Tampa Bay Partnership Center for Business Intelligence. Regional Economic Scorecard

Transcription

1 Partnership Center for Business Intelligence Regional Economic Scorecard Spring 009

2

3 Introduction During challenging economic times, the Regional Economic Scorecard continues to be valuable as an unbiased assessment tool not only to measure our region s economic health but also to indicate how we re doing in economic performance against the comparison regions of Atlanta, Charlotte, Dallas, Jacksonville, and Raleigh-Durham. The scorecard looks at a number of economic indicators including employment and workforce, income and productivity, housing, innovation, education, and transportation. This seventh edition of the Regional Economic Scorecard shows that the national recession has affected the economies of the comparison regions in some cases more severely than. Charlotte, Dallas, and Jacksonville dropped in the rankings from the previous scorecard while and Atlanta improved. The good news is the Overall rank for improved from sixth to third in this Scorecard. Nonetheless, many of the supporting data points have actually declined, especially those that measure economic activity. While the overall indicators remain down, there are bright signs that the region may be turning the corner. Of the indicators tracked in the Scorecard, could be updated with new data on this Scorecard. Of those updated indicators, nine rankings remained unchanged, eight improved, and four declined. This is the second consecutive scorecard where improving indicators outnumber the declining indicators. These scorecard results, which are only a snapshot of where our region has been, naturally lead to questions of how economic development can best influence these scores. We continue to view the data within the context of the Partnership s three-year strategic plan, A Model for Prosperity, to provide focus to regional leaders on the region s critical issues and a sense of urgency to work toward solutions. Gary Sasso President & CEO, Carlton Fields Partnership Business Intelligence Chair, Partnership Center for Business Intelligence

4 Despite current economic challenges, the Regional Economic Scorecard continues to provide us with the relevant information for our discussions about regional priorities. By taking a long term view, we can use these periods of slowdown as an opportunity to build toward our Model for Prosperity through productive, inclusive and sustainable growth. Steve Mason President and CEO, BayCare Health System Partnership Chair, Partnership Center for Business Intelligence

5 Building A Model For Prosperity The Regional Economic Scorecard shows we are facing unprecedented change and challenges to every sector of our economic well being, as individuals, as organizations and as a region. This environment calls for a completely new way of looking at our challenges and addressing them. While the region has benefitted from years of robust growth, this current economy has re-emphasized that we can no longer continue to grow for growth s sake alone. We must guide our prosperity through meaningful policy and investments in key economic drivers. To be successful, the outcomes of our future growth must be productive, inclusive and sustainable. Consider that the top 00 largest U.S. metro regions generate 7% of the nation s GDP. But it s not just the U.S. regions we compete with for talent and resources. The Tampa Adapted from the Brookings Institution Blueprint for American Prosperity Bay region is one of the top 0 most productive regional economies in the world. According to research done by Richard Florida and others, Tampa Bay is in the So-Flo megaregion which also includes Jacksonville, Orlando and Miami. It s from this megaregion economy context we can leverage resources, leadership and talent to help us address the key drivers of innovation, human capital, infrastructure and quality places. The Partnership believes that achieving this Model for Prosperity requires our region to strategically invest in the institutions, people and programs that produce these outcomes. Translating this model into an actionable program of work we can implement today, the Partnership s Model for Prosperity Strategic Plan concentrates on four focus areas: A Vision for Regional Prosperity A Blueprint for Economic Development A Transportation Strategy to Support Regional Transit A Broader Advocacy and Leadership Model Each of these focus areas has ambitious goals and targets measurable outcomes that will create a model for prosperity and build upon the advantage of our region in a global economy. To learn more about the Model for Prosperity, visit our website at Regional Economic Scorecard - Spring 009

