Today, the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University and the Centre for Public Impact announce the third cohort of The Opportunity Project for Cities. Akron, OH will join local governments Detroit, MI, Macon-Bibb County, GA, and Miami-Dade County, FL in a 22-week design sprint that partners government and community organizations with pro bono technical support from Google.org. The Google.org technologists will help to research, design, and create digital tools that address residents’ most pressing needs. 

Communities in the 2023 The Opportunity Project for Cities cohort will be working to address the following local issues:

• Akron, OH seeks to proactively address and ameliorate poor rental and low-income housing conditions while strengthening the relationship between the city government and the community with a new, equitable code enforcement system.
• Detroit, MI will develop aggregate community engagement datasets to avoid survey redundancy, and help residents better understand their neighborhoods and community opportunities.  
• Macon-Bibb County, GA plans to make it easier for local business owners to succeed by streamlining the permitting processes across agencies and departments. 
• Miami-Dade County, FL looks to improve regional decision-making for residents, community organizations, and governments around climate and extreme heat by better sharing data across the 34 municipalities in the county

“We’re thrilled to announce this next cohort of The Opportunity Project for Cities and applaud these communities for doubling down on their dedication to engaging residents to address a diverse range of community challenges by leveraging data and technology,” said Lynn Overmann, Executive Director of the Beeck Center. “As this program continues to grow, we hope to see more communities collaborating in this way and designing solutions that positively impact people’s daily lives.”

The Opportunity Project for Cities is a program, funded by the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, wherein local governments, community leaders, and Google technologists (including Product Managers, Software Engineers, UX Researchers, UX Designers and more) work with residents to identify pressing local issues and prototype digital tools that use open data. The program aims to surface new open data technology solutions to address public challenges and foster cultures of government transparency, accessibility, and responsiveness to strengthen trust with residents and lay the foundation for lasting community-driven innovation. Cities participating in the different cohorts of The Opportunity Project For Cities through 2024 are Knight cities, defined as places that once hosted Knight newspapers.

“Open data can be a powerful tool for governments seeking to solve pressing challenges. But to truly unlock the potential of open data, community engagement is imperative,” said Rebecca Ierardo, Program Manger for the Centre for Public Impact. “The third cohort of The Opportunity Project for Cities builds on the learnings of previous cohorts, enabling governments to design solutions that matter in partnership with their communities.” 

Previous participants of The Opportunity Project for Cities include the Cities of Detroit, MI; Long Beach, CA; Saint Paul, MN; and San José, CA, as well as Macon-Bibb County, GA, and Miami-Dade County, FL. In partnership with their communities, participants developed prototypes that address a wide range of challenges, such as improving urban tree canopy and providing equitable internet access. Upon the program’s conclusion, the Beeck Center and Centre for Public Impact will deliver a comprehensive report to share key insights for local governments facing similar challenges and a toolkit to encourage the replication of The Opportunity Project for Cities model. The report and toolkit from the 2022 cohort were published in March 2023. 

The program was inspired by the U.S. Census Bureau’s The Opportunity Project and adapted for local contexts by the Centre for Public Impact and the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University. The Opportunity Project for Cities is supported by the Knight Foundation, with pro bono technical support from Google.org.

QUOTE SHEET FROM THE OPPORTUNITY PROJECT FOR CITIES PARTICIPANTS & PARTNERS

• Ana Peralta Chammas, Director of County Innovation, Miami-Dade County 

“The strongest solutions to our community’s challenges come from the collective impact of meaningful partnerships,” said Ana Peralta Chammas, Miami-Dade Director of County Innovation. “In our second year selected as a community to join The Opportunity Project For Cities, we will collaborate on a cross-municipal data sharing platform making way for added pathways in which residents, businesses and entrepreneurs can support local resilience efforts, invest in and grow our local economy, and work together to build our Smart City ecosystem.”

• Tony G. Geara, Deputy Chief of Mobility Innovation, City of Detroit 

“We are thrilled to take part in the TOPC cohort this year to support the City of Detroit’s mission to minimize redundancy in the community engagement process. We hope this will lead to more intentional programs, stronger relationships, and better outcomes for our communities. This is a process that we are grateful to have such strong resident support in and are mindful of this for each effort we are involved in.

The Office of Mobility Innovation is focused on equity, accessibility, transparency and sustainability for existing mobility modes, and the modes of tomorrow. To find success, we lead with public and community engagement and sincerely value the time that Detroiters spend to share their stories and experiences so we can better understand their mobility challenges and needs.”

• Mayor Daniel Horrigan, City of Akron, Ohio

“The City of Akron is excited to work with The Opportunity Project for Cities to utilize the human-centered design process and data in order to more proactively address low-income housing conditions.”

• Erin Hattersley, Manager, Google.org

“Google.org is proud to support The Opportunity Project for Cities for the third year in a row as we are committed to providing opportunity for all. From visualizing local climate data to helping minority-owned businesses navigate the permitting process, past projects are a testament to the powerful social impact we can have if we take a collaborative approach to solving community challenges. We firmly believe that by bringing together community organizations, government leaders, and Google’s pro bono technologists, our combined knowledge and expertise can help move the needle in our local communities.”

• Kelly Jin, Vice President for Community and National Initiatives, Knight Foundation

“We’re proud to continue to support The Opportunity Project for Cities. These four Knight communities are leading the way in how technology and data alongside responsible resident engagement – can directly improve community outcomes like housing conditions, mobility experience, business permitting, and intermunicipal local services.”

About The Opportunity Project for Cities

The Opportunity Project for Cities brings together governments, community leaders, and tech volunteers to address local challenges through the power of open data and community engagement. During the program, cities and counties create a series of customized digital tools that speak to residents’ most pressing needs. The Opportunity Project for Cities builds a culture of government transparency, accessibility, and responsiveness that strengthens trust with residents and lays the foundation for lasting co-created innovation.

The Opportunity Project for Cities was inspired by the U.S. Census Bureau’s The Opportunity Project and adapted for local contexts by the Centre for Public Impact and the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University. The Opportunity Project for Cities is supported by the Knight Foundation and pro bono technical support from Google.org.

About the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University

The Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University brings together students, expert practitioners, and extended networks to work on projects that solve societal challenges using data, design, technology, and policy. An anchor of Georgetown University’s Tech and Society network, its projects test new ways for public and private institutions to leverage data and analytics, digital technologies, and service design to help more people. For more information, please visit beeckcenter.georgetown.edu. 

About the Centre for Public Impact

At the Centre for Public Impact, we believe in the potential of government to bring about better outcomes for people. Yet, we have found that the systems, structures, and processes of government today are often not set up to respond to the complex challenges we face as a society. That’s why we have an emerging vision to reimagine government so that it works for everyone.

