Saint Paul ranks highly in many livability metrics, and low in a few others.
“Data presentation” ability isn’t a metric or a ranking – but it should be.
The city will improve our quality of life when information is created and
debated – and when decisions are made – using better data management practices.
The city recognizes the value of information as a public asset and to promote
civic engagement. In April 2016, Saint Paul established an Open Information
Program with a centralized website (https://information.stpaul.gov/) including
maps, datasets, charts, graphs and analytics.
We should applaud the city for showing us our data. But Saint Paul still has a
gap to close before achieving its goals for this program: to better allocate
resources, enhance coordination and collaboration among agencies, and make
data-driven decisions across all departments.
Here are some suggestions:
Promote the Open Information Program. It is hard to find out about this
program other than on the city website, and in an opinion piece on the Sunlight
Foundation website. This data is not for the masses; the charts on the site
have only been viewed 109 times (median) each. Supply and demand are a tango –
to get more users the city should promote the initiative more. But it is not
clear whether money was allocated in the 2017 budget to complete Phase II for
more support for this program, nor is it clear any money has ever been budgeted
to advertise the site.
Link to decisions. Graphs and information on the Open Information website are
powerful and help us see historical patterns and trends. However, to be more
functional the data should be “linked” to legislative and executive meetings
and actions. For example, if the city council passes a new zoning regulation,
then the data used to support the new law should be “backlinked” to all the
datasets in the Open Information site that the council used to arrive at their
conclusion. And vice versa. Rarely do citizens see the real-time connection
between data and policy, and doing so would make good government.
Use future-oriented data tools. Different chart types and filters on the site
are helpful for interrogating historical data. But for making future decisions
the city should master skills like sensitivity analysis, probability forecasts
and simulation, and risk identification and mitigation. It is common but
specious to extrapolate the future as a single point, linear prediction,
without documenting and understanding possible alternative outcomes including
unintended consequences. Duty-bound, private organizations protect their
obligations to stakeholders with these future-oriented analytical tools. The
city should too.
Poll us often. The Open Information site presents routine data collected by
city agencies. But it lacks any numerical responses from citizens. To get
feedback to government officials regarding local issues, there should be better
ways to ask, collect, analyze and summarize questions from the city to us
residents. Want to know what we think about the new recycling system? Put a
poll on the city website with links to all city- and party-related social media
sites. Polls can be done frequently and cheaply and effectively. The
traditional way of communicating to the city through a council member may have
passed, if this method was ever effective.
Go deeper into the city. There are currently very few charts on the Open
Information site. Sixteen charts relate to the Police Department, eight to
Parks and Recreation, and seven each to Budgets and Workforce Demographics.
There are no charts in the Census category, only one chart for Permits, and two
charts each for Buildings and Infrastructure. The site does not have a section
for city Commissions, Boards and Committees, and there is no District Council
data and information. To be more effective, the site should have data closer
to the everyday lives we live. Most residents are not data analysts and won’t
value city-wide patterns; the issues we tend to care about most are in our
wards and precincts.
Synthesize. In the interest of “transparency,” the Open Information site has
lots of data. But “big data” is often impenetrable and lacks context and
synthesis. Telling a story and establishing credibility are the two goals when
presenting data. Raw data – even patterns and trends – are not enough to tell
a story and create a credible action plan. The Open Information data, when
used un-biasedly and with better analytical tools, should tell the story of
where we’ve been as a city and where we need to go.
In summary, improvements to the Open Information site will only make our
community more livable.
“Data presentation” ability isn’t a metric or a ranking – but it should be.
The city will improve our quality of life when information is created and
debated – and when decisions are made – using better data management practices.
The city recognizes the value of information as a public asset and to promote
civic engagement. In April 2016, Saint Paul established an Open Information
Program with a centralized website (https://information.stpaul.gov/) including
maps, datasets, charts, graphs and analytics.
We should applaud the city for showing us our data. But Saint Paul still has a
gap to close before achieving its goals for this program: to better allocate
resources, enhance coordination and collaboration among agencies, and make
data-driven decisions across all departments.
Here are some suggestions:
Promote the Open Information Program. It is hard to find out about this
program other than on the city website, and in an opinion piece on the Sunlight
Foundation website. This data is not for the masses; the charts on the site
have only been viewed 109 times (median) each. Supply and demand are a tango –
to get more users the city should promote the initiative more. But it is not
clear whether money was allocated in the 2017 budget to complete Phase II for
more support for this program, nor is it clear any money has ever been budgeted
to advertise the site.
Link to decisions. Graphs and information on the Open Information website are
powerful and help us see historical patterns and trends. However, to be more
functional the data should be “linked” to legislative and executive meetings
and actions. For example, if the city council passes a new zoning regulation,
then the data used to support the new law should be “backlinked” to all the
datasets in the Open Information site that the council used to arrive at their
conclusion. And vice versa. Rarely do citizens see the real-time connection
between data and policy, and doing so would make good government.
Use future-oriented data tools. Different chart types and filters on the site
are helpful for interrogating historical data. But for making future decisions
the city should master skills like sensitivity analysis, probability forecasts
and simulation, and risk identification and mitigation. It is common but
specious to extrapolate the future as a single point, linear prediction,
without documenting and understanding possible alternative outcomes including
unintended consequences. Duty-bound, private organizations protect their
obligations to stakeholders with these future-oriented analytical tools. The
city should too.
Poll us often. The Open Information site presents routine data collected by
city agencies. But it lacks any numerical responses from citizens. To get
feedback to government officials regarding local issues, there should be better
ways to ask, collect, analyze and summarize questions from the city to us
residents. Want to know what we think about the new recycling system? Put a
poll on the city website with links to all city- and party-related social media
sites. Polls can be done frequently and cheaply and effectively. The
traditional way of communicating to the city through a council member may have
passed, if this method was ever effective.
Go deeper into the city. There are currently very few charts on the Open
Information site. Sixteen charts relate to the Police Department, eight to
Parks and Recreation, and seven each to Budgets and Workforce Demographics.
There are no charts in the Census category, only one chart for Permits, and two
charts each for Buildings and Infrastructure. The site does not have a section
for city Commissions, Boards and Committees, and there is no District Council
data and information. To be more effective, the site should have data closer
to the everyday lives we live. Most residents are not data analysts and won’t
value city-wide patterns; the issues we tend to care about most are in our
wards and precincts.
Synthesize. In the interest of “transparency,” the Open Information site has
lots of data. But “big data” is often impenetrable and lacks context and
synthesis. Telling a story and establishing credibility are the two goals when
presenting data. Raw data – even patterns and trends – are not enough to tell
a story and create a credible action plan. The Open Information data, when
used un-biasedly and with better analytical tools, should tell the story of
where we’ve been as a city and where we need to go.
In summary, improvements to the Open Information site will only make our
community more livable.