6 Overall Commentary: The Overall rank for improved from sixth to third on this Spring 009 update of the scorecard. The last time Tampa Bay ranked as high as third was the Summer 00 scorecard. This does not imply that the region s economy is back to performing as well as it was in 00. In reality, the national recession has simply affected the economies of the comparison regions, in some cases, more severely than. Charlotte, Dallas and Jacksonville dropped in the rankings from the previous scorecard while and Atlanta improved. As s Overall ranking has improved, many of the supporting data points have actually declined, especially those that measure economic vitality. Raleigh-Durham remained in first place. Charlotte s drop was the most significant, falling from third to sixth. While previous scorecards showed entered a recessionary period earlier than the comparison regions, this edition clearly illustrates how the national recession has reached all the regions measured by the scorecard. Massive job losses, high unemployment and flat or negative economic output have struck every scorecard region. Home construction has slowed even more from the last scorecard in nearly every market although is performing less poorly than most of the comparison regions. The rankings for improved from sixth to fourth for Employment and Workforce, slipped from third to fourth in Income, moved up from sixth to third in Housing, advanced from sixth to fourth in Transportation and remained steady for the other two categories. s Employment and Workforce ranking improved from sixth to fourth as every individual indicator within the category advanced. The previous scorecard was done as the employment situation was worse than the comparison regions so every indicator ranked last. As the job markets in other regions now have worsened, s rankings have improved. The ranking for Income and Productivity has dropped from third to fourth for as real wages, wage growth, and personal income have not made any gains during the economic downturn. This scorecard produced s highest ranking for Housing of any scorecard produced to date. s third place ranking for housing was significant because until this scorecard, Housing had ranked in last place for six consecutive scorecards. The ranking for housing permits growth remained at two, outperforming four regions for the second consecutive scorecard. Single family home affordability rose from last to fourth for the first time since the inception of the scorecard. Rental affordability remained in sixth place. The Innovation ranking for remained at fifth. While the ranking for patents declined, the rankings for all the other indicators remained the same. Education remained unchanged at third place with mixed results for the individual indicators that make up the category. Tampa Bay s high school graduation rate ranking improved from fourth to third with the region scoring the highest graduation rate in seven scorecards. In this scorecard update, s transportation ranking improved from six to four. There was no new data for three indicators. Transit Ridership remained at sixth while Transportation Investment improved from fourth to first. The Overall category of the Regional Economic Scorecard sums the scores for six key areas covered in this report and ranks them against comparison regions for a composite measurement of progress. The six key categories are equally weighted, as are the indicators within the categories. The six categories of Employment and Workforce, Income and Productivity, Housing, Innovation, Education, and Transportation are presented with a set of twenty-five consensus indicators to measure competitiveness. Every indicator is ranked on a scale of one to six, with one being the most desirable position and six being the least desirable position based on the indicator indexing. Of the twenty-five indicators, twenty-one could be updated with new data on this scorecard. Of those twenty-one updated indicators, nine rankings remained unchanged, eight improved, and four declined. This makes two consecutive scorecards where improving indicators outnumbered the declining indicators. Definition: As s Overall ranking has improved, many of the supporting data points have actually declined, especially those that measure economic vitality. This category is the total of the six categories that make up the Regional Economic Scorecard: Employment and Workforce; Income and Productivity; Housing; Innovation; Education; and Transportation. This distillation is meant to be a quick snapshot of how the region is performing and how it ranks against the five selected comparison regions. Partnership Center for Business Intelligence

7 SECTION I Overall Regional Economic Scorecard : Atlanta Charlotte Dallas Jacksonville Raleigh/Durham ()* Category ings: Atlanta Charlotte Dallas Jacksonville Raleigh/Durham Employment and Workforce ()* Income and Productivity ()* Housing ()* Innovation Education Transportation ()* Overall Score 7 9 Overall ()* *Number in parentheses indicates a change in ranking from the previous scorecard and shows s Fall 008 Scorecard ranking in this category. Regional Economic Scorecard - Spring 009

8 Employment and Workforce Commentary: s Employment and Workforce ranking improved from sixth to fourth in this category with all four indicators that comprise this category advancing. The rankings for all four indicators were at sixth place on the previous scorecard. These four indicator rankings all improved while the underlying data points lost ground from the previous scorecard. This illustrates how the benchmarking process scores the region against comparison regions that are themselves suffering through what is now one of the more serious national recessions on record. experienced significant job losses in every business sector except health care, hospitality and government. Charlotte, with its reliance on the hard-hit banking industry, dropped from third to sixth in the Employment category with a high negative job growth rate and a high unemployment rate. Job Creation The region lost 8,00 jobs between the first quarter of 009 and the first quarter of 008. Atlanta and Dallas experienced similar movement from the previous scorecard where Atlanta lost nearly 0,000 jobs but dropped to a negative 0,000 jobs on this update using employment data just two quarters later. Dallas went from a positive job growth of 0,000 on the previous scorecard to a loss of more than,000 jobs on this update. The last scorecard had three regions with positive job growth while this scorecard has none. The national scope of the recession is well illustrated by the fact that s job losses have increased significantly from the previous scorecard but the ranking for the Job Creation indicator improved from sixth to fourth because of the worsening situation in the comparison regions. Job Growth Rate s score for job growth rate improved from sixth to fifth on this latest scorecard. The job growth rate declined from -.87% on the Fall 008 scorecard to -.7% on this current scorecard. This data measures change from the first quarter of 009 versus the first quarter of 008. All the regions had a negative job growth rate on this scorecard which is a significant change from the last scorecard when Charlotte, Dallas and Raleigh-Durham had positive growth. Job growth and job creation are measured by taking the average non farm employment for the three months of the first quarter of 009 and calculating the difference between that figure and the average for the three months of the first quarter of 008. Job creation is expressed as the numeric change and the job growth rate is expressed as the percent change. Unemployment Rate The unemployment rate reached its highest level for the seven scorecards produced to date. The first quarter 009 unemployment rate of 0.%, although dramatically higher than the previous scorecard, still yielded an improved ranking for this indicator. The ranking rose from sixth to fifth. This was due primarily to the Charlotte unemployment rate of.% which ranked that region sixth. Every region had at least a.-% increase in unemployment rates from the previous scorecard. The number of unemployed workers in soared to more than 9,000, an increase of,000 from the previous scorecard. Labor Force Growth Rate s labor force growth rate ranking improved from sixth to third. The region s labor force had a year-over-year growth rate of just 0.7% in the first quarter of 009 compared to the first quarter of 008. That is only a slight slowdown in labor force growth from the last scorecard when the growth rate was 0.99%. The labor force growth rate slowed for every region measured. Atlanta, Charlotte and Raleigh-Durham had negative labor force growth. Charlotte dropped in ranking from second to fifth. Definition: s Employment and Workforce ranking improved from sixth to fourth in this category with all four indicators that comprise this category advancing. This category is comprised of four components: the quarterly average total number of jobs created; the quarterly average job growth rate; the quarterly average unemployment rate; and the quarterly average labor force growth rate. The total number of jobs created, the job growth rate, and the labor force growth rate are measured on a year-over-year basis. The unemployment rate is for the quarter. The level and type of employment in a region are very important because it is one of the timeliest indicators of a region s industry performance. Partnership Center for Business Intelligence