A global not-for-profit organization founded by the Boston Consulting Group, we act as a learning partner for governments, public servants, and the diverse network of changemakers who are leading the charge to reimagine government. We work with them to hold space to collectively make sense of the complex challenges we face and drive meaningful change through learning and experimentation.

About Knight Foundation

We are social investors who support a more effective democracy by funding free expression and journalism, arts and culture in community, research in areas of media and democracy, and in the success of American cities and towns where the Knight brothers once published newspapers. KF.org

About Google.org

Google.org, Google’s philanthropy, brings the best of Google to help solve some of humanity’s biggest challenges combining funding, innovation, and technical expertise to support underserved communities and provide opportunity for everyone. We engage nonprofits and social enterprises who make a significant impact on the communities they represent, and whose work has the potential to produce meaningful change. We want a better world, faster — and we believe in leveraging technology and applying scalable data-driven innovation to move the needle.

About the City of Detroit Office of Mobility Innovation
The City of Detroit Office of Mobility Innovation (OMI) builds and delivers mobility solutions that improve transportation experience for all Detroit road users. By centering residents in every step of the process, OMI is focused on leveraging mobility as a pathway to opportunity in Detroit. OMI is responsible for identifying and testing mobility innovations, and for collecting and sharing best practices with local, national, and international partners. To learn more about OMI email mobility@detroitmi.gov or visit detroitmi.gov/mobility.

About the Eastside Community Network

For over 39 years the Eastside Community Network (formerly Warren Conner Development Coalition) has worked tirelessly to develop programs and resources that center the needs of east side residents and amplify their voices with respect to the development of their communities. ECN spearheads initiatives that promote social cohesion, neighborhood sustainability, community participation, and resident empowerment. We envision the eastside of Detroit as a community of choice where residents can live, work, play and thrive.

About The City of Akron

Founded in 1825, the City of Akron began as a small canal town before making its mark on international industry with its rubber production in the 20th century, earning it the nickname “The Rubber Capital of the World.” Since then, Akron has developed into an All-America City, valuing community, inclusion and sustainability that continues to expand on its industrious roots with world-renowned innovations. Today, Akron is a city of nearly 200,000 residents and its local economy includes manufacturing, education, healthcare, and biomedical research. See here: akronohio.gov

About Macon-Bibb County

Macon-Bibb County is the fourth largest city in Georgia and its newest consolidated government. It was created on January 1, 2014, after a popular vote in July 2012, and it replaced the older, outdated, often contentious, and separate municipal and county governments. 

The Macon-Bibb County consolidated government serves more than 157,000 residents, with nearly 30,000 more people driving in each day to work, eat, or shop. Thousands more travel through each day thanks to Interstates 75 and 16. The entire county serves as a regional hub for services, eating, shopping, entertainment, jobs, transportation, and more. 

In January 2021, a new mayor, Lester Miller, began serving as the first new mayor in 13 years. Through a months-long process of forums, surveys, meetings, and more, he found the community’s top priorities to be: public safety; economic development; education & workforce development; diversity, equity, & inclusion; and recreation & tourism. In his first year, several successful initiatives have been launched, including the Brookdale Resource Center, Macon Mental Health Matters, the Blight Fight, Clean Streets Matter, and more.

About NewTown Macon

We are an independent nonprofit that focuses on economic development and revitalizing Downtown Macon. We make it safe and beautiful and fun and affordable. And we keep it local. We are located at 555 Poplar Street, Macon, GA 31201 and can be reached at (478) 722-9909. For more information, visit newtownmacon.com.

Press Contacts: 

Joanna Rosholm 

Original Strategies 

beeckcenter@originalstrategies.com  

Elysa Neumann

Communications Specialist

Centre for Public Impact

elysa@centreforpublicimpact.org

‪202-630-3383‬

On February 28, 2023, the Digital Benefits Network published an open dataset documenting authentication and identity proofing requirements across online unemployment insurance (UI) applications in the 53 states and territories that administer the program. Today, we are excited to release similar data for online Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program (TANF), Medicaid, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), child care (CCAP), and unemployment insurance (UI) applications, following a data sharing and data collection collaboration with Code for America as part of their Benefits Enrollment Field Guide project. Users can now find detailed data about authentication and identity proofing practices across each of the six programs on the Digital Benefits Hub. We are publishing this data openly and publicly at this stage of our research to share knowledge and also to solicit feedback and engagement from various stakeholders.

Key findings across programs

In our review of 158 online applications across these six programs, we found:

• A majority of applications across programs (75%) require applicants to login or create an account to start an application.
• We found evidence that more than 80% of online application processes that require or allow users to create an account also incorporate additional authentication measures such as security questions, email validation links, and one-time authentication codes, among other measures.
• Across programs, a small number of applications (31) are using state or city-wide single sign-on services (SSOs) that enable applicants to use the same login for other government services.
• About a third of applications across programs require or prompt some type of active identity proofing actions as part of an online application process. 
• The use of identity proofing varies across programs, both in terms of commonality and methods.
  • Identity proofing requirements were most common in unemployment insurance online applications.
  • Just under half of unemployment insurance applications use biometric verification for identity proofing, but we did not find any uses of biometrics for identity proofing in other safety net program applications. 

Outside of UI applications, many of the applications we reviewed for SNAP, TANF, Medicaid, WIC, and CCAP are combined or integrated applications that allow users to apply for more than one program at a time. The data we captured represents applicant experiences when applying to all benefits available on a single application flow at once such as MAGI Medicaid, SNAP, and TANF. You can read more about our findings and research process on the Digital Benefits Hub, where you can also view program-specific summaries of our findings.

The Impact of Login and Identity Proofing on Benefits Access 

When we launched our digital identity research agenda in December, 2022 we knew it would be essential to get a comprehensive, up-to-date understanding of the identity proofing and authentication requirements that benefits seekers may encounter. Our interest in this project – and the basis of our research on this and digital identity in general– is driven by our concern about online application requirements and implementations of identity proofing that create additional burdens for applicants. We are concerned that these processes and technologies may potentially block benefits seekers from applying for or receiving benefits, duplicate processes across programs, and raise challenging issues around privacy and data security. We are also concerned that the advocacy around recent technology implementations has been an all-or-nothing approach to remove a type of technology, rather than supporting government practitioners in navigating solutions that make these processes secure while producing equitable outcomes.

We know through our work that agencies that administer public benefits applications online continually balance multiple potentially conflicting priorities around privacy, fraud prevention, and accessibility to ensure equitable outcomes. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and Code for America have previously suggested that removing login and identity proofing requirements may improve access to benefits programs. As was made clear during the pandemic, the design and implementation of online benefits applications and identity proofing approaches can impact an applicant’s ability to access essential benefits. Reports of applicants getting stuck in various digital queues and or blocked by new processes were rampant when people needed the help most.

