WELCOME MESSAGE
For nine years, the Regional Competitiveness Report has served not only as a mirror but also as a compass for the Tampa Bay region. It reflects where we are, clearly and sometimes uncomfortably, while helping chart where we must go next. Over nearly a decade of shared work, we have learned that progress is rarely linear. At times it feels incremental, even glacial. Yet this pace is not unexpected. We are, a er all, turning a colossal vessel. It takes time to align a crew, build trust, and move in sync.
What continues to encourage us each year goes beyond movement in the data. It is the growing belief across our region that the challenges we face are best solved with collective e ort. That trust among business, government, education, and nonprofit leaders has unlocked smarter strategies, deeper collaboration, and solutions transforming Tampa Bay.
The 2026 Regional Competitiveness Report shows proof of that progress. Across the dataset, values improved in 39 of 61 indicators (64%). Of the remaining indicators, one was removed and five were not updated due to the absence of new data.
Talent is a bright spot, with 83% of talent indicators showing positive performance. Civic Quality indicators also advanced, with gains in eight of ten measures (80%).
At a macro level, Tampa Bay’s ranking against national peers is improving. We have shi ed away from the bottom quintile, with five fewer indicators in the lowest tier (9% less YOY) and four fewer in the fourth quintile. In 2026, more than a quarter of national indicators (25.86%) now rank in the top half.
This year’s theme, “Shaping the Mindset,” is timely and necessary. Competitiveness is not defined solely by rankings, but by the conditions we create for ideas to emerge and grow. In Tampa Bay, we aim to continue innovating by encouraging environments that reward experimentation and signal opportunity to entrepreneurs, students, and employers.
That mindset is especially critical as our cultural landscape shi s. Advances in artificial intelligence and digital infrastructure are reshaping how people learn, work, and connect. Tampa Bay saw a three percent increase in broadband access this year, alongside improved national rankings. Technology will also shape how we prepare our future workforce.
Bemetra Simmons President & CEO Tampa Bay Partnership
In 2026, we saw a small contraction in the number of 3and 4-year-olds enrolled in school (from 49.89% to 48.25%). Improvements in science, math, and third grade reading stand out. High school graduation rates rose year over year, including a 4.25% increase among economically disadvantaged students. Educational attainment improved across all levels, signaling stronger wage potential.
At the same time, several indicators demand attention. One key signal is the slowing influx of working-age professionals ages 24 to 35. Workforce dynamics, housing, transportation, and a ordability are deeply connected, and regions that succeed o er pathways to a prosperous life. There is much to love about Tampa Bay, but we cannot a ord to lose momentum here.
Wages in Tampa Bay increased by more than five percent year over year, a faster pace than in recent years. Yet in the lowest quintile, households are living on less than $18,000 annually. While traditional poverty rates have improved slightly, the share of households at the Asset Limited Income Constrained, Employed (ALICE) + Poverty threshold continues to grow, now at 46.30%.
People are working, some are earning more, yet many families still struggle to stay afloat. While modest a ordability improvements are encouraging, economic resilience will require sustained focus and bold, collective action.
In a world saturated with noise—crises, transformation, rapid technological change—leadership is about finding the signal. The Regional Competitiveness Report exists to cut through that noise. Each of its 66 indicators represents a lever for change. As we plan next steps, which signal will you tune into, and how will it shape your mindset?
We invite you to set your ceiling—your aspiration—and your floor—the minimum action you will commit to, even on the hardest days. Because the cost of inaction is too great.
With each engaged leader, momentum builds, and we move closer to the future we seek. We are grateful to shape Tampa Bay’s future alongside each of you.
Here is to bold thinking, shared purpose, and a fruitful year ahead.
Marlene Spalten President & CEO Community Foundation Tampa Bay
Jessica Muro CEO United Way Suncoast
ABOUT THE REPORT
The Regional Competitiveness Report brings together 66 indicators shaped through collaboration with more than 100 leaders from the business, public, and nonprofit sectors, with annual review and input from community stakeholders.