9 SECTION II Employment and Workforce : Atlanta Charlotte Dallas Jacksonville Raleigh/Durham ()* Indicators: Number of Jobs Created Job Growth Rate Unemployment Rate Labor Force Growth Rate Score ()* -8,00 ()* -.7% ()* 0.% ()* 0.7% 8 ()* Atlanta Charlotte Dallas Jacksonville Raleigh/Durham -0,77 -.7% 8.97% -.9% 9 -,9 -.09%.% -0.% -,7-0.8%.99%.7% 7 -, -.00% 9.%.% 0-9,00 -.8% 8.9% -0.% 9 *Number in parentheses indicates a change in ranking from the previous scorecard and shows s Fall 008 Scorecard ranking in this category. Regional Economic Scorecard - Spring 009 7

10 Income and Productivity Commentary: s ranking in this category fell from third to fourth from the last scorecard. There was new data available for four of the five indicators that comprise this category. Atlanta improved from sixth to third in the rankings from the previous scorecard while Jacksonville fell from fourth to fifth. The growth of wages, income and overall economic productivity has been slowed by the national recession for and all the comparison regions. continues to be last among its comparison regions in wages paid, and now ranks fourth in the growth in wages. The economic downturn continues to be a drag on the region s personal income and the overall growth of economic output. Average Wage Growth Definition: The growth of wages, income and overall economic productivity has been slowed by the national recession for and all the comparison regions. s wage growth ranking dropped from second to fourth as the percentage growth rate fell to.% from nearly % on the previous scorecard. That is a significant drop from the to 9 percent growth rates experienced over the previous two years and reflects the clear trend took toward recession. Since the last scorecard, wage growth fell across every region except Atlanta and Raleigh-Durham. The rate of growth is measured from the fourth quarter of 007 versus the same quarter of 00 for each region. The lag in the data does not fully reflect the current depth of the recession across all the comparison regions. Absolute Average Wage again ranks last in absolute annual wage, with an average wage of $,99. The ranking for absolute annual wage remained the same for every region from the previous scorecard except for Atlanta and Charlotte which traded rankings. Wages grew for every region over the data reported on the last scorecard. As this data is from the fourth quarter of 007, it may not continue to show growth as more current wage data becomes available. Median Household Income Growth Rate There was no new data for this indicator. As a result, s ranking for median household income growth remained unchanged at second. s ranking is based on a growth rate of.% from 008 over 007. This data is from Claritas, a private vendor, and is released annually. Per Capita Personal Income Growth Rate s ranking for per capita personal income (PCPI) growth fell from second to fourth as the growth rate dropped from.% to.0%. That was significantly less than the national growth rate of.9%. Per capita personal income is the total of all income, including wages, proprietor income and transfer payments, such as Social Security, coming into a region divided by the region s population. Raleigh-Durham ranked first and Dallas ranked second for this indicator. The data used for this indicator is the growth from 00 to 007, the most recent available. Because of the considerable time lag for this data, it does not fully reflect the national recession for any of the comparison regions. Gross Regional Product Growth Rate s economy experienced a contraction at a real rate of minus.7 percent which ranks the region in fifth place. That is an improvement from the sixth place ranking from the previous scorecard. The data is not easily comparable from the last scorecard because a new data source was secured for this update. Because of the importance of this measure and the volatility of the economies of all the comparison regions, it was necessary to purchase quarterly gross metro product data from Moody s economy.com to have a timelier picture of the economic changes the scorecard is measuring. The growth rate for this scorecard is for the first quarter of 009 compared to the first quarter of 008. This more current economic data revealed that only Dallas has an economy that has positive growth. At a 0.% growth rate, the Dallas economy is essentially flat, but that was enough to rank first for this indicator. This category is comprised of five components: the annual average wage growth rate; the absolute annual average wage; the annual median household income growth rate; the annual per capita personal income growth rate; and the annual gross regional product growth rate. These are all measured in year over year terms. Monitoring income, wages and gross regional product is important because these factors have a direct impact on the resident s quality of life, spending power, and economic growth in the region. 8 Partnership Center for Business Intelligence