Since launching our research agenda, we have also published a guide to U.S. government actions on digital identity at the federal level. This work summarizes and synthesizes the disparate activities that can shape the future of digital identity in the U.S. Within the public benefits ecosystem, we see authentication and identity proofing as part of the overall service design of benefits delivery. For example, as part of an overall service design process, we believe that state agencies should consider whether identity proofing is necessary, and, if it is, where it should be placed so it does not create undue barriers for applicants. Going forward, we are eager to continue working closely with state agencies and other partners to help agency leaders navigate tradeoffs in different approaches, map out key decision points around digital identity in public benefits, and promote best practices for privacy, fraud prevention, and accessibility.

Research Questions and Goals

When collecting data about identity proofing and authentication requirements across benefits applications, we sought to answer several questions, including:

• When and how do applicants need to create a log-in to apply for benefits online?
• What kinds of personally identifiable information (PII) are applicants required or requested to share when applying online?
• When and how are front-end identity proofing steps incorporated into application processes?
• What identity proofing methods are applicants asked to use?

To answer these questions, we consulted publicly available information about UI applications from agency websites, application portals, claimant guides, news coverage, vendor websites, and contracting repositories. We established a data sharing agreement and data collection partnership with Code for America to support their Benefits Enrollment Field Guide and facilitate our data collection on authentication and identity proofing in online SNAP, WIC, TANF, MAGI Medicaid, and CCAP.

 By building and releasing this dataset publicly, we hope to:

• Create an easy to consult and readily updatable resource that documents the landscape of authentication and identity proofing practices unemployment benefits seekers may encounter.
• Make it easier for state and territorial agencies, advocates, technology implementers, and federal agencies to see and understand what others in the field are doing.
• Expand our own knowledge and understanding of the varied approaches to login and identity proofing across labor agencies.

Feedback and Engagement

We are publishing this dataset openly and publicly at this stage of our research to share knowledge and solicit feedback and engagement from various stakeholders. We hope that people who access and work with the dataset will help ensure the accuracy of the data, fill in any gaps that they find, conduct their own analysis, and share ideas for further extensions of this work. 

This data represents a moment in time. We also know that the  information we accessed during this project may not reflect the most up-to-date experiences of claimants. We also know that application requirements and processes can be complex.

To submit general or specific feedback about an application included in the dataset, you can use our designated feedback form. 

We are grateful for the feedback and input we have already received from members of the Unemployment Insurance Technology Coordinating Coalition and others working on improvements to core safety net programs. We are eager to continue receiving additional feedback.

We view this dataset as one step in our digital identity research agenda – one that will help us direct further research and continued engagement with state and territorial agencies, technology implementers, and others in the ecosystem over the coming months. We encourage you to reach out to us at digitalbenefits@georgetown.edu if you have questions about our data or ideas for expanding this research. To receive updates about our work, we invite you to subscribe to the Digital Benefits Network.

Acknowledgments

• A special thanks to our colleagues at Code for America for the data sharing partnership that facilitated the development of these datasets, and for inviting us to support work on their Benefits Enrollment Field Guide.
• We would also like to thank Jeremy Ney and Stephanie Motta from American Inequality for creating the data visualizations that helped illustrate our learnings from this research in new ways.
• Finally, we would like to thank the partner organizations and state agencies that spoke with us about their work, both formally and informally.

Georgetown University’s Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation and Child Care Aware® of America (CCAoA) have joined forces to embark on a 12-week long project aimed at addressing the challenges families and child care providers face in accessing and utilizing child care subsidies in the U.S. Alongside representatives from three states, this collaboration aims to define pathways for actionable solutions to challenges in the child care landscape through user research and human-centered design that centers family and provider experience, as well as Child Care Resource and Referral (CCR&Rs) agencies’ leadership.

The Problem & Our Approach

According to a recent report by the Government Accountability Office (GAO), out of the 12.5 million federally eligible children, only 2 million currently receive child care subsidies. This alarming statistic underscores the urgent need to understand the factors driving this gap and what comprehensive improvements to the subsidy journey could bridge it. 

Across multiple states, the Beeck Center and CCAoA are examining three interrelated dimensions of child care subsidy systems: child care provider and family experience, organizational policies and processes, and technology. 

This project joins existent work led by our peers at U.S. Digital Response, Code for America, and New America’s New Practice Lab. Their teams have already produced user research on family experience,  an open-source model subsidy application in partnership with the Office of Child Care, and  a brief on early care and education systems respectively.

Provider & Family Experience

As an essential but under-researched group, child care providers have multifaceted experiences interacting with various entities––such as state agencies, CCR&Rs, and families––making their perspectives vital for a comprehensive understanding of the child care landscape. Our team will explore provider experience to better understand the factors that inform the number of providers accepting subsidy, in addition to family experience navigating subsidy onboarding. These findings will help surface the systemic barriers to affordable, quality child care services. 

Centering CCR&Rs

Georgetown University’s Beeck Center and CCAoA are committed to placing CCR&Rs at the forefront of change and empowering them as leaders in improving the child care subsidy journey. Through thorough research and analysis, the project aims to equip CCR&Rs with valuable insights and possible solutions to drive human-centered, user experience-informed design changes. While the project acknowledges the need to understand the subsidy journey holistically, we will primarily focus on identifying solutions within the CCR&R’s sphere of influence. By doing so, this collaboration aims to leverage the expertise and power of CCR&Rs to effect meaningful and practical improvements in the child care subsidy system.

Beyond Technology Solutions

While this project originally sought to provide technology solutions, initial conversations with CCR&Rs illustrated the design and policy challenges underlying user-facing systems. Consequently, we have suspended our original assumption that technology can improve user experience in favor of a discovery-oriented, iterative project design that allows for multiple solutions that consider the complex governance, policy, and technical nuances each state faces. This approach prioritizes pathways of influence where CCR&Rs can drive long-term changes in their work.

As this project progresses, we will convene a virtual “Show & Ask” event, during which we will summarize learnings from our research and draw on the expertise in the room to explore relevant themes and questions. You can sign up to receive communication about our Show & Ask as well as future information and publications related to this work here.

The UI Technology Coordinating Coalition, part of the Digital Benefits Network at the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University, hosted a virtual conversation on April 13, 2023 focused on recent developments in unemployment insurance (UI) modernization efforts. 