The report assesses the region’s performance and trajectory against 19 peer and aspirational metro areas, as well as the national benchmark. Organizations use these insights to better understand local challenges, establish strategic priorities, and allocate resources e ectively.
Five core pillars—Economic Vitality, Innovation, Infrastructure, Talent, and Civic Quality—define the foundational elements of the regional economy. These pillars reflect the needs of residents and employers, inform measurable Outcomes, and create a shared framework for fostering sustainable growth.
Comparison metro areas were selected based on their alignment with Tampa Bay in terms of population size, demographics, and economic scale, as well as shared regional assets such as ports and research universities and similar levels of competition for economic development.
COMPARISON COMMUNITIES
The Tampa Bay region is comprised of eight counties: Citrus, Hernando, Hillsborough, Manatee, Pasco, Pinellas, Polk, and Sarasota. For the purposes of this report, data is either composed by combining individual county-level data or data from the four Metropolitan Statistical Areas (metros):
Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater (Hernando, Hillsborough, Pasco, and Pinellas)
Homosassa Springs (Citrus)
Lakeland-Winter Haven (Polk) North Port-Sarasota-Bradenton (Manatee and Sarasota)
When metro-level data is used to create a regional value, the component values are weighted by an appropriate factor (population, number of households, etc.). It should be noted that o en, the Tampa Bay regional value remains close to the value of the Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater metro due to its size (it is the 10th largest metro in the nation).
THIS REPORT
RALEIGH-DURHAM
HOW TO READ THE TILES
THE 2026 REGIONAL COMPETITIVENESS SUMMARY REPORT is intended for the entire community, empowering individuals and organizations to contribute to Tampa Bay’s long-term competitiveness and prosperity. Learning how to e ectively interpret and use the information in the report is critical to making it a relevant and actionable resource.
Indicator Name
Tampa Bay
The absolute value for Tampa Bay is noted to provide additional context to the relative ranking. When displayed in green, the value improved. When displayed in red, the value worsened. When displayed in black, the value remained the same.
United States
Where available, information for the U.S. is included to illustrate how Tampa Bay compares to national performance. In the Florida Talent indicators, this section of the tile is the state average.
Top Performer
This is the top performer among the 20 markets, and its value.
2026 Ranking
The ranking highlights Tampa Bay’s relative position among the cohort in the 2026 report, and the ranking next to it indicates its position in the 2025 report. When the arrow appears in green, the ranking improved over the previous year. When displayed in red, the ranking worsened. When there is no arrow, the ranking remained the same.
THE COMPLETE DATA SET for each indicator, including the ranking and performance for all 20 markets, as well as the data source, can be found at www.stateo heregion.com.
Disclaimer: The Tampa Bay Partnership Foundation has, to the best of its ability, compiled the information contained within and used it to produce this publication. The data is believed to be the latest available at the time of production, accurate, and from reliable sources. The Tampa Bay Partnership Foundation welcomes feedback from the community. For more information on the methodology for this report, please contact Sarah Burgoyne, Senior Director of Research and Public Policy, at Sburgoyne@tampabay.org.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
THE REGIONAL COMPETITIVENESS REPORT is made possible through the engaged support of business and community leaders throughout Tampa Bay, both past and present.
This project expands and advances previous regional e orts, such as the Economic Market report and the Regional Economic Scorecard, led by the Tampa Bay Partnership and the former University of South Florida Center for Economic Development and Research (CEDR).
The strategic vision and leadership of Chuck Sykes, President and CEO of Sykes Enterprises and the chair of the Regional Indicators Task Force, was instrumental in the creation of the inaugural Regional Competitiveness Report in 2017, along with that of the participating task force members, including:
Robbie Artz
Michael Baughen
Len Becker
David Call
Gino Casanova
Bob Clifford
David Cohen
Tom Corona
David Doney
Nathaniel Doliner
Lee Evans
Gina Gallo
Scott Garlick
Brett Lafferty
Marty Lanahan
2026 STAKEHOLDER REVIEW
Rhea Law
Mark Lilly
Chad Loar
Suzanne McCormick
Seth McKeel
David Pizzo
Dr. Ed Rafalski
Amy Rettig
Nick Setteducato
Marlene Spalten
Matt Spence
William Walsh
Chuck Warrington
Melanie Williams
The insights and guidance of subject matter experts play a vital role in informing the indicators we track. As part of the annual review process, the following regional stakeholders generously contributed their time and perspectives. Their input will help strengthen future editions of the Regional Competitiveness Report, ensuring it remains a valuable and impactful resource for the community. We are sincerely grateful for their support and collaboration.