11 SECTION III Income and Productivity : Atlanta Charlotte Dallas Jacksonville Raleigh/Durham ()* Indicators: Average Wage Growth Rate Absolute Average Wage Median Household Income Growth Rate Per Capita Personal Income Growth Rate Gross Regional Product Growth Rate Score ()*.% $,99.% ()*.0% ()* -.70% 0 ()* Atlanta Charlotte Dallas Jacksonville Raleigh/Durham.9% $0, -0.9%.% -.9% 7 Regional Economic Scorecard - Spring % $0,8 -.9%.% -.%.99% $, -0.%.0% 0.% 0.08% $,08.%.97%.% $0,79 *Number in parentheses indicates a change in ranking from the previous scorecard and shows s Fall 008 Scorecard ranking in this category. -.% -0.%.9% -0.8% 0

12 Housing Commentary: This marks the first scorecard that does not rank last in Housing. s ranking improved from sixth to third, reflecting the dramatic changes that have occurred with respect to housing in and all the comparison markets. The improvement can be attributed to the region holding steady at second for housing permit growth and scoring higher in single family affordability. Rental affordability for remained at sixth place as apartment rents showed no downward pressure in the current economic climate. Unlike single family home prices, apartment rents were higher in every market except Charlotte. While housing affordability has been a long-standing chronic weakness for, the dramatic drop in housing prices has made single family homes much more affordable in relation to the region s median household income. housing prices, long the highest among the comparison regions, are now middle of the pack among this group of cities. Housing Permit Growth Rate Every region experienced negative growth in housing permits from the first quarter of 009 compared to the same quarter of 008. On the previous scorecard, and Dallas flirted with modest increases in permit activity only to see that reversed two quarters later for the first quarter of 009. Dallas and Raleigh-Durham experienced the greatest housing downturns. Dallas had a positive growth in permits on the previous scorecard of 7.% which turned into a negative % growth on this scorecard. Raleigh-Durham changed from a negative 0.% permit growth on the last scorecard to a minus.8% on this scorecard in a dramatic downturn. The ranking for this indicator remained second while Atlanta also stayed unchanged at sixth. The rankings for the other four regions changed significantly with Jacksonville dropping the most from first to fourth. The actual number of housing permits issued in the first quarter of 009 in was,, down from,00 the same quarter a year earlier. issued the second highest number of permits of any of the comparison regions behind only Dallas. Rental Affordability Ratio has ranked sixth in rental affordability now for all seven scorecards published. The average apartment rent for for the period was $89 which was third highest behind Atlanta at $09 and Dallas at $9. Raleigh-Durham ranks first in rental affordability with an average apartment rental of $8 and a median household income of $,77. Jacksonville improved to second with the lowest apartment rent and the second lowest household income. Charlotte ranks third and Dallas ranks fourth for affordability. Atlanta ranks fifth in affordability with the highest median household income at $8,70 but the highest rent. Single Family Home Affordability moved up to fourth in single family home affordability after ranking last on six consecutive scorecards. Tampa Bay s improved ranking in housing affordability came because of falling home prices, not rising income. Prior to the current housing crisis, ranked last because it had the highest home prices and the lowest household income. With the precipitous loss of home values in, only homes in Atlanta and Dallas are less expensive than. The price gap between and Raleigh-Durham was about.% when the last scorecard was produced. The median price of a single family home in Raleigh-Durham is now almost 7% higher than. The data for this scorecard update is for the fourth quarter of 008, which reports the median price of an existing single family home at $,00 for the seven-county region. That represents nearly a 0% decrease in price from the $9,00 for the second quarter of 008 that was used for the previous scorecard. median home prices have dropped 8% or $9,00 since their 00 second quarter peak with the Winter 007 scorecard. Home prices dropped on this scorecard in every region except Raleigh-Durham. Because Raleigh- Durham prices continued to climb, that region s affordability ranking dropped from fourth to sixth. Interestingly, two years ago the scorecard showed home prices in Jacksonville $0,000 higher than. This scorecard reveals that home prices have fallen below Jacksonville s for the first time since the beginning of the scorecard project. Definition: s improved ranking in housing affordability came because of falling prices, not rising income. This category is comprised of three components: the quarterly housing permit growth rate; the annual ratio of the median household income to the median apartment rental rate the rental affordability index; and the ratio of the annual median household income to quarterly median single family home price the housing affordability index. The number of building permits for new homes is one of the best regionally available leading indicators because it is a measure of how many new residents are expected. Housing affordability is critical to attracting and retaining workers. 0 Partnership Center for Business Intelligence