The American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) appropriated $2 billion to improve timeliness, increase equity, and prevent fraud in the UI system by offering grants to states to modernize their UI systems and for developing shared services and systems for use across the nation. The U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) established the new Office of UI Modernization (OUIM) to administer those funds and help states adopt improved technology practices. For the conversation, Andrew Stettner, the Deputy Director for Policy and Larry Bafundo, the Deputy Director for Technology of OUIM joined to discuss their efforts and progress in advancing UI technology modernization. In addition, Jennifer L. Phillips, the Assistant Deputy Director of Service Delivery at the Illinois Department of Employment Security (IDES) joined to discuss updates to their UI system. The call was moderated by Adam Bobrow and Marcus Courtney, co-convenors of the UI Technology Coordinating Coalition. 

With panelists from the state and federal government, attendees were able to hear first-hand from people who are working to implement modernization efforts, including insights they’ve uncovered. We have included edited highlights from the conversation below. Please watch the recording for a full playback.

What is OUIM’s policy vision? How have they already allocated the $2 billion from ARPA, and how do they plan on using the rest? 

Stettner emphasized that they are focused on making technology updates towards building a system that will be more resilient to the next economic downturn. The goal of distributing the funds is to address three pillars of UI modernization: the timeliness of benefits, equity in delivery, and integrity and fraud prevention.  

By June 2023, $1.6 billion of the funds will have been deployed: $340 million will go towards fraud prevention detection and recovery; $250 million towards an equity grant initiative spurring states to do equity data analysis; $246 million has gone towards a Tiger Team grant initiative, such as improving the online experience and mapping customer journeys with state agencies; and $18 million for a navigator program operating in seven states to meet workers where they are. Another $200 million grant program coming out in several weeks will focus on what good looks like in identity verification, including other forms of recommended and required fraud prevention strategies; and a $600 million investment that has been set aside for IT modernization. 

What is OUIM’s technology vision? 

Bafundo emphasized that OUIM is focused on enabling a UI system that not only works for the people that it was designed for, but is also more resilient and responsive to changing needs. This means that our work is not just about replacing legacy technology; it’s also focused on helping states adopt new ways of working, such as agile software development and procurement practices, modular system design, and modern tools and infrastructure that enable states to adopt a continual approach to modernization and which lower the cost of IT systems change.

The reality is that this is a long-term effort that requires sustained investment in the UI system beyond OUIM, and so we need to think about this work in the context of a “relay race”, where ARPA helps establish a foundation for a broader ecosystem of actors to work towards this vision and identify and share best practices along the way. 

That being said, Bafundo outlined 5 key areas related to technology that their office is focused on:  

1. Customer experience (CX) While many states are already working to improve their customer experiences, CX is not yet a defined aspect of the UI program. As a result, the OUIM team is working to define guiding principles, approaches, and metrics for states to look to as they evolve their IT systems, with a focus on enabling greater self-service and minimizing the need for manual state intervention, on top of ensuring that multiple pathways to service, including digital and non-digital channels, exist to equitable access to benefits. As part of this area, OUIM is also working with states to help them better leverage data and feedback from claimants to drive insights and IT modernization strategy. 
2. Plain language  The UI system is inherently complex and rules vary across states. At the same time, a significant percentage of errors and improper payments could be attributed to people not understanding the materials they need to navigate the program. OUIM is helping states adopt plain language techniques to simplify complexity, starting with common forms and notices. OUIM is also making centrally-provided resources available so that states and other groups can leverage in building their communications. 
3. Emerging technology  OUIM is working to help states adopt tools, like robotic process automation and chatbots to streamline workflows and create efficiencies that improve accuracy and timeliness. 
4. Flexible technology  As described earlier, a key constraint states face in modernizing is inflexibility of their IT systems, where even simple changes can be prohibitively costly and risky to make. As a result of this, OUIM is helping states improve the modularity of their system architecture so that various components can be managed more easily, expand the use of APIs, and adopt open source technology to lower the need for custom software development. 
5. Effective ID verification OUIM wants to help states acquire effective ID verification solutions that protect against fraud while also ensuring equitable access. As part of this, OUIM is offering access to both in-person and remote ID proofing and is working with states to leverage data, better understanding how these tools affect different demographics. As part of the new grant program, they plan to develop new partnerships with public options for identity verification, such as the General Services Administration’s (GSA) Login.gov, and offering in-person identity verification at post offices. 

How has the help from OUIM been helpful for Illinois?

Sharing the state perspective, Phillips spoke about how OUIM best practice and technical assistance resources have been “instantly illuminating” for Illinois. OUIM has boosted IDES’ capacity for customer experience analyses. During the COVID-19 pandemic from April 2020 to April 2022, Illinois set up an pop-up survey including open-ended questions on the UI application that received over 75,000 voluntary responses. They did not have the internal capacity to analyze the data, but within weeks, OUIM was able to successfully analyze the data, helping IDES create better questions, methodologies, and a high-level observational analysis. 

With the information, the IDES team has been able to pinpoint where to implement changes within the benefit information system. OUIM is helping Illinois learn how to build customer experience analysis into its work, improving claimant access and experience. 

Looking Ahead

Bafundo concluded with five types of support OUIM is providing for states: 

1. Reusable and tangible technology solutions. For example, NJ is launching a new claims intake experience this summer that leverages best practices in form design and in partnership with the DOL, while making it available as an open-source component.
2. The UI Lexicon Project: a glossary of terms common in the UI space, written in plain language, that states and other groups can use in the development of more effective, claimant-facing communications.  
3. Establishing guiding principles, approaches, and measures to help states improve their customer experiences (CX) and providing states with hands-on assistance to improve towards these goals, including assistance with user research and testing and improving the mobile responsiveness of claimant portals.
4. Creating useful resources, such as the claim status playbook and other models, or reference implementations, that states can use as a guide for their own modernization efforts.
5. Directing services with the $600 million OUIM plans to invest into the UI system in order to reduce costs for IT system changes.  

Brief Q&A Summary and Ending Remarks

During the Q&A session, the panelists used the remaining time allocated towards questions posed by the audience. The questions and answers have been edited for length and clarity.

• Q: What is the potential for increased UI and employment service staffing to facilitate in-person services?

A (Stettner): With part of the FY23 budget allocated towards UI administration, DOL has reinforced the importance of having multiple methods for ID verification — a digital solution in addition to an in-person solution, especially for those who may have trouble using technology. 

•  Q: What have been the most helpful tools or software panelists have leveraged to modernize their UI systems or have seen others use effectively?

A (Phillips): IDES is leaning into all the OUIM resources because states don’t have time to gather and synthesize best practices the same way DOL can.

Additionally, we partnered with the Illinois Department of Innovation and Technology (DoIT) to create ILogin, similar to Login.gov. Integrated in September 2021, this multi-factor, identity proofing system is like a gate before accessing the UI claim application. However, the intention is for additional State of Illinois departments to utilize ILogin so that claimants only need to complete the process once and then use it across other State of Illinois applications. The next state agencies to come onto the system are the Department of Human Services (IDHS) and Department of Revenue (IDOR).

