Engaging the Community in Priority Setting
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.
By Tim Dodd
November 13, 2021
Community input is critical to informing and setting priorities as part of a city’s strategic plan. In 2017, the City of Santa Monica established the Framework for a Sustainability City of Wellbeing (“The Framework”) as its strategic plan. After the document was established based on past community feedback and City Council engagement, staff sought to engage the community in setting priorities within the structure of The Framework.
Organized into seven outcome areas (Safety; Community; Economic Opportunity; Governance; Health; Learning; and Place and Planet) , the Framework also included sub-outcomes, which provided more details to the work of an outcome area:
Outcome area: Health
Sub-Outcomes: Environmental Health
Physical Health
Mental Health
Additionally, outcome areas included:
- Outcome metrics: Designed to track long-range progress in each area. Data towards these metrics were published quarterly on the city’s dashboard.
- Key investment one-time project investments that were part of operating budgets as well as capital funding; and
- Programs: The work of each department was organized into programs, which then mapped back to departments. All work of the city fell into a program, and each program had a output metric which tracked the efficiency and effectiveness of the program as part of the budget process.
After the Framework was in place for about a year and a half, staff designed a process to engage the community in setting priorities. Staff decided to request that priorities be set at the sub-outcome level, as outcomes were broad categories and outcome metrics were tied to the achievement of specific sub-outcomes. The priority setting process started in the late fall of 2018, with a goal of setting priorities as part of the budget which would go into effect on July 1, 2019. The process started with a community survey, and culminated with a City Council retreat during which time priorities were identified.
A postcard was mailed to every address in the city inviting residents, property/business owners and businesses to weigh in on their priorities. The city utilized a survey platform which provided community members with a drop down of all of the sub-outcomes in the plan, as well as an opportunity to provide written comments about priorities.
Engagement opportunities varied in an attempt to provide a variety of settings that were designed to engage people with a variety of different schedules. These included:
- Coffee with the City Manager: Over 40 members of the community attended informal conversations with the City Manager, which were held at his office as well as at local coffee shops in the city.
- Staff outreach: A facilitated discussion with members of the city’s leadership team (managers and above), as well as a survey sent to all city employees.
- Pop up events: City Councilors and members of the staff held several pop up events to engage community members. These were held at the farmer’s market, library and business parks.
- Boards and commissions: Staff presented on the Framework to over 20 boards and commissions. In addition to providing input during these meetings, five also sent letters to City Council detailing their priorities.
All told, more than 3,500 members of the community (including residents, business owners and property owners) and staff participated in the survey or other events. After the receipt and analysis of this input, the City Council held an all-day retreat in January. In the morning, Council members heard reports on the survey, communication outreach and survey results. This was followed by facilitated roundtable discussions during which members of the public could participate. A City Councilor, staff member, and department head sat at each table to assist in facilitation. At the end of the retreat, City Councilors voted to set priorities, based on feedback received.
The priorities set by Council became known as Framework Priorities and included a detailed planning process, enhanced monitoring and reporting and priority in funding through the city’s enhancement process:
- Monitoring: Each month, staff convened SaMostat meetings, our version of CitiStat, to review progress in each of the six Framework Priorities.
- Planning: A short “plug in plan” was written for each of the priorities and included as part of the city’s strategic plan/budget. These plug in plans included an overview of each priority, as well as key projects (including capital projects) and programs (along with their performance metrics), as well as an estimate of what we spent on each Framework Priority.
- Funding: As part of the budget process, enhancement requests were given priority if they mapped to Framework Priorities.
This process allowed the city to set priorities which were informed by a comprehensive community engagement process.
Author: Tim Dodd is the Chief Performance Officer for the City of Santa Monica, CA, previously serving as the Performance Manager for the City of Baltimore and Director of Performance Management for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. [email protected]
(1 votes, average: 4.00 out of 5)
Loading...
Engaging the Community in Priority Setting
The views expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of ASPA as an organization.
By Tim Dodd
November 13, 2021
Community input is critical to informing and setting priorities as part of a city’s strategic plan. In 2017, the City of Santa Monica established the Framework for a Sustainability City of Wellbeing (“The Framework”) as its strategic plan. After the document was established based on past community feedback and City Council engagement, staff sought to engage the community in setting priorities within the structure of The Framework.
Organized into seven outcome areas (Safety; Community; Economic Opportunity; Governance; Health; Learning; and Place and Planet) , the Framework also included sub-outcomes, which provided more details to the work of an outcome area:
Outcome area: Health
Sub-Outcomes: Environmental Health
Physical Health
Mental Health
Additionally, outcome areas included:
After the Framework was in place for about a year and a half, staff designed a process to engage the community in setting priorities. Staff decided to request that priorities be set at the sub-outcome level, as outcomes were broad categories and outcome metrics were tied to the achievement of specific sub-outcomes. The priority setting process started in the late fall of 2018, with a goal of setting priorities as part of the budget which would go into effect on July 1, 2019. The process started with a community survey, and culminated with a City Council retreat during which time priorities were identified.
A postcard was mailed to every address in the city inviting residents, property/business owners and businesses to weigh in on their priorities. The city utilized a survey platform which provided community members with a drop down of all of the sub-outcomes in the plan, as well as an opportunity to provide written comments about priorities.
Engagement opportunities varied in an attempt to provide a variety of settings that were designed to engage people with a variety of different schedules. These included:
All told, more than 3,500 members of the community (including residents, business owners and property owners) and staff participated in the survey or other events. After the receipt and analysis of this input, the City Council held an all-day retreat in January. In the morning, Council members heard reports on the survey, communication outreach and survey results. This was followed by facilitated roundtable discussions during which members of the public could participate. A City Councilor, staff member, and department head sat at each table to assist in facilitation. At the end of the retreat, City Councilors voted to set priorities, based on feedback received.
The priorities set by Council became known as Framework Priorities and included a detailed planning process, enhanced monitoring and reporting and priority in funding through the city’s enhancement process:
This process allowed the city to set priorities which were informed by a comprehensive community engagement process.
Author: Tim Dodd is the Chief Performance Officer for the City of Santa Monica, CA, previously serving as the Performance Manager for the City of Baltimore and Director of Performance Management for the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. [email protected]
Follow Us!