13 SECTION IV Housing : Atlanta Charlotte Dallas Jacksonville Raleigh/Durham ()* Indicators: Housing Permit Growth Rate Rental Affordability Ratio Single Family Home Affordability Ratio Score -.% 0. ()* 0.00 ()* Atlanta Charlotte Dallas Jacksonville Raleigh/Durham -78.% % % % *Number in parentheses indicates a change in ranking from the previous scorecard and shows s Fall 008 Scorecard ranking in this category. -9.8% Regional Economic Scorecard - Spring 009

14 Innovation Commentary: s Innovation rankings remained at fifth for this seventh edition of the scorecard. s rankings on venture capital, university R&D per worker, and National Science Foundation awards all remained steady while the ranking for patents declined. Raleigh-Durham scored first on every indicator of the innovation category just as they have for the previous six scorecards. The only movement among the rankings of the comparison regions from the previous scorecard was Dallas fell from a tie for second with Atlanta to third place. Venture Capital Per Worker held at sixth place in venture capital per worker for the second consecutive scorecard. To remove the volatility in this measure, the methodology was changed for the Spring 008 scorecard. The most recent data available was fourth quarter 008, but in order to smooth out the extreme peaks and valleys in this data caused by large deals, a four quarter running average was utilized. This data represents an average of the first quarter 008 through fourth quarter of 008. s average venture capital investment for the four quarters was $7. million. That ranked last in total venture capital invested, behind Charlotte at $.9 million. The venture capital totals are divided by the number of workers to control for population size. Using a four quarter average to smooth the data was much more equitable for all the regions measured. Definition: s rankings on venture capital, university R&D per worker, and National Science Foundation awards all remained steady while the ranking for patents declined. Patents Per 0,000 Workers s ranking in the number of patents issued per 0,000 workers dropped from fourth to fifth. In absolute numbers, 9 patents were issued for the region for the first quarter of 009. That is the fourth highest total among the comparison regions more than Jacksonville and Charlotte but less than Raleigh-Durham, Dallas, and Atlanta. When the number of patents is weighted by workforce, s ranking per 0,000 workers is fifth. Atlanta improved from fifth to third from the previous scorecard. University R&D Per Worker The ranking for university R&D per worker for remained fourth with updated data for FY 007. In absolute dollars, the university R&D recorded by the National Science Foundation for the region was just under $7. million. Paralleling patents, that is the fourth highest total among the comparison regions more than Jacksonville and Charlotte but less than Raleigh-Durham, Atlanta, and Dallas. Unlike patents, Atlanta far outperformed Dallas on this innovation measure. Dallas had $8 million in university R&D compared to $987 in Atlanta. The $. billion in Raleigh-Durham exemplified the powerful research universities of the Research Triangle. When R&D was weighted by workers, the much larger workforce in Dallas made its weighted ranking only slightly ahead of. An issue for for this measure is the number of universities that generate National Science Foundation R&D expenditures. only has the University of South Florida reporting NSF R&D expenditures compared to ten universities in Dallas, nine in Atlanta, five in Raleigh-Durham, and two each in Charlotte and Jacksonville. National Science Awards Per Worker s ranking remained at fifth for National Science Foundation active awards with start dates in the first quarter of 009. The data is weighted by number of workers to control for the size of the region for the rankings. ranks in National Science Foundation dollars awarded, as with the other innovation measures, ahead of Charlotte and Jacksonville in, but behind Raleigh-Durham, Atlanta, and Dallas. had total NSF awards of slightly more than $8,000 for the quarter compared to almost $8 million for Raleigh-Durham, $ million for Atlanta, $. million for Dallas, $80,000 for Charlotte and none for Jacksonville. When the award data is weighted by work force, Raleigh-Durham with its high award total and its smaller work force easily ranks first. Atlanta ranks second. This category is comprised of four components: the average of the most recent four quarters of venture capital per worker; the quarterly number of patents per 0,000 workers; the annual amount of university R&D per worker; and the quarterly amount of National Science Foundation awards per worker. Innovation is imperative in the new knowledgebased economy and has historically been the competitive advantage of America. It is important to measure how Tampa Bay performs in terms of innovation because it is often tied to high-wage jobs. Partnership Center for Business Intelligence

