News
Quarterly Update – October to December 2021
Quarterly Update- October to December 2021 So much has happened since we really scaled this past summer. The seeds we
[vc_row][vc_column][thim-heading title=”ECONOMIC RECOVERY PART 3: PLANNING & PARTNERSHIPS – Coordinated Resiliency during COVID 19″ title_uppercase=”” clone_title=”” line=””][vc_column_text]During the response phase, communities are developing strategies to solve immediate impacts, but the recovery leadership will also be setting the foundation for long-term resiliency planning concurrently as illustrated in the disaster recovery continuum process. Many communities will already have plans in place including Comprehensive Economic Development Strategies and Hazard Mitigation Plans. However, these plans will need to be adjusted to the revised impacts by the COVID 19 disruption and particular attention will be required if the plans have not been updated in some time and/or are not coordinated to include economic resilience.
The US Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration (USEDA) funds community Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) to provide “effective economic development in America’s communities and regions through a locally-based, regionally-driven economic development planning process.”[1] USEDA CEDS’ guidelines are recognized as the standards for traditional economic development plans as they encourage cross-sector engagement and analysis. USEDA now advises that CEDS incorporate economic resilience which USEDA defines: “Economic resilience limit its focus on the ability to quickly recover from a disruption. However, in the context of economic development, economic resilience becomes inclusive of three primary attributes: the ability to recover quickly from a shock, the ability to withstand a shock, and the ability to avoid the shock altogether. Establishing economic resilience in a local or regional economy requires the ability to anticipate risk, evaluate how that risk can impact key economic assets, and build a responsive capacity.”[2]
Community resilience results from integrating hazard mitigation with other local planning processes that help guide community development. According to FEMA, “Communities can build a stronger capacity for mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery by building on the public, private, and non-profit institutions that enable day-to-day activities to run well. Integration can also lead to efficiencies and reduced costs as planning efforts and hazard mitigation activities are combined, productivity is optimized, and tasks and responsibilities are shared.”[3]
Aligning hazard mitigation plans with economic development and recovery plans is key, but should be expanded to include a dialogue regarding alignment with interrelated strategic plans such as workforce development, land use, education, transportation, information technology, healthcare, etc. which have comprehensive plans. Many of these plans are federally funded and mandate plan alignment, the outcomes are even more significant during the recovery process.
The following is a fictional, but realistic, example to illustrate why coordinated efforts are necessary. In response to the impacts of a disruptive event, the state’s Department of Labor (DOL) and Workforce Investment Board (WIB) update their workforce plan and prioritizes coding and website development training programs dependent on federal funds. However, due to the sense of urgency of developing the plan, the focus on coding did not take into account that the state’s Department of Education (DOE) has an existing federally- funded coding program in place. The DOE has established relationships with local non-governmental organizations to supporting the execution of their coding program. Rather than “reinvent the wheel,” a stronger investment (grant) may be for the state to expand on the existing DOE coding program for more efficient use of resources. Further, a grant for the coding workforce program out of the plan for the US Department of Labor could be considered “double-dipping” since an existing coding program is funded by another federal agency. The Stafford Act (the foundation for all disaster supplemental funding) includes strict regulations and provides for federal oversight of grantmaking to ensure grantees are not duplicating funding efforts.
To further complicate matters in this fictional example, the workforce investment plan did not gather significant input from the private sector to determine the demand proposed workforce programs. The DOL was not aware that the state’s economic development strategy, due to the disruptive event, is now focused on attracting and retaining an industry that requires expertise in advanced manufacturing for medical equipment. This business attraction strategy was based on a federally-funded study that focused on private sector analysis. In this case, the economic development agency will be advocating for funds from the federal government to support that plan, but is reliant on a workforce that has the skills for that industry. The economic development agency was not aware that the department of labor was moving forward with workforce programs and did not include advanced manufacturing in their plan.[/vc_column_text][vc_single_image image=”7490″ img_size=”large” alignment=”center” onclick=”link_image”][vc_column_text]This fictional recovery example illustrates that the economic plan, education plan, and workforce plans, if coordinated and aligned, would provide improved leverage for philanthropic and federal funding, produce additional transparency and trust with the constituents and stakeholders, and create a more efficient and effective recovery process. A policy or strategy of one agency’s plan may not be the priority of another agency’s (or non-governmental organization, private sector stakeholders, community stakeholders). A policy could conflict or worse, jeopardize a high priority policy of others. A challenge of “silo-ed governance” is somewhat manageable in steady-state environments. Due to the sense of urgency required and the reliance on federal and philanthropic funds, a coordinated, collaborative, and aligned planning is necessary to move recovery forward and not remain stagnant.
Plan alignment outcomes are not specific to economic development and recovery and apply to other sectors as well including, but not limited to: housing, infrastructure, community planning, health and social services, and cultural and natural resources (the sectors of FEMA’s National Disaster Recovery Framework). Coordinated and aligned plans provide improved efficiency, transparent engagement, and leverage for resources and funding during the ongoing recovery timeline.