• Q: What type of role private vendors should play in UI and IT modernization efforts versus developing systems and expertise within agencies?

A (Bafundo): It’s important that states have some layer of in-house technology expertise. For those in service delivery, it’s crucial for people to have a sense of what the technical capabilities are needed to successfully implement services.  

A (Phillips): Illinois believes that vendors are essential but should be used to help build state capacity and for joint learning not just coming in to problem-solve; it’s a both/and approach. 

• Q: How is OUIM planning to use the $600M towards IT modernization, and how can we track and take advantage of it?

A (Bafundo): We want states to incentivize API-driven approaches and work towards measurable outcomes. To follow our work, go onto the Office of UI Modernization website. We want to help you generate outcomes and if you need help using tangible technology solutions, we’ll help or propose an alternative.

Phillips shared that Illinois’s partnership with DOL has been helpful; they are leaning on resources from their partner organizations across the country, within their state, DOL regional meetings, and peer-to-peer with other states to better this work. Stettner and Bafundo hope that various groups working with UI modernization will take advantage of the resources that they provide, build it into systems, and share any learnings or observations with those in the space. 

For detailed panelist bios, resources, and links shared by the audience during the virtual conversation, check out this resource document.

The Unemployment Insurance Technology Coordinating Coalition is a community of practice of the Digital Benefits Network of the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University that engages cross-sector practitioners, including states, legal advocates, labor unions, technologists, think tanks, and other nonprofits through bi-weekly calls, annual convenings, closed-door sessions, research, and technical assistance in order to improve the technology delivery of the UI system. Subscribe to our  UI Quarterly Research Round Up and monthly Digital Benefits Digest newsletter. You can get in touch with us at uitechconveners@georgetown.edu.

A person’s identity is a complex matter. While we have one body, we have multiple ways to self-identify: If you have kids, “parent” becomes one of your identities; doctors and nurses may identify as healthcare professionals; or we may identify as belonging to certain communities or physical locations. Of these many identities, those related to our race and ethnicity are the most complex social constructs the US government uses to categorize us.

Most federal government data collection relies on data collected at the state and local level. In order for national policymakers to make important decisions—like funding for maternal and child health programs or designating healthcare professional shortage areas—the data that they collect at state and local levels needs to be comparable. 

The federal Office of Management and Budget (OMB) and a technical working group recently issued proposed changes to the federal Directive 15 that define how race and ethnicity are collected at many federal agencies, including the Census Bureau, which could create challenges for the comparability of available state and local data. The last time OMB changed this standard was almost 30 years ago. While these are just proposed changes (the final ruling is expected in the summer of 2024), states are likely to follow federal standards and collect data using the same categories that would allow state and federal agencies to compare local, state, and national numbers. This might mean that it will take two to three years to have enough data to compare county-level data because the implementation of revised standards will happen at different times.

The Beeck Center welcomes the update to the race and ethnicity standard. We urge OMB to partner more with states on data collection standards and support them on developing a reasonable timeline to implement recommendations, guide them on how to technically implement recommendations, and provide funds for states to modernize legacy systems that need to change in order to improve how data is collected.

Timeline

The final rules of the Directive should include a detailed timeline for the implementation of the changes at federal agencies and how those timelines will affect states. States consist of multiple agencies that follow data reporting requirements from their corresponding federal partners. For example, central cancer incidence reporting systems are overseen by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, mental health crisis interventions by Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, and criminal history records follow the Federal Bureau of Investigation standards. States will benefit from an orchestrated approach led by the federal government once the updated guidance comes into effect. If there is any prioritization of federal systems or domains such as health and human services, it would be useful to know those systems in advance.

Technical assistance and guidance

The Directive as proposed acknowledges many challenges associated with more granular data collection. Federal partners that fall directly under the scope of the Directive should prepare detailed technical guides to answer common questions from state and local analysts around how to group free text entries, what to do with missing data, sample size thresholds that guide suppression of publication, and similar aspects of data management. 

To build trust with people providing their data, states would also benefit from technical assistance or training materials on the best way to communicate why this data is being collected, how it is going to be used, and how it will be protected. For example, states will likely be asked by residents about the new Middle Eastern and North American categories, or why the Hispanic category is no longer a separate question.

Funding

There are hundreds of applications and systems that collect and house race and ethnicity data. Funding is required for the actual update of these systems that have end-user interfaces and back-end databases to hold the data. Ideally, states would be able to access new dedicated funding or receive clear guidance on how existing federal money could be used to make the necessary IT changes. 

Implementation of the revised race and ethnicity standard recommendations will mean that millions of Americans are represented in government data in ways that previous data collection efforts didn’t capture. For the first time, state, local, and federal agencies can work together to ensure that no one slips through the cracks in receiving benefits of public policies.

You can submit your comments by April 12, 2023, here.

Data Labs, a collaboration between the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University and the National Governors Association (NGA), today kicks off their second-annual cohort. Composed of cross-functional teams from six state governments—Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Minnesota, Nevada, and West Virginia—the cohort will embark on a nine-month program that offers hands-on support to develop  a thoughtfully-designed data project intended to improve government services and the lives of residents.

“We are excited to welcome Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Minnesota, Nevada, and West Virginia into the Data Labs program,” said Lynn Overmann, Executive Director of the Beeck Center. “We are thrilled to work with these innovative state leaders, alongside NGA, as they hone data-informed solutions across a diverse range of challenges that will make tangible improvements in programs that will help accelerate mobility and opportunity for their residents.” 

State teams will have access to human-centered design and data-sharing subject matter experts, project management, and one-on-one support through a dedicated program manager as they pursue data-sharing projects in one of three areas: 

• Safety Net Benefits: Improving access to and administration of programs that support families and children such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC), Child Tax Credit (CTC), and Unemployment Insurance (UI).

States focusing on safety net benefits include Connecticut and Minnesota.

• Workforce Transitions: Improving  pathways to employment and increasing  access to career opportunities.

States focusing on workforce transitions include Colorado, Nevada, and West Virginia.

• Student Outcomes: Improve student progress and outcomes by using state longitudinal education data from preschool to college. .

States focusing on student outcomes include Arizona.

“NGA is pleased to work with the Beeck Center to help states better use data to improve their safety net, workforce, and education programs,” said Tim Blute, Director of NGA’s Center for Best Practices. “By assisting this diverse group of states, NGA and the Beeck Center will support governors who are focused on delivering more effective services for the individuals in their states.”

This year’s Data Labs program comes on the heels of a successful inaugural cohort in 2021 which led eight states through data-driven projects that addressed challenges related to higher education, housing and homelessness, small businesses, and workforce. More information on the inaugural cohort can be found in the Data Labs Playbook.