Rebecca Bacon
Matthew Battista
Dustin Becker
Lisa Bell
Whit Blanton
Cassandra Borchers
Ronaldo Brave
Christie Bruner
Jamison Carnegie
Rick Casey
U.S. Rep. Kathy Castor
Sydney Devitt
Joshua Ewen
Kelly Flannery
Allison Fraga
Layla Hayavi
Dr. Fredrick Hicks
Renee Hood
Lara Hopkins
Tinea Horman
2026 RESEARCH TEAM
Mischa Kirby
Yvette Lewis
Lisa Lopez
Lee Lowry
Sean Mallott
Joshua Matlock
Marcia Meijia
Olivier Millour
Jeff Oligschlaeger
Abigail Perez
Francis Pheeny
Rick Rampersad
Jerome Salantino
Esther Sanni
Richa Sharma
Veronica Thames
Johnny Wong
Lindsay Zimmerman
The data found in the 2026 Regional Competitiveness Report was compiled and produced by Sarah Burgoyne, Barbara J. Caldwell, Ph.D., Brian Camp, and Marcela Hladilova. Data analysis and summaries were produced by Shannon Kalahar, with appreciation to Sarah Burgoyne, Courtney McDonnell, and Diane Soto for quality assurance and editorial review.
OUTCOMES
OUTCOMES
Outcomes measure the growth of the regional economy, the extent to which economic growth is being enjoyed by everyone, and the attractiveness of the region for its current and potential residents.
Tampa Bay demonstrated improvements in 3 of 7 (43%) Outcomes Indicators, with rankings increasing in three areas. Two indicators—Gross Regional Product (GRP) Growth Rate and GRP per Capita—were unable to be updated for the 2026 report and continue to rely on the most recent available data at the time of production.
Tampa Bay’s Net Migration Rate slowed modestly from 2.20% to 2.09%, resulting in a drop from 1st to 2nd place among peer regions. Despite this slowdown, Tampa Bay continues to significantly outperform the national net migration rate of 0.83%. Of note, Florida MSAs continue to hold strong appeal. Orlando, Tampa Bay, and Jacksonville lead the competitive set, each with rates exceeding 2% net migration. The In-Migration Rate for young adults (ages 25–34) in Tampa Bay continued its gradual decline, moving from 9.68% to 8.43%. Tampa Bay’s ranking remained steady at 7th place, trailing faster-growing peer regions such as Austin, Jacksonville, and Nashville.
Tampa Bay’s Unemployment Rate for Ages 25–64 increased slightly from 3.47% to 3.63%, but the region remains marginally better than the national average of 3.80%. Notably, Tampa Bay’s ranking improved from 14th to 10th place, largely due to higher unemployment rates across other regions. This indicator features numerous ties, underscoring the narrow spread between peer metros.
Across traditional poverty measures, Tampa Bay continued to show incremental improvement. The region’s overall Poverty Rate declined from 11.96% to 11.09%, an improvement of nearly a full percentage point and faster than the national decrease of 0.35%. This progress nudged Tampa Bay’s ranking up from 17th to 16th, though the region still trails the leading metro by approximately six percentage points. Youth Poverty Rates also improved, falling from 14.86% to 14.14%, outperforming the national average of 15.48%. Despite this progress, Tampa Bay’s ranking slipped slightly to 16th, reflecting faster gains in peer regions. Full-Time Worker Poverty improved modestly, declining from 2.27% to 2.09%, with Tampa Bay’s ranking rising three places to 12th.
