nonprofit produced terrific results but did not keep its books correctly, it was harshly penalized and considered a failure. If an organization accomplished nothing but did so with impeccable bookkeeping, the corporation's inspectors judged it successful.

And so we arrive at the crisis that city government faces today. Structures that produced progressive government in 1890 ensure regressive results in 2014. Public officials work in narrow spaces confined by civil service laws, labor contracts, job classifications, court cases, and risk-averse lawyers. Layers of bureaucracy, inflexible rule applications, redundant multiple agency involvement in a single transaction, and tone deafness to citizens became the hallmarks of government as progressive government overgrew itself. Again and again, local and state officials, hemmed in by federal mandates, miss commonsense breakthroughs because of the way they are organized and regulated. Confined to verticals, with a different agency responsible for each program, public servants strain to engage with constituents who, like all other people, live their lives horizontally—in neighborhoods and families, not within the purview of the sanitation department or the housing agency.

Not only did complexity and rule-driven accountability affect the way we manufactured government; it also affected the way government regulated. As the twentieth century advanced, this system broke down. Problems spread across the neat organizational lines that divided building inspection from health from fire. Citizens who were used to smartphone apps lost their patience when told they had to wait for documents to be found in file cabinets and put in the mail. Local governments addressed risk in a complex society by imposing more regulations. When serious breakdowns occurred, watchdogs and monitoring procedures also were piled on. To deal with problems that didn't fit neatly into departmental divisions, working groups were fastened onto the older bureaucratic structures. Meanwhile, even while stretching to do its old job, local government added new responsibilities to its portfolio. The federal government led this charge with a vast array of regulations and programs it imposed on cities and states. Courts also handed down mandates. City hall, once concerned with fires, crimes, sanitation, and other basic services, now expands its reach from prenatal to preschool through to senior services and scores of services in between. The expansion of services coupled with the increasing complexity of modern life made government workers' jobs more difficult to break down into clear, simple, easily supervised tasks.

We need a postprogressive response by government, and this century's digital tools are perfectly equipped to sweep these frustrations away.¹ Because they can collect, analyze, and share information so efficiently, these technologies push both government and its constituents to focus on results rather than compliance. This frees up the talents and judgment of government workers, letting them spend more time solving problems and less time proving they adhered to rigid standards. Moreover, that ability to share data undermines the vertical organization of traditional government, encouraging horizontal exchanges among departments (and, of course, among community groups and other stakeholders outside city hall). This can open up the machinery of government to its people, letting them collaborate to create solutions coproduced by public servants and their constituents. In the place of bureaucratic and centralized structures that frustrate citizens and officials alike, information technology can deliver government whenever and however citizens need it. The result is a smarter and nimbler government that better deploys its resources and attention.

Refreshingly, we also see that a citizen's judgment concerning the trustworthiness of the local government can be facilitated by public transparency and social media use, resulting in more participation in solving the community's problems. This social-media-engendered trust can produce an enhanced role in areas from policy to development to planning. We can see from international research work that although social media cannot promise to unite both institutions and citizens one hundred percent, to a certain extent, it can facilitate effectiveness in two important perspectives: (1) build social capital via online civic engagement and (2) instill a sense of confidence and trust in the government and justice system.²

In this book, we present stories of digital efforts designed to accomplish just this kind of trust building. More important, we describe the successful struggles of people who managed to overcome resistance to change.

Saving Children with Tablets

For twenty years Jim Payne presided over Juvenile Court in Marion County, Indiana. Each year he and his magistrates adjudicated over twelve thousand delinquency cases that had been investigated by police officers assigned to their department's juvenile branch, prepared for court and sentencing by the juvenile probation department, and filed by a separate prosecutor's office. Payne's courts also handled matters involving more than one thousand neglected and abused children annually, whose cases were investigated by workers from the county welfare department. Some of the neglect cases also involved school social workers who had identified young children who had frequently missed school. That adds up to five different departments addressing the same problem but never sharing information.