The second-annual Data Labs program will run through October 2023. Please visit http://tinyurl.com/data-labs to learn more.

About the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation

The Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University brings together students, expert practitioners, and extended networks to work on projects that solve societal challenges using data, design, technology, and policy. An anchor of Georgetown’s Tech and Society network, its projects test new ways for public and private institutions to leverage data and analytics, digital technologies, and service design to help more people. For more information, please visit beeckcenter.georgetown.edu.

About the National Governors Association

The National Governors Association (NGA)—the bipartisan organization of the nation’s governors—promotes visionary state leadership, shares best practices and speaks with a collective voice on national policy. Founded in 1908, NGA is the collective voice of the nation’s governors and one of Washington, D.C.’s most respected public policy organizations. Its members are the governors of the 55 states, territories and commonwealths. NGA provides governors and their senior staff members with services that range from representing states on Capitol Hill and before the Administration on key federal issues to developing and implementing innovative state solutions to public policy challenges through the NGA Center for Best Practices. NGA also provides management and technical assistance to both new and incumbent governors.

Press Contact: 

Joanna Rosholm, Original Strategies 

beeckcenter@originalstrategies.com 

The Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University and the Centre for Public Impact today unveil the findings and lessons from the second annual The Opportunity Project for Cities sprint. Doubling in size from the inaugural 2021 cohort, the 2022 program led four cities and counties through a 22-week design sprint that partnered government practitioners and community organizations. Google.org offered pro bono support as their technical team helped to research, design, and create digital tools to address residents’ most pressing needs.  

Communities involved in The Opportunity Project for Cities second annual sprint included: 

• Detroit, MI who aimed to accelerate its digital equity initiatives by improving residents’ experiences with prolonged internet outages.
• Long Beach, CA who looked to strengthen the community’s climate resilience by expanding urban forest coverage.
• Macon-Bibb County, GA who sought to support thriving neighborhoods and local residents by removing neighborhood blight.  
• Miami-Dade County, FL who planned to support local entrepreneurs and small business owners by lowering the barriers to starting a business. 

“The Opportunity Project for Cities shows how we can positively improve people’s lives when local governments and community members work together and leverage open-data to address challenges across a diverse range of issues,” said Lynn Overmann, Executive Director of the Beeck Center. “We’re excited to share these case studies as resources for communities across the country as they seek to better engage and serve their residents.”  

On the heels of the program’s conclusion, the Beeck Center and Centre for Public Impact will deliver a comprehensive report and toolkit to help inform and advance wider efforts in the field of civic innovation. Now armed with these resources, governments will be able to develop meaningful applications for local data to tackle community needs. The report shares key insights for local governments facing similar challenges. The toolkit allows anyone to replicate The Opportunity Project for Cities model. Together, these resources not only present new ways to leverage human-centered design for public interest technology but also identify new models of collaboration with community partners and technologists through civic innovation.

“We’re honored to have worked alongside this cohort to advance their shared mission of empowering residents who are closest to problems and have great ideas on how to solve them,” said Josh Sorin, a Global Director at the Centre for Public Impact.

This second cohort of The Opportunity Project for Cities builds upon the success of the 2021 sprint in San José, CA, and Saint Paul, MN where sprint teams partnered to address local housing issues. In its second year, the program was scaled up to include county governments and an additional four weeks of programming. The program also strengthened its commitment to Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Belonging (DEIB) through new programming and an improved application process, including the creation of a systems map workshop which trained teams to analyze inequitable power dynamics and identify underrepresented actors who are directly affected by their chosen problem. The Opportunity Project for Cities will continue to build on this work as the program continues to expand. 

The long term goal of The Opportunity Project for Cities is to surface new open-data technology solutions to address public challenges and foster cultures of government transparency, accessibility, and responsiveness to strengthen trust with residents and lay the foundation for lasting community-driven innovation.

Quote Sheet From the Opportunity Project for Cities Participants and Partners

• Gabe Doss, Google.org program lead

“At Google.org, we know that engaging directly with local governments and community organizations can accelerate technology’s ability to meet residents’ needs. That’s why we were excited to support The Opportunity Project for Cities for the second year in a row. Our pro bono, cross-functional team of Google technologists worked alongside community experts to improve digital equity in Detroit, climate resilience in Long Beach, neighborhood blight removal in Macon-Bibb, and economic development in Miami-Dade. With the solutions developed and the toolkit published today, government agencies across the country can continue to leverage public data, community knowledge, and proven technology practices to unlock innovation for their communities.”

• Rob Biederman, Director of Google State and Local Government Affairs, Central and East Regions 

“We were thrilled to support The Opportunity Project for Cities for a second year and bring together the best of Google tech expertise with local knowledge of community needs. From digital equity to sustainability, the diverse array of projects across the four communities demonstrates our commitment to technology that improves lives and creates opportunity for everyone.”

• Art Thompson, Chief Information Officer, City of Detroit

“Collaboration between community organizations, Google.org, and The Opportunity Project for Cities helped us create a platform that crowdsources and reports data on internet outages. By doing so, residents are now able to make more informed decisions about their internet service provider. Most importantly, this data will help the city continue to advocate for equitable internet service in the most underserved locations first.”

• Jeff Jones, Executive Director, Hope Village Revitalization

“Hope Village, like most communities of color, has long suffered with digital access inequities. Despite the challenge, the resilience of our community is rooted in our commitment to collaborating with partners like the Opportunity Project for Cities to effectively advocate for residents. Hope Village is proud to be a part of this growing movement to ensure digital equity and lift the voice of the residents of underserved communities.” 

• Lea Eriksen, Director of Technology & Innovation/CIO, City of Long Beach 

“Long Beach was very happy with our participation in The Opportunity Project. We loved the model of bringing community members, city team members and tech volunteers together to understand the needs of our community first and then to co-design with community a solution that works! The site developed leveraged the City’s open data and will allow community members to learn about our urban tree canopy and to help the City to maintain it!”

• Jeff Rowe, President of Nehyam Neighborhood Association in Long Beach

“TOPC has been instrumental in helping our Nehyam Neighborhood Association in North Long Beach focus on the challenge of getting public street trees watered, the tree cutouts mulched and weeded, and public gardens in general maintained. Moreover, the work with TOPC has inspired us to assemble a team of experts and conservation groups to share best practices and find a way to water trees on public spaces in Long Beach.”

• Cheriene Floyd, director of performance and analytics, Miami-Dade County

“With this project, the County team embraced a new way of building. We stood up a cross-functional team with multiple external partners to prove out a solution that would have lasting impact. That’s a big deal because it meets Mayor Cava’s challenge to us on several levels. She’s asked to collaborate, to be agile, solution-focused, and inclusive. To name a few. I think we walked out those values with this work.” 