In contrast to gains across traditional poverty metrics, Tampa Bay’s Financial Instability Rate (ALICE + Poverty) worsened year over year. The share of households classified as “Asset Limited, Income Constrained, Employed) (ALICE), or living in poverty increased by nearly half a percentage point to 46.30%, pushing the region’s ranking down from 17th to 19th place. The national average held steady at 42%, placing Tampa Bay more than four percentage points worse than the U.S. overall. The data reveals a clear tiering among peer regions, with Tampa Bay clustered alongside other large Florida metros near the bottom, while regions like Minneapolis–St. Paul significantly outperform. Although more residents are technically rising above the federal poverty line, the growing ALICE population suggests an expanding “missing middle” of households that are employed yet increasingly unable to make ends meet.
^ No new data were available at the time of reporting.
^ No new data were available at the time of reporting.
ECONOMIC VITALITY
Economic Vitality measures the quantity and quality of jobs within a region, the relative incomes that its residents earn, the wealth they attain, and economic opportunities for its entrepreneurs.
Tampa Bay continues to demonstrate economic resilience, with 6 of 11 Economic Vitality indicators improving in value and rankings advancing in 4 areas. While several measures reflect ongoing wage and income gains, others point to a cooling growth environment consistent with national trends.
Wages increased at a faster pace than the U.S. overall, with average wages rising 5.14% to $66,671, compared with 4.50% nationally. Despite this momentum, Tampa Bay continues to trail the U.S. average by roughly $9,200, and the region’s ranking held steady at 18th for the fourth consecutive year. Average Service Sector Wages also continued to grow, reaching $37,698 (+3%), remaining slightly above the national average and maintaining 11th place.
In the 2026 report, only eight metro areas are adding jobs faster than the national average (0.97%), and Tampa Bay is one of them. Even though the Job Growth Rate in Tampa Bay has slowed marginally, falling to 1.07%, our ranking improved from 9th to 8th.
In 2026, Tampa Bay’s Share of Advanced Industry Jobs continued an incremental but steady increase, rising a few tenths of a percentage point year over year to 15.78%, ranking 9th.
Household Wealth showed notable improvement. Median Household Net Worth increased 6.2% to $267,696, far outpacing national growth (+1.2%), and li ed Tampa Bay’s ranking from 12th to 9th. Because wealth accumulates over time, these gains remain disproportionately concentrated among the region’s older residents.
Entrepreneurship remained a strength, even as activity so ened slightly. The Business Establishment Start Rate dipped to 12.97%, but Tampa Bay remains above the U.S. average (10.61%) and held 5th place for the fourth year in a row. Orlando leads the competitive set at 14.14%.
In contrast, Existing Home Sales price growth turned negative at -4.01%, placing Tampa Bay 19th among peer regions. Markets across the country are cooling, with 11 of the 20 MSAs showing signs of slowing or contracting. Thirteen metro areas are growing more slowly than the national average of 0.78%.
Because home prices rose sharply during the pandemic, many Tampa Bay homeowners, especially long-time owners, still hold substantial equity, despite the recent decline in prices.
For buyers, this slowdown could improve a ordability and create more realistic entry points into the market.
Merchandise Export Growth Rates reflect data prior to any trade policy changes that occurred during the current administration. Tampa Bay’s value decreased from 57.11% to 7.10%. The U.S. Average also had large declines, falling from 17.56% to 2.04%. Tampa Bay’s ranking fell from 1st to 5th place.
Income gains continued across households. Median household income rose to $76,741 (+$4,310), growing faster than the U.S. average increase, though Tampa Bay’s ranking remained 20th. The lowest income quintile also saw improvement, rising to $17,582, moving just above the national average and improving the region’s rank from 18th to 17th.
INFRASTRUCTURE
Infrastructure measures the quantity and quality of the investment a region makes in underlying structures, including transportation and broadband internet.
Infrastructure remains a long-standing challenge for the Tampa Bay region. In the 2026 Regional Competitiveness Report, performance was mixed, with 4 indicators improving and 4 worsening, and rankings improving in several areas. Two important data notes apply this year: updated data was not available for Pavement Condition, and the Walkability indicator has been discontinued due to inconsistent frequency and quality of the data.