15 SECTION V Innovation : Atlanta Charlotte Dallas Jacksonville Raleigh/Durham Indicators: Venture Capital Per Worker Patents Per 0,000 Workers University R&D Per Worker National Science Awards Per Worker Score $. ()* 0.7 $.8 $0. 0 Atlanta Charlotte Dallas Jacksonville Raleigh/Durham $.7 0. $0. $. 0 Regional Economic Scorecard - Spring 009 $7. 0. $7.0 $0.9 $ $. $0.80 $.0 $ $, *Number in parentheses indicates a change in ranking from the previous scorecard and shows s Fall 008 Scorecard ranking in this category. 0.8 $. $0.00 $9.87

16 Education Commentary: s Education ranking held at three for the third consecutive scorecard. Through the six scorecards produced to date,, Dallas, and Raleigh-Durham have consistently scored higher in education that the other comparison regions. ranked second in education for four consecutive scorecards before dropping to third for the last three scorecards. Raleigh-Durham has held first place though seven scorecards. High School Graduation Rates Based on data for the school year, s ranking moved up from fourth to third in high school graduation rates. had a graduation rate for the region of 78.0%, the highest for any scorecard produced to date. Dallas and Atlanta ranked first and second in graduation rates. The only significant shift in rankings from the previous scorecard besides was Raleigh-Durham dropping from third to fourth. had a graduation rate for the region of 78.0%, the highest for any scorecard produced to date. Mean SAT Score Based on the new data, held on to its fourth-place ranking in SAT scores. This Spring 009 scorecard makes three straight rankings of fourth after four straight scorecards in second place behind Raleigh-Durham. This same data ranked Dallas in second place, Jacksonville is third and Raleigh-Durham first. Charlotte is fifth and Atlanta is sixth. The SAT test changed after the Summer 007 scorecard. There are now three parts to the test: math, critical reading, and writing with a total possible score of 00. Associates and Bachelors Degrees Conferred Per Worker s ranking for bachelor s degrees conferred per worker fell from second to third with the release of new 008 data from the National Center for Education Statistics. For this indicator, the degrees conferred are weighted by the number of workers. The region had, Associates and Bachelor s degrees conferred in 008, which was second only to Dallas in total degrees granted. had 0,898 Associates degrees conferred, more than any other region. Raleigh-Durham, with, Bachelor s and Associates degrees conferred, was ranked first for this indicator because of its smaller workforce. Graduate and Doctorate Degrees Conferred Per Worker has ranked fourth for Graduate and Doctorate degrees conferred per worker on every scorecard produced. This indicator has been updated with 008 data from the National Center for Education Statistics. The region had,0 Graduate and doctorate degrees conferred in 008, which was fourth behind Dallas, Atlanta, and Raleigh-Durham in total degrees granted. Producing and retaining people with advanced degrees is critical to the creation of an innovation economy. The benefits of advanced degrees are easily documented. The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that salaries for individuals with a graduate degree are 9% higher than those with only a high school diploma. A person with a doctorate degree earns % more than someone with a high school education. Definition: This category is comprised of four components: the annual public high school graduation rate; the annual mean SAT score of public school students; the annual number of Associates and Bachelors degrees conferred per worker; and the annual number of Graduate and Doctorate degrees conferred per worker. The quality of a region s educational system not only influences the future workforce quality, but also is often a critical factor in the site selection process for relocating and expanding companies. Partnership Center for Business Intelligence

17 SECTION VI Education : Atlanta Charlotte Dallas Jacksonville Raleigh/Durham Indicators: High School Graduation Rate Mean SAT Score Associates and Bachelor s Degrees Conferred Per Worker Graduate and Doctorate Degrees Conferred Per Worker Score ()* 78.0% 78 ()* Atlanta Charlotte Dallas Jacksonville Raleigh/Durham 78.9% Regional Economic Scorecard - Spring % % % % *Number in parentheses indicates a change in ranking from the previous scorecard and shows s Fall 008 Scorecard ranking in this category. 7 7