About The Opportunity Project for Cities

The Opportunity Project for Cities brings together governments, community leaders, and tech volunteers to address local challenges through the power of open data and community engagement. During the program, cities and counties create a series of customized digital tools that speak to residents’ most pressing needs. The Opportunity Project for Cities builds a culture of government transparency, accessibility, and responsiveness that strengthens trust with residents and lays the foundation for lasting co-created innovation.

The Opportunity Project for Cities was inspired by the U.S. Census Bureau’s The Opportunity Project and adapted for local contexts by the Centre for Public Impact and the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University. The Opportunity Project for Cities is supported by the Knight Foundation and pro bono technical support from Google.org.

About the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University

The Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University brings together students, expert practitioners, and extended networks to work on projects that solve societal challenges using data, design, technology, and policy. An anchor of Georgetown University’s Tech and Society network, its projects test new ways for public and private institutions to leverage data and analytics, digital technologies, and service design to help more people. For more information, please visit beeckcenter.georgetown.edu. 

About the Centre for Public Impact

At the Centre for Public Impact, we believe in the potential of government to bring about better outcomes for people. Yet, we have found that the systems, structures, and processes of government today are often not set up to respond to the complex challenges we face as a society. That’s why we have an emerging vision to reimagine government so that it works for everyone.

A global not-for-profit organization founded by the Boston Consulting Group, we act as a learning partner for governments, public servants, and the diverse network of changemakers who are leading the charge to reimagine government. We work with them to hold space to collectively make sense of the complex challenges we face and drive meaningful change through learning and experimentation.

About Knight Foundation

We are social investors who support a more effective democracy by funding free expression and journalism, arts and culture in community, research in areas of media and democracy, and in the success of American cities and towns where the Knight brothers once published newspapers. Learn more at KF.org.

Press Contacts: 

Joanna Rosholm 

Original Strategies 

beeckcenter@originalstrategies.com  

Elysa Neumann

Communications Specialist

Centre for Public Impact

elysa@centreforpublicimpact.org

‪202-630-3383‬

The Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation at Georgetown University, an interdisciplinary organization focused on projects that solve societal challenges using data, design, technology, and policy, is proud to announce Lynn Overmann as its new Executive Director, effective March 6, 2023. 

“As the Beeck Center enters its next phase of growth and development, there is no one better to lead our team than Lynn,” said Alberto Beeck, Cofounder of the Beeck Center and Chair of its Advisory Board. “We look forward to scaling our impact under Lynn’s leadership to reach even more people with improved digital government services and continue to inspire more students to pursue this critically important work.”

Overmann joins the Beeck Center from her role as Senior Advisor for Delivery with the U.S. Digital Service, embedded in the White House Domestic Policy Council to advise Ambassador Susan Rice and U.S. Digital Service Administrator Mina Hsiang. In this role, she led strategic initiatives to leverage data and technology to advance criminal justice reform, improve the delivery of safety net benefits, and increase adoption of evidence-based policies to increase economic mobility. Overmann brings over two decades of varied experience at the most senior levels of government, philanthropy, and academia to the Beeck Center. 

“We are thrilled to welcome Lynn Overmann to the Beeck Center and greater Georgetown community,” commented Georgetown Provost Robert M. Groves. “Her extensive experience driving strategy at the highest levels will prove integral as the Beeck Center continues to reimagine the future of public interest technology.”

As Executive Director, Overmann will serve as the Beeck Center’s primary spokesperson and lead fundraising and development efforts as the organization continues to expand its reach and impact amidst a recently announced $11 million in new funding. 

“I am honored to be named Executive Director of the Beeck Center and join this incredibly talented team of faculty, fellows, and students at Georgetown,” said Lynn Overmann. “I’m looking forward to diving in and continuing to accelerate data-driven, human-centered solutions that will most improve people’s lives, especially for our most vulnerable populations.”

About Lynn Overmann

Lynn Overmann recently served as a Senior Advisor for Delivery for the U.S. Digital Service, embedded in the Domestic Policy Council to advise Ambassador Susan Rice on priority policy implementation. In this role, Overmann oversaw teams of digital service experts across diverse projects, including targeted efforts to make the asylum system more effective and humane, increasing access to federal funding for low-capacity communities, and improving the delivery of safety net benefits. Overmann also served as a Senior Advisor for Delivery at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, leading the department’s work to leverage data and human centered design to advance equity, streamline critical funding programs, and improve insights into rural economies. 

Prior to the U.S. Digital Service, Overmann served as Senior Data Strategist at Opportunity Insights, a research and policy institute based at Harvard University that leverages big data to improve economic mobility. Overmann also served as a Vice President of Criminal Justice and head of the DC Office at Arnold Ventures, where she led a team that developed and executed a multi-million grant portfolio focused on leveraging data and technology to reduce low-level arrests in police departments across the country. 

Overmann served during the Obama Administration as a Senior Policy Advisor to the U.S. Chief Technology Officer in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy, where she launched the Data Driven Justice Initiative. Overmann served in several senior policy positions at the U.S. Department of Justice as well, where she helped establish the Access to Justice Initiative, and as Deputy Chief Data Officer in the U.S. Department of Commerce. 

Before joining the Obama Administration, Overmann was a civil rights and criminal defense attorney in Miami, Florida, starting her career by serving as a public defender for five years, litigating dozens of cases to jury trial and successfully challenging unconstitutional practices in police departments and jails. Overmann graduated from the NYU School of Law and received her Bachelor of Arts from Bryn Mawr College.

Press Contact: 

Joanna Rosholm, Original Strategies 

beeckcenter@originalstrategies.com 

Intergovernmental software collaboratives (ISC) — groups of two or more government agencies jointly supporting the development of software for their collective use, operating under some kind of a governance structure — have the potential to address longstanding and seemingly intractable issues in government IT projects. When done right, ISCs can save governments time and money while increasing the likelihood of success of the project, the quality of the end solution, and satisfaction ratings from the public. But the journey to success is rife with challenges which threaten the sustainability of ISCs, including:  

• Different motivations, goals, and attitudes among members
• A lack of precedent working across autonomous organizations 
• Uncertainties about decision-making authorities 
• Asymmetries in key areas of expertise – technical or otherwise

These challenges have contextual dimensions which necessitate contextual solutions. This context specificity means that guidance on an issue-by-issue basis (e.g., “here’s how to navigate [fill-in-the-blank-issue]”) may be only one part of the puzzle in supporting ISCs. 

