Process & Accomplishments
All-In-Pittsburgh
PREPARED FOR URBANKIND INSTITUTE By MonWin Consulting January 27, 2021
TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of Contents Where All-In-Pittsburgh started .................................................................................................................................. 1 The need for an Equity Agenda ........................................................................................................................................................... 2 The All-In-Cities model 2
......................................................................................
PolicyLink’s role .......................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Building the Capacity of the Local Team ......................................................................................................................................... 2 Resident Voice .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 2
Process ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 The P4 Summit and Equity Conference............................................................................................................................................ 5 Developing an Equity Agenda ............................................................................................................................................................... 2 Release of “Equitable Development in Pittsburgh: Moving from Vision to Action” ........................................................ 2 2017: Laying the groundwork for Implementation- Work Session with PolicyLink.................................................. 2 Developing strategy with PolicyLink and the Core Team .................................................................................................. 6 A Results Based Accountability Framework ............................................................................................................................ 6 A Data-informed Approach .............................................................................................................................................................. 6 The Steering Committee .................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Action Teams ........................................................................................................................................................................................... 6
Goals, metrics and Outcomes......................................................................................................................................... 4 Housing Action Team ............................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Entrepreneurship & Employment Action Team........................................................................................................................... 2 Overarching Outcomes ............................................................................................................................................................................. 2
Conclusion ................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Analysis ........................................................................................................................................................................................................... 5 Limitations ..................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Future Work .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 2 Next Steps ...................................................................................................................................................................................................... 2
Acknowledgements The work of All-In Pittsburgh was the result of a broad-based coalition including the public and private sector, philanthropy, community organizations, and universities. The following organizations contributed to the work of All-In Pittsburgh from 2017 to 2019: •
Homewood Children’s Village
•
The Allegheny Conference
•
The Kingsley Association
•
Vibrant Pittsburgh
•
Kelly Strayhorn Theater
•
Riverside Center for Innovation
•
Beltzhoover Consensus Group
•
Trek Development
•
Hill District Consensus Group
•
East End Development Partners
•
Hazelwood Initiative
•
Green Building Alliance
•
Perry Hilltop and Fineview Citizen’s Council
•
Regional Housing Legal Services
•
University of Pittsburgh |Office of Economic Partnerships
•
The Urban Redevelopment Authority
•
The Dept. of City Planning
•
Housing Alliance of PA
•
City Council District 6
•
Pittsburgh United
•
Allegheny County District 10
•
Action Housing
•
Office of Mayor William Peduto
•
The Pittsburgh Foundation
•
Pittsburgh Black Elected Officials Coalition
•
The Heinz Endowments
•
City Commission on Human Relations
•
The Forbes Funds
•
Allegheny County Dept. of Human Services
•
Chatham: Center for Women’s Entrepreneurship
•
Partners4Work
The core team is defined as the organizations and individuals responsible for convening and facilitating meetings. •
Neighborhood Allies
•
UrbanKind Institute
•
MonWin Consulting
•
Urban Innovation 21/Riverside Center for Innovation
•
PolicyLink
Page 1
PART 1: WHERE ALL-IN-PITTSBURGH STARTED THE NEED FOR AN EQUITY AGENDA All-In-Pittsburgh grew out of conversations that began in 2015 about equity and opportunity in our city, and the growing sense that not everyone was benefiting from Pittsburgh’s resurgence. It is well documented that Black and brown people of Pittsburgh do not have the same access to economic opportunity and have poorer outcomes than their white counterparts. Specific events that yearprovided an opportunity to develop a comprehensive equity agenda for Pittsburgh, as individual organizations’ work on equity related initiatives presented an opportunity to develop a shared agenda for an inclusive region. The following factors led a local group of leaders to advocate for an equity agenda: • •
• •
Pittsburgh’s resurgence brings great potential to deliver long-awaited jobs, economic opportunities, and neighborhood improvements. A recognition that without an intentional strategy to connect underserved people and the neighborhoods where they live to new opportunities, there are definitive populations that will not only “not benefit” but will be further left behind and displaced. Pittsburgh’s wide and well-documented racial, economic, and geographic inequities in health, wealth, and opportunity threaten our economic resilience and prosperity. Our region cannot reach its full potential when so many residents face barriers to fully participate and contribute to our economy.