18 Transportation Commentary: improved from sixth to fourth with three indicators unchanged because no new data was available, transit ridership remained unchanged with the update and transportation investment rose from fourth to first with an update off the data. With little new data available to update the transportation indicators, s increase in rankings is primarily due to the improvement in the transportation investment per capita ranking. Experts had issued the caveat that there would be swings in investment as major projects are completed or started in all the regions. Congestion Annual Hours of Delay per Traveler There was no new data available for the congestion indicator, where the data is released annually. is tied with Charlotte for third place in the annual hours of delay per traveler at hours. Raleigh-Durham is best at hours and Jacksonville is second at 9 hours. Dallas and Atlanta have the greatest amount of delay with 8 and 0 hours respectively. This data is calculated by the Texas Transportation Institute at Texas A&M University as part of their well-respected Urban Mobility Report for 007. The data is available for metropolitan areas only, so is represented by the Tampa-St. Petersburg metro area and Raleigh-Durham is represented by the Raleigh-Cary metro area. Commute Time Mean Travel Time to Work There was no new data available to update the commute time indicator for the Spring 009 scorecard. ranked third for commute time mean travel time to work with an average commute time of.0 minutes utilizing 007 data. ranked third for this indicator on the Spring 008 scorecard using 00 data and again ranked third on the Fall 008 scorecard utilizing 007 data. The commute time improved slightly from the 00 figure of. minutes to the 007 figure of.0 minutes. Raleigh-Durham is ranked first and Charlotte is second. Jacksonville is ranked fourth for commute time while Dallas and Atlanta are fifth and sixth. This data is from the 007 American Community Survey. Vehicle Miles Traveled per Capita No new data was available to update the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita indicator. Carrying over information from the previous scorecard, is ranked fifth in 007 vehicle miles traveled (VMT) per capita behind Dallas, Charlotte, Raleigh- Durham, and Atlanta. VMT is defined as the daily miles traveled on all public roads by any type of vehicle regardless of the number of persons in the vehicle. VMT per capita is considered a good indicator of transportation efficiency: a measure for how well a region is incorporating the smart growth principles of accessible and walkable communities, increased public transportation, and a shift away from development practices centered on the automobile. A lower number indicates greater efficiency and less sprawl. Transit Ridership as a Percent of Population ranked sixth for the third straight scorecard in transit ridership as a percent of population. While the region had the third highest daily transit ridership behind Atlanta and Dallas, that ridership as a share of the region s large population made it last in the rankings. Atlanta, Charlotte and Dallas were first through third in the rankings with their well-developed transit systems. The data was from the fourth quarter 008 Ridership Reports published by the American Public Transportation Association. Transportation Investment per Capita improved from fourth to first for transportation investment per capita. Dallas fell from the first place ranking on the previous scorecard to third, while Jacksonville remained unchanged at second. Atlanta dropped from third to fourth while Raleigh- Durham and Charlotte held steady with their previous rankings of fifth and sixth respectively. had the third largest dollar investment behind Dallas and Atlanta before adjusting for population. Investment was defined as all road, bridge, and tollway spending from federal, state, tollway authority, and local sources for FY 009. Transportation officials warned that investments will fluctuate from year to year as large expressway projects are funded or completed. Definition: With little new data available to update the transportation indicators, s increase in rankings is primarily due to the improvement in the transportation investment per capita ranking. This category is comprised of five components: congestion - annual hours of delay per traveler; commute time - mean travel time to work; vehicle miles traveled per capita; transit ridership as a percent of population; and transportation investment per capita. Transportation efficiency is not only an important quality of life issue; it is a key business issue. With growing energy costs, the efficiency of a region s transportation network affects the ability of businesses to gain access to goods, markets and skilled workers. Partnership Center for Business Intelligence

19 SECTION VI Transportation : Atlanta Charlotte Dallas Jacksonville Raleigh/Durham ()* Indicators: Congestion - Annual Hrs. Delay Per Traveler Commute Time - Mean Travel Time to Work Vehicle Miles Traveled Per Capita Transit Ridership as a % of Population Transportation Investment Per Capita Score % ()* $9. 8 ()* Atlanta Charlotte Dallas Jacksonville Raleigh/Durham % $ % $ % $ % $ % $7.0 *Number in parentheses indicates a change in ranking from the previous scorecard and shows s Fall 008 Scorecard ranking in this category. Regional Economic Scorecard - Spring 009 7

20 How to Read the Regional Economic Scorecard The Regional Economic Scorecard is a dashboard view of how the region compares in six key areas to five peer regions. It is comprised of data that is universally available and widely used in economic and community development. Each category of the Regional Economic Scorecard (Employment and Workforce, Income and Productivity, Housing, Innovation, Education, and Transportation) has an overall category rank which represents a distillation of where the regions ranked against each other, with one being the most favorable ranking. The Overall Regional Economic Scorecard is determined by adding together the ranks of the six categories. The region with the lowest score overall is determined to have the highest ranking overall. How to Read the Regional Economic Scorecard: The commentary section is provided to give insight into the rankings and their significance for. 8 Partnership Center for Business Intelligence

21 The category rank shows where ranks against the comparison regions on a one-through-six scale, with one being the most favorable based on the score line of the component details table. The region with the lowest score ranks the best. The number in parentheses represents s Fall 008 Scorecard ranking in this category. The indicators table shows indicators that make up the category and how compared in each of these against the comparison regions. The data line illustrates the raw numbers behind the region s rank. The score line at the bottom is a summation of all of the indicator ranks. Regional Economic Scorecard - Spring 009 9