Public transit showed modest improvement, with Transit Ridership per Capita increasing from 6.39 to 6.60 and Transit Vehicle Revenue Miles per Capita rising almost a negligible amount from 7.70 to 7.76. It is important to note that the data set for Transit Ridership per Capita tracks overall rides, not unique riders, so this may indicate an uptick in adoption or that those who already use public transit are using it more frequently. Despite the incremental improvements, Tampa Bay’s rankings remained near the bottom (19th and 20th).
Pedestrian and cyclist safety worsened, with fatalities increasing to 5.49 per 100,000 residents. Although Tampa Bay is now closer to twice the national average rather than 2.5 times higher, this reflects worsening safety nationally rather than local improvement. The region remains 20th for the third consecutive year.
Annual Hours Lost in Congestion increased slightly to 26 hours, yet Tampa Bay’s ranking improved from 5th to 4th, as tra ic worsened more significantly in other peer metros.
Average commute time declined marginally to 29.26 minutes (a di erence of 18 seconds), improving Tampa Bay’s rank to 15th, while the Share of Commuters with 1+ Hour Commutes edged up to 10.53%. These patterns continue to reflect housing a ordability pressures and longer-distance commuting within the region.
Digital access improved meaningfully, with the Share of Households with a Computer and Dedicated Broadband increasing to 85.51%, moving Tampa Bay from 14th to 9th place. The top performer is now just 2.4 percent higher than our region.
Airline Passenger Growth Rates declined to 2.31%, pushing Tampa Bay’s ranking down to 18th place. The U.S. average declined for the second year by a similar margin, from 11.43% to 4.09%. This decline is not a cause for concern. Passenger totals continue to increase, though growth rates are moderating as regional airports near infrastructure capacity and pursue operational expansion.
^ No new data were available at the time of reporting.
INFRASTRUCTURE
TALENT
Talent measures who is working today and how well the region's talent pipeline is being prepared for the jobs of tomorrow.
Overall, Tampa Bay continued to show year over year improvement across many Talent indicators, signaling a gradual strengthening of the region’s workforce. However, gains were uneven across the pipeline, and competitive positioning (tracked by rankings) remains a challenge.
Educational attainment increased at every level.
The share of residents with an AA/AS or higher rose from 43.84% to 45.33%, marking the first ranking improvement in several years, moving Tampa Bay from 19th to 18th. Bachelor’s Degree Attainment increased to 35.04%, and Graduate or Professional Degree Attainment rose to 13.48%, though Tampa Bay continues to rank near the bottom and remains below the U.S. average in both categories. Among adults ages 25–34, BA/BS Attainment improved to 37.80%, yet Tampa Bay slipped to 18th place, indicating faster progress in the other metro areas tracked in the report.
Certificate Production increased by over three percentage points to 31.52 per 10,000 residents. AA/AS Degree Production was nearly flat but did not decline like the national trend. STEM Degree Production rose to 13.08. Despite these gains in year over year performance, Tampa Bay ranks in the bottom quintile against peer metros.
K–12 indicators saw strong gains. Overall, High School Graduation Rates in Tampa Bay increased from 85.70% to 88.61%, and Graduation Rates for Economically Disadvantaged Students rose more than four points to 83.56%, improving Tampa Bay’s rankings to 11th and 10th, respectively. However, the share of 3- and 4-year-olds enrolled in school declined slightly to 48.25%, a slight contraction a er last year’s 6.52% surge.
At the same time, the share of Opportunity Youth (referred to as Disconnected Youth in previous reports)—defined as youth aged 16–24 who are neither enrolled in school nor working—increased from 10.77% to 11.35%, suggesting additional pressures as youth falter in the transition from high school to post-secondary training or work.
Labor force participation among ages 25–64 continued to climb, reaching 79.71%, narrowing the gap with the U.S. average, though Tampa Bay remains 19th overall.
Together, the data suggests Tampa Bay is making positive progress each year, but we will need to continue scaling e orts to become more competitive with peer and aspirant metro areas.