The resurgence of investment that Pittsburgh has experienced in recent years has exacerbated housing inequality. Housing insecurity has skyrocketed, and vulnerable populations are being systematically displaced from their neighborhoods. These factors all contributed to the evolution of an All-In-Pittsburgh agenda- a model for inclusive growth developed by PolicyLink. According to the National Equity Atlas, the Pittsburgh region’s economic output would be about $5 billion higher every year absent our racial gaps in income.
THE ALL-IN-CITIES MODEL The discussions that took place in 2015 led to the formation of a local coalition that would partner with PolicyLink to adapt their All-In-Cities for inclusive growth to Pittsburgh. The work of this coalition became known as All-In-Pittsburgh. PolicyLink is a national research and action institute committed to advancing racial and economic equity. They came to Pittsburgh at the invitation of several community leaders with the support of local philanthropy. The All-In Cities initiative at PolicyLink is a policy agenda to equip city officials, community advocates, and civic leaders with policy ideas, data, and strategy support and build equitable cities.
Page 2
POLICYLINK’S ROLE After the release of the report (Equitable Development in Pittsburgh: Moving from Vision to Action), PolicyLink continued to support the local team for the next two years as a national partner. Their role was primarily to provide technical assistance to the local team, share best practices nationally, demonstrate how to work within the Results Based Framework model, and help resolve challenges along the way. The local coalition that initially began working with PolicyLink included Neighborhood Allies, Urban Innovation 21, and UrbanKind Institute. Their work was funded through the generous support of The Heinz Endowments and The Pittsburgh Foundation. The coalition began a public engagement process in earnest late in 2015 to begin to define what an inclusive equity agenda would look like for Pittsburgh. The process for developing that agenda is described in the next chapter.
BUILDING CAPACITY OF THE LOCAL TEAM The Pittsburgh Equitable Development Collaborative is the leadership body that came together to implement the equity agenda presented in the report- Equitable Development in Pittsburgh: Moving from Vision to Action. During the first few months of 2017, the local team went through some transitions and added extra capacity. Bill Generett, one of the founding members, transitioned to Duquesne University, and Neighborhood Allies contracted Mongalo-Winston Consulting to help manage implementation. This collaborative had a unique identity, focus, and change strategy: • • • • •
A diverse, multi-sector collaborative of over 50 organizations. Committed to advancing racial equity and inclusion. Anchored by community voice and power. Focused on policy and systems level change. Local partnerships and national expertise.
The core team was assembled to help implement the report and manage the coalition, with the support of PolicyLink from afar. The roles of the core team are described below:
Neighborhood Allies
MonWin Consulting
•Lead Convener of the Collaborative •Project Management Support •Research Support
•Project management •Coordinate the Implementation Team •Facilitate Steering Committee Meetings, and Action Teams •Coordinate policy efforts
Page 3
UrbanKind
PolicyLink
Urban Innovation 21
•Led the community and resident engagement •Help connect to broader equitable development initiatives
•Provide policy, research and data expertise •Advocacy •Coalition Building
•Support economic and entrepreneurship components of the work
RESIDENT VOICE Building community power, voice, & capacity was one of the (5) primary elements of the Equitable Development agenda. Therefore, the implementation phase included funding (7) community organizations to participate in coalition meetings and connect the city-wide conversations to what was happening in the neighborhoods. These organizations included: • • • • • • •
The Hill District Consensus Group (Hill District) The Kingsley Association (Larimer) Perry Hilltop/ Fineview Citizen’s Council (Northside) The Homewood Children’s Village (Homewood) Beltzhoover Consensus group (Hilltop neighborhoods) Hazelwood Initiative (Hazelwood) Kelly Strayhorn Theater (Janera Solomon)
This group was selected to include those with active participation in early conversations about an equity platform, to include the neighborhoods that were experiencing displacement due to pending development projects, and to include recognized community leaders. Several young leaders were selected to ensure diverse voices at the table. Some of the representatives from the organizations above, later, took leadership roles in the action teams. The role of these community organizations was to ensure All-In-Pittsburgh represented resident voices by: •
Serving as a link to activities that are happening in the neighborhoods and ensure that the Equitable Development Collaborative is serving the needs of our target population.