Cross-cutting alignment can be addressed by creating a leadership position known as Chief Resiliency or Recovery Officer (CRO). According the Rockefeller Foundation’s 100 Resilient Cities, “ The CRO is an innovative position in city government that ideally reports directly to the city’s chief executive, and acts as the city’s point person for resilience building, helping to coordinate all of the city’s resilience efforts.”[4] Ideally, the CRO would report directly to the chief executive (governor, CEO, mayor, etc.) and convene a Recovery/Resiliency Task Force and/or Office. There is no reason to “reinvent the wheel.” Communities should adapt organizational structures such as FEMA’s National Disaster Recovery Framework when developing a Recovery Task Force or Office. Once key stakeholders have been identified for the Task Force, the CRO is in a better position to determine if there are cross-cutting issues, drill down to the vulnerabilities of each sector and prioritize projects for funding, and determine if there are conflicts.
In addition to members of the Recovery/Resiliency Task Force or Office and the Chief Recovery/Resiliency Officer, there should be a centralized coordinator and staff responsible for the management and oversight of the recovery funding. This will build capacity for grants management and writing, ensure compliance and transparency with grants, and improve credibility with stakeholders. The COVID 19 recovery is already the largest economic stimulus package in US history with the first bill $2 trillion passed into law March 27, 2020 (ARRA in 2009 stimulus act was $831 billion) and additional funding bills to be signed into law. A coordination team that can ensure the funding is “put out on the street” quickly, but responsibly, will be a major asset to the recovery effort. Federal funding is complex, particularly with recovery supplemental funds and resources. The coordinator and team should have awareness of:
Including subject matter experts with this experience is particularly significant for plan alignment and impacts the economic recovery coordination for the sectors. Each sector will have steering committees with stakeholders from specific non-governmental organizations and government agencies. The Economic Sector would ideally align with the US Department of Commerce Economic Development Administration’s guidelines for Comprehensive Economic Development Strategies. The Economic Sector will have representatives from state agencies, local government, federal delegations, chambers of commerce, small business organizations, private sector, industry organizations, and the like. The steering committee will work directly with the organization tasked with the responsibility for managing economic recovery as well as the Resiliency/Recovery Task Force or Office. Other sectors will include related and sometimes overlapping stakeholders. For example, philanthropic and volunteer organizations generally fall under the Community Planning sector. While this overlap supports coordination, it is necessary for the sectors to have consistent messaging, information-sharing, and meetings to avoid committee member burnout which inevitably reduces engagement. This is why a CRO and coordinators are so vital to managing the recovery.
Regional multi-state approaches to economic recovery collaboration and coordination are unprecedented and are already underway with the first coordinated strategy focusing on reopening phasing timelines. “The governors from New Jersey, Connecticut, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Massachusetts and Rhode Island said they would begin to draw up a plan for when to reopen businesses and schools, and how quickly to allow people to return to work safely, although the timeline for such a plan remained unclear…. The joint effort was the first of two announced on Monday: The governors of California, Oregon and Washington, three Western states that were among those that felt the impact of the virus before it spread rapidly in the Northeast, announced a similar pact.”[5] Regional multi-state recovery planning and coordination will continue after the “reopening strategy” is designed and implemented. Regional oversight of economic and health shifts will also continue as the COVID 19 disruption may show signs of improvement, and then regression. Regional coordination is key, and resources can be leveraged with a regional approach. However, state and community leadership should not lose site of their local challenges and needs and ensure those needs and available resources are being addressed by the community and state resiliency task forces/offices and steering committees.
Economic resilience, discussed as a major component of Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy and Hazard Mitigation Plans, is an ecosystem’s ability to recover from economic shocks. The COVID 19 economic recovery will illustrate a community’s resilient, collaborative, and innovative ability to adapt to “a new normal” rather than simply bounce back will be crucial in this particular economic recovery.
[1] Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) Content Guidelines: Recommendations for Creating an Impactful CEDS, p. 6
[2] Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS) Content Guidelines: Recommendations for Creating an Impactful CEDS, p. 1
[3]Integrating Hazard Mitigation Into Local Planning Case Studies and Tools for Community Officials March 1, 2013, p. 74
[4] What a Chief Resilience Officer Does, by Michael Berkowitz, March 18, 2015.
[5] Worst Is Over,’ Cuomo Says as States Snub Trump on Restarting Economy, The New York Times, April 13, 2020.[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
Quarterly Update- October to December 2021 So much has happened since we really scaled this past summer. The seeds we
Plant the Seeds by Kirsten McGregor, Principal, Sagax Associates We’ve all heard that you need to plant the seeds,
Sagax Associates, LLC is an economic recovery and development consulting firm supporting governments, nonprofit organizations, public-private partnerships, and businesses responding to and preparing for economic disruptions and disasters.
Get the latest Sagax Associates news delivered to your inbox.