FLORIDA TALENT
Florida Talent measures specific educational pipeline indicators tracked by the state of Florida, and compares the Tampa Bay metro against 3 other comparison metrosJacksonville, Orlando, and South Florida.
Tampa Bay improved performance in 6 of 9 Florida Talent indicators (67%), signaling continued academic progress across the K–12 pipeline. However, statewide rankings did not improve, with none increasing, six unchanged, and three declining, suggesting faster gains elsewhere in Florida.
Kindergarten Readiness fell to 42.96%, though this decline reflects a new assessment scale for all metro areas and is not comparable to prior years. Third Grade ELA Reading rose to 55.40%, adding roughly 922 students at grade level. Math, Science, Biology I, and Algebra I also improved, though rankings remained 4th. AP Passing Rates climbed sharply to 57.95%, despite a slight dip in AP participation. SAT scores declined but stayed above the state average.
INNOVATION
Innovation measures the extent to which a community and its institutions are generating new ideas, and the market’s reception of these ideas.
Innovation performance in Tampa Bay was mixed in the 2026 Regional Competitiveness Report, with 2 of 4 indicators improving and 2 declining, while rankings improved or held steady across all measures.
University Research and Development Expenditures increased significantly, rising by $58 million to $467.2 million, though Tampa Bay’s ranking remained 16th for the sixth consecutive year, reflecting the large-scale gap between the region and top-performing peers like Houston.
University Technology Licensing Income declined to $4.25 million, yet Tampa Bay’s ranking improved slightly to 13th, as several peer regions experienced sharper drops.
Patent Production continued to weaken, falling for the third straight year to 0.66 patents per 10,000 residents, with Tampa Bay remaining 19th while national patent activity increased.
A bright spot was SBIR/STTR Awards per Capita, which rose 40% year over year to $6.24 per capita, improving Tampa Bay’s rank from 18th to 12th. Performance signals growing strength in small business innovation, though uncertainty around federal program authorization presents a near-term risk.
CIVIC QUALITY
Civic quality measures the affordability of a region, the health and safety of its citizens, and the recreational opportunities that impact its quality of life.
Tampa Bay showed broad improvement across Civic Quality indicators in the 2026 Regional Competitiveness Report, with values improving in 8 of 10 measures (80%). However, competitive positioning was mixed, with rankings improving in 4 indicators, holding steady in 2, and declining in 4, reflecting faster progress in some peer regions. New data was not available for the Total Crime Index or Violent Crime Index this year.
On average, annual housing costs rose by $514, and annual transportation expenditures rose by $195. However, due to a rise in average household income in the region, the “share of household income” or the proportion of a budget used to pay for these expenditures has improved year over year to 53.33%.
As a result, Tampa Bay saw its first ranking gain in “combined a ordability” in three years, moving us to 16th place.
The share of income spent on housing in the region declined from 41.15% to 39.63% of income, and the percentage of income spent on transportation expenses fell below 14% for the first time in five years (from 14.20% in the 2025 report to 13.70% in 2026), improving the region’s rank three places to 15th.
Health and access indicators were mixed. Health Insurance Coverage Rates increased to 89.74%, improving Tampa Bay’s rank to 12th, while Primary Care Physicians per 10,000 Residents declined almost imperceptibly, dropping the region two places to 16th place. This number has remained stable for the last five years. The number of Mental Health Providers per 10,000 Residents continued to grow, but Tampa Bay remains well below the national average, even as our growth rate is above the national average.
Food Insecurity worsened, now a ecting over 14% of residents, with Tampa Bay holding 16th place for the fourth consecutive year. Median Air Quality improved modestly, though the region’s rank slipped to 6th due to tighter clustering among peers. Cultural and Recreational Establishments per 10,000 Residents continued to expand faster than the national pace, despite a slight drop in ranking to 12th place.
Overall, Tampa Bay continues to make gains in civic quality, but we should continue to stay keenly aware of challenges in a ordability, food security, and healthcare access.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
^ No new data were available at the time of reporting.
^ No new data were available at the time of reporting.