Meanwhile, governance, — defined as the means of achieving the direction, control, and coordination of multiple, independent government organizations on behalf of a software solution which they jointly develop and maintain — offers a broad frame for earning from how ISCs structure their ability to respond to the unique challenges they face. Our previous research suggests that clear, effective governance is indeed a crucial determinant of an ISC’s success and sustainability. 

One of our goals at the Beeck Center for Social Impact + Innovation is to facilitate the emergence and sustainability of more ISCs as we strive to make them the default for software development in government. We believe fostering a better understanding of ISC governance will help our team create more generalizable and scalable advice for practitioners compared to issue-specific guidance.

To understand governance more deeply, we developed a set of evergreen research questions focused on the design, implementation, and responsiveness of governance in ISCs. We then conducted an initial case study to help us start answering those questions. This case study examines the governance of ActivitySim – an open-source, activity-based travel behavior modeling tool developed and managed by a consortium-based ISC. For the last several years, the Beeck Center has looked to ActivitySim as a strong example to mine for lessons in governance.

Six Lessons in Governance for ISCs

Studying ActivitySim offered actionable lessons on achieving clear, effective governance for ISCs. Below, we lay out these six lessons, and pair each with practical recommendations to help those working in ISCs translate it into practice.

Lesson 1: A dynamic approach to governance helps ISCs adaptively meet challenges as they mature. A dynamic approach to governance acknowledges that unanticipated challenges are likely to crop up. This strategy also acknowledges that a first pass at governance design is unlikely to perfectly meet your ISC’s needs as it matures. Operationalizing a dynamic view of governance helps members avoid feeling too rigid about a first pass at governance design because everyone understands that new needs can be addressed down the line.

Practical recommendations:

• Hold regular meetings dedicated specifically to discussing and refining governance.
• Run retros on governance practices to help proactively surface new needs as they arise.
• Outline a clear pathway for proposing, assessing, and implementing new governance mechanisms. This can be formal, like a proposal template for new governance ideas alongside a clearly defined decision making structure for determining which proposals will be acted on (e.g., LocalGov Drupal’s sociocracy or ActivitySim’s voting scheme). Or, the mechanism could be more informal, like carving out some dedicated discussion time and using a lazy consensus approach.

Lesson 2: A balance of formal and informal governance strategies promotes clarity and helps ISCs respond to diverse challenges. This lesson is a clarifying update to our prior advice which at times suggested that governance doesn’t need to be formal. Indeed, informal governance mechanisms can enable ISCs to retain flexibility. That said, even if your ISC prefers to govern day-to-day work informally, successful and sustainable ISCs have some level of formal, documented governance structures in place to promote shared understanding and to insure against inevitable conflict.

Practical recommendation:

• Play Foundation for Public Code’s Governance Game. The game helps groups collaborating on public code architect governance — formal and informal — that is equipped to handle (un)expected challenges. 

Lesson 3: Intentionally governing member growth is more important than starting small. The Beeck Center’s previous advice on starting an ISC emphasized the importance of starting small with only two members to avoid a “too many cooks” scenario. While starting with two members is not necessarily bad advice, it is too conservative. If an ISC starts too small, development may be overly tailored to a limited set of needs early on, making expansion to a broader set of shared needs more difficult down the line. Ultimately, deciding whether your ISC is open or closed to new membership isn’t the only — or the best — mechanism for managing growth sustainably.

Additionally, governance mechanisms affect how potential members view your ISC and can “filter” your membership, attracting and retaining members with particular kinds of goals, motivations, and attitudes. Mechanisms with obvious filtering effects are heavy-handed ones, like contracts or financial commitments. But it can be easy to overlook how lighter-touch mechanisms — such as defining project principles — can also impact the composition of your membership base.

Practical recommendations:

• To intentionally govern growth even when open to new members, explore strategies for how members are recruited, how criteria for membership eligibility are designed and implemented, and how new members are onboarded. 
• If your ISC has plans to grow, it is important to design governance with potential members, not just current ones, in mind. Conduct user research with potential members when you are (re)designing governance to identify whether and how your governance infrastructure – existing or proposed – affects other organizations’ decisions to join your ISC.

Lesson 4: Distributing leadership responsibilities and planning for succession promotes sustainable and resilient leadership. Previous Beeck Center research suggested that having a single, visionary project leader is an exemplary model for other ISCs, but vision can be difficult to replicate. While we maintain that it is important to have a single product owner steward a vision, in an age where government staff tend to experience burnout and turnover at relatively high rates, overly centralized leadership doesn’t promote resilience in ISCs unless accompanied by additional strategies which help distribute responsibilities and support succession planning.

Practical recommendations:

• Audit the current leadership burden by identifying all of the responsibilities your current leader(s) take on. Keep this list up to date and review it regularly with all members. 
• Experiment with new structures and roles that distribute the leadership burden and support clear succession plans. For example, you might experiment with creating multiple leadership roles, mandating turn-taking in leadership service as a requirement of membership, or offering discounts on membership dues for organizations which dedicate staff time for leadership roles.

Lesson 5: Governance can help ISC members remain empowered in vendor relationships. Government staff often feel unable to effectively manage software vendors or question their approaches because they feel they lack the requisite expertise. ISCs are not exempt from this common challenge. Helpfully, there is abundant and extensive guidance available on these topics.

Practical recommendations:

• Ensure your ISC has a product manager stewarding a long-term vision and roadmap, and who can work to bridge asymmetries in expertise across your stakeholder groups. 
• Tools like OKRs and ADRs can help members without development experience better understand your project’s direction and how it changes over time in user-centered terms. 
• Maintain competition throughout the development lifecycle and contract for services that drive toward outcomes. You can get creative, for example by implementing a non-mandatory RFP process among bench vendors.

Lesson 6: Frequent touchpoints mitigate the potential for severe conflict. ISCs are composed of many governments with different and sometimes competing needs. Frequent touch points allow issues and concerns of all types to be resolved at early stages. This strategy helps prevent bigger, more severe challenges and conflicts from arising.

Practical recommendation:

• Members (or the core governing body) should meet at minimum once per week. As noted above, be sure to ensure some of these touch points are dedicated to issues other than short-term development, like governance and long-term product vision. 
• If you are working with external vendors, some of your meeting spaces should exclude them.

These lessons iterate on the guidance offered in our previous research, including how the degree of formality in governance matters, how ISCs should start and grow their numbers, and how highly centralized leadership can function as a point of vulnerability. What remains clear: government practitioners who work in ISCs and dedicate the time, energy, and resources to governance that it deserves will be well-positioned to foster smooth collaborations that produce effective shared software solutions.

Interested in engaging more deeply with our current research on and engagement with ISC governance? Read the full case study: Architecting Effective Governance in ISCs. Keep track of what the ISC project at the Beeck Center is up to on our website, softwarecollaborative.org.