22 Sources Employment and Workforce. State and Area Employment, Hours and Earnings: Public Query, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Local Area Unemployment Statistics Program, Income and Productivity. U.S. Census Local Employment Dynamics, Quarterly Workforce Indicators, datatools/qwiapp.html. Claritas, Demographic Updates. U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional Economic Information System, Moody s economy.com Buffet, Gross Metro Product by Quarter, Housing. U.S. Census Bureau, Housing Units Authorized by Building Permits, Table Metropolitan areas, National Association of Realtors, Metropolitan Area Existing-Home Prices, Apartment Ratings, Inc., Innovation. PricewaterhouseCoopers/Venture Economics/NVCA Moneytree Survey United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Full-Text and Full-Page Image base, National Science Foundation, Table - R&D expenditures at universities and colleges, National Science Foundation, Award Search, Education. Local school district reports in each metropolitan area. National Center for Educational Statistics, Transportation. The 007 Urban Mobility Report, Texas Transportation Institute, Texas A&M University U.S. Bureau of Census, American Community Survey, American FactFinder, State Departments of Transportation supplies Vehicle Miles Traveled from Road Inventory or Highway Mileage Reports, population from U.S. Bureau of Census. American Public Transportation Association, Ridership reports, Metropolitan Planning Organization TIP (Transportation Improvement Program), state department of transportation STIP (State Transportation Improvement Program), county and city CIP (Capital Improvement Program), tollway authorities Disclaimer: Information contained within and used to produce this publication is believed to be accurate and from reliable sources. The Partnership makes no representation regarding the completeness, accuracy, or timeliness of such information and the data or that such information and information will be error-free. 0 Partnership Center for Business Intelligence

23 Methodology The Partnership Regional Economic Scorecard was designed to give its leadership a quick reference index for understanding how the region compares with five other regions: Atlanta, Charlotte, Dallas, Jacksonville, and Raleigh-Durham. The most recent data available was used for all indicators. Comparison regions and indicators used in the categories were chosen through a series of working group meetings and with input from the Partnership leadership. All regions are unique so finding an apples to apples comparison is difficult if not impossible. The regions were arrived at by a consensus of which regions were felt to be common competitors for business expansions and relocations. There are six categories: Employment and Workforce; Income and Productivity; Housing; Innovation; Education; and Transportation. Each of these is made up of several individual indicators. Within every category, the regions are ranked against each other on a one-through-six scale with one being the most favorable in each of the indicators. All of the region s ranks are added together to arrive at the region s score. Whichever region has the lowest score is ranked the highest. From the overall rank of each region in the six categories, an Overall Regional Economic Scorecard is created by adding together the region s rank in each of the categories to arrive at a score. The regions are then ranked against each other one through six, in terms of which region had the lowest score, with one being the most favorable. The U.S. Office of Management and Budget definitions are used for comparison core-based statistical areas (CBSAs). The Raleigh-Durham region, consisting of. million residents, is a combination of the Raleigh- Cary CBSA and the Durham CBSA, defined as the counties of Chatham, Durham, Orange, Person, Franklin, Johnston, and Wake. The region, consisting of.0 million residents, is defined as a combination of the Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater CBSA, Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice CBSA, and the Lakeland CBSA. This definition of includes the seven counties of Hernando, Hillsborough, Manatee, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, and Sarasota. When CBSAs are combined they are done so by using a weighted average using an indicator appropriate factor. The Atlanta region, consisting of. million residents, is defined as the 8 counties of Barrow, Bartow, Butts, Carroll, Cherokee, Clayton, Cobb, Coweta, Dawson, DeKalb, Douglas, Fayette, Forsyth, Fulton, Gwinnett, Haralson, Heard, Henry, Jasper, Lamar, Meriwether, Newton, Paulding, Pickens, Pike, Rockdale, Spalding, and Walton. The Charlotte region, consisting of. million residents, is defined as the six counties of Anson, Cabarrus, Gaston, Mecklenburg, Union, and York (South Carolina). The Dallas region, consisting of. million residents, is defined as the counties of Collin, Dallas, Delta, Denton, Ellis, Hunt, Kaufman, Rockwall, Johnson, Parker, Tarrant, and Wise. The Jacksonville region, defined as the five counties of Baker, Clay, Duval, Nassau, and St. Johns, has. million residents. used for mean SAT score and high school graduation rates were reported by school district and were combined using a weighted average based on the number of students in each district in grades 9 through. used for degree information and University R&D spending were reported by the institution. This information was vetted by organizing the institutions by USOMB definitions of the CBSAs. Patents and National Science Foundation Awards were reported by city and were vetted to align with CBSA definitions used throughout the Regional Economic Scorecard. It is important to note that patents included in this document are issued patents by the inventor s city of residence by the major cities in the respective metropolitan statistical areas. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Covered Employment Statistics Program is used to determine the number of jobs and the job growth rate indicators. In some instances, this program may over or under count the number of employees of professional employment firms, which may affect data for all regions. Regional Economic Scorecard - Spring 009

24 The Partnership is the regional organization that works with its partners to market the region nationally and internationally, to conduct regional research and to coordinate efforts to influence business and government issues that impact economic growth and development West Cypress Street Suite 0 Tampa, FL info@tampabay.org AN ENTERPRISEFLORIDA PARTNER Printed May 009