This chart o ers a quick snapshot of how each indicator ranks across peer communities, grouped into five tiers. Darker shading signals stronger performance, while lighter shading reflects a weaker relative position. The view is meant to surface patterns among peer and aspirational markets and prompt deeper review, and is not intended to convey an overall score.
In Economic Vitality, Tampa Bay saw values improve in 55% of indicators, reflecting continued gains in wages, job growth, and household wealth. Ranking outcomes were mixed, with 36% improving, 36% holding steady, and 27% declining.
Innovation results were evenly split, with half of the indicators improving and half declining. While University Research and Development investment and SBIR/STTR funding showed meaningful gains, patent production continued to lag. Ranking performance was stable to improving, with no indicators declining.
In Infrastructure, results were mixed. Half of the indicators improved, and half worsened year over year. Rankings improved in 5 measures, 3 remained unchanged, and 1 indicator fell in rank. Gains in digital access, and slight increases in commute times, transit ridership and service contrast with ongoing challenges in safety. And although annual hours in congestion worsened year-over-year, our ranking improved to third place, demonstrating it is getting even worse in other parts of the country. Two indicators—pavement condition and walkability— were unavailable or discontinued this year.
(Contains Ties) Household Digital Access Average Commute Time (Contains Ties) Commuters with
The Talent category showed broad improvement, with 83% of values improving. Gains were evident across educational attainment, degree production, high school completion, and labor force participation. Rankings improved in one-third of indicators, though several remained unchanged or declined.
In Civic Quality, Tampa Bay demonstrated strong forward momentum, with 80% of values improving. Crime indicators were not updated for the 2026 report due to delays in data release from their sources.
Across Outcomes, performance was more balanced, with 43% of values improving and 57% worsening, and rankings split evenly between gains and declines (4/10 each, with 2/10 indicators having no change). Two economic output measures—GRP Growth Rate and GRP per Capita—did not have new data released in time for publication.
Overall, the 2026 results depict a region making progress across many drivers, while also facing constraints in a ordability and infrastructure. The data reinforces the importance of sustained regional collaboration in continuing to build long-term competitiveness and continued improvements to quality of life.
16-24 Year Olds Neither Employed norin School Certificate Production per 10,000 Residents Degree Production per 10,000 Residents STEM Degree Production per 10,000 Residents High School Graduation Rate High School Graduation Rate Economically Disadvantaged 3& 4-Year-Olds Enrolled in School (Contains Ties)
Educational Attainment Rate: AA/AS+ Educational Attainment Rate: BA/BS+ Educational Attainment Rate: Graduate/Professional 25-34 Year Old Educational Attainment Rate: BA/BS+ Labor Force Participation Rate: Age 25-64 (Contains Ties) Cultural/Recreational Establishments per 10,000 Residents Mental Health Providers per 10,000 Residents A ordability: Costsas Percentageof Income A ordability: Housing A ordability: Transportation FoodInsecurityPrimaryCarePhysicians per 10,000 Residents Air Quality (Contains Ties) Health Insurance Coverage Rate Total Crime Index (Contains Ties) Violent Crime Rate Index Share of Children in Foster Care (Contains Ties) Unemployment Rate (Contains Ties) NetMigrationPopulationAge 25-34 In-Migration Rate Gross Regional Product (GRP) Growth Rate Per Capita Gross Regional Product (GRP) Financial Instability Rate: ALICE+Poverty Poverty Rate Youth Poverty Rate Full-Time Worker Poverty Rate
The authors, together with the project team, sincerely appreciate the board leadership of Community Foundation Tampa Bay, United Way Suncoast, and the Tampa Bay Partnership. Your ongoing commitment and active support are invaluable as we work collectively to strengthen a more competitive and vibrant Tampa Bay.
(Leadership lists are current as of January 06, 2026.)
COMMUNITY FOUNDATION
TAMPA BAY BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Linda O. Simmons, Chair
R.R.Simmons Construction Corporation
Barry M. Alpert Alpert Financial Group
G. Robert Blanchard Jr. WRB Enterprises, Inc.
Joshua M. Bomstein Creative Contractors, Inc.
Dr. Andy Hafer Community Entreprenuer and Philanthropist
Oscar J. Horton, Past Chair Sun State International Truckers, LLC
Karen B. Lanese Lanese & Associates CPA Firm
Christopher C. Lykes Banking Executive
Sareet Majumdar ICTC Global Manufacturing Solutions
Andres S. Prida Prida, Guida and Perez P.A.
Greg Rosica Ernst & Young
Dr. Kevin Sneed USF Health
Marlene M. Spalten Community Foundation Tampa Bay
Janice Ferman Straske Philanthropist & Community Advocate
Willie Tims Jr. Retired Executive
Susan L. Touchton Philanthropist
Kay Annis Wilson Retired CEO, Volunteer Community Leader
Gregory C. Yadley Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP
UNITED WAY SUNCOAST BOARD OF TRUSTEES
Sara Nichols, Chair Appspace
Robbie Artz Tampa Bay Rays
Lori Baggett PODS Enterprises, LLC
Dr. Renée Baker The RBI Group
Sam Blatt
Amazon
James Camp Eagle Asset
Scott Curtis Raymond James
Mike Daigle M&J Daigle, LLC
Jacki Dezelski Manatee Chamber of Commerce
Carl Harness
Hillsborough County
Gary Hartfield Serenity Village
Laura Hurd PwC
Devaney Iglesias Florida Power and Light
Robert Lane Kerkering, Barberio, & Co.
Traci Larsen Regions Bank
Phillip Lee Florida Blue
Mary Lifland CAN Community Health
Chad Loar PNC Bank
Chris Majeski Raymond James
Joanne Mayers BayCare
Melva McKay-Bass Suncoast Credit Union
Rebecca Pickett Zoey Consulting, LLC.
Thais Rodriguez-Caez EY
Sonja Rosario Citibank
Alex Sink Community Volunteer
Robert Thompson Community Volunteer
TAMPA BAY PARTNERSHIP COUNCIL OF GOVERNORS
Nikky Flores, Chair JPMorganChase
Brian Auld Tampa Bay Rays
Ken Babby Tampa Bay Rays
Christina Barker Vinik Family O ice
Brian A. Butler Vistra Communications
Scott M. Daigle Fi h Third Bank
Kevin Johnson Suncoast Credit Union
Andrew Koenig CITY Furniture
Rhea F. Law University of South Florida
Phillip Lee Florida Blue
John A. Moore Orlando Health Bayfront Hospital
Benjamin J. Pratt The Mosaic Company
Melissa Seixas Duke Energy Florida
Jyric Sims HCA Healthcare, West Florida
Helen Wesley TECO Peoples Gas System
TAMPA BAY PARTNERSHIP LEADERSHIP COUNCIL
James Armstrong
Raymond James Financial
Stacy Baier Helios Education Foundation
Jared Barr Grow Financial Federal Credit Union
Ryan Booher Truist
Bob Cli ord WSP USA
Robin W. DeLaVergne Tampa General Hospital
Keri Eisenbeis BayCare Health System
April Grajales Regions Bank
Steve Griggs Tampa Bay Lightning
Chris Gstadler Accenture
Andy Hill
Coca-Cola Beverages Florida
Jill Kermes
TD Synnex
Atul Khosla Tampa Bay Buccaneers
Kara Klinger Deloitte & Touche, LLP
Chad Loar PNC Bank
Thomas Mantz Feeding Tampa Bay
Merritt Martin Mo itt Cancer Center
Ivory Matthews Neal Communities
Andy Mayts Shumaker, Loop & Kendrick, LLP
Jessica Muro United Way Suncoast
United Way Suncoast Board of Trustees continued
Gerhard Toth GTE Financial
Jessica Tressler Fi h Third Bank
Mike Webb Publix
Sean Wilkinson Publix
Edwin Narain AT&T
Keith O’Malley USAA
Robin Roark, MD McKinsey & Company
Marlene Spalten
Community Foundation
Tampa Bay
Mike Sutton
Habitat for Humanity
Tampa Bay Gulfside
Josh Taube
Strategic Property Partners
Andrew Wright Franklin Street