•
Sharing information about priority equitable development issues at the neighborhood level
•
Communicating activities of the collaborative to residents in the neighborhood and sharing opportunities to support legislation and activities that would ensure more equitable outcomes for residents.
•
Assisting in the identification of the action agenda for one of the Action Teams (Housing or Employment/Entrepreneurship).
•
Tracking the alignment of equitable development efforts with local community goals.
CRITERIA FOR DEVELOPING ROGRAM ADVOCACY There was major concern about ensuring resident voice on major development projects such as the Lower Hill Redevelopment and the ALMONO site in Hazelwood. PolicyLink helped to facilitate a conversation on how to prioritize advocacy efforts for equitable development on specific sites. The team defined key elements as follows: • • • •
Page 4
Size of project Type of project- a mixed-use project Degree of public involvement Timing: to ensure advocacy is taking place after a developer has been selected, but months before project for approval
•
Power analysis: analyze the ability to influence the project and improve outcomes
SECTION 2: PROCESS The effort to develop recommendations specific to Pittsburgh began in 2015 and lasted for about 18 months. The team then moved into implementation between 2017 and 2019. Below is a brief timeline of the evolution of All-In-Pittsburgh:
2015: P4 SUMMIT & THE POLICYLINK EQUITY SUMMIT •
In May 2015, The Heinz Endowments held the first p4 Summit in the Hill District. Angela Glover Blackwell, President of PolicyLink was an invited speaker and spoke directly to the inequities being experienced in cities throughout the country. The audience at the summit was largely homogenous, indicating that people of color were not part of the conversation in Pittsburgh. o
Participants at the summit felt the discussion focused in larger part on the vision of attracting new investment (and outsiders) rather than having deliberate conversations about addressing existing inequity and injustices in Pittsburgh.
o
There was also a sentiment that leaders talked about equity in small circles, yet there was minimal vocal leadership around making progress on these issues.
•
Subsequently a group of Black leaders, including, Bill Generett, Presley Gillespie, and UrbanKind Institute pursued a conversation with the Heinz Endowments to develop a policy agenda to ensure all Pittsburghers would benefit from Pittsburgh’s resurgence.
•
Summit 2015: All in for inclusion, justice, and prosperity in Los Angeles (Oct. 27-29, 2015) o
The Heinz Endowments and The POISE Foundation funded a cohort of Pittsburghers to attend the Equity Summit in L.A.
o
With the hope of expanding the conversation, and get more people using language of equity, inclusion, and justice.
o
Delegates included community orgs, public sector, philanthropy, activists (see the Appendix for a full list of participants) in Equity Summit delegation.
2015-2016: DEVELOPING AN EQUITY AGENDA Several parallel efforts helped to inform the final All-In-Pittsburgh agenda. The first was an effort by UrbanKind Institute to develop an inclusive agenda for Pittsburgh (see Appendix: Recommendations for an Equity, Justice, and Inclusionary Agenda for Pittsburgh).
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR AN EQUITY, JUSTICE AND INCLUSINARY AGENDA FOR PITTSBURGH In early 2016, Neighborhood Allies invited UrbanKind Institute to develop recommendations for a policy agenda that would make the Pittsburgh region more just, equitable, and inclusive. What followed was eight months of group discussions, one-on-one interviews, surveys, and informal
Page 5
conversations with more than 125 participants, representing 90 organizations including elected officials from the city, county, and state, practitioners including representatives from the mayor’s office, and heads of various city departments and authorities, and a range of community organizations and local leaders. UrbanKind Institute engaged a broad range of stakeholders to prepare a list of recommendations for an action agenda for equity, justice, and inclusion, using PolicyLink’s list of policy goals for cities that commit to being “all-in” for equity and justice. 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8.
Grow good, accessible jobs that provide pathways to the middle class, Increase the economic security and mobility of vulnerable families and workers, Cultivate homegrown talent through a strong cradle-to-career pipeline, Create healthy, opportunity-rich neighborhoods for all, Build resilient, connected infrastructure, Increase access to high quality, affordable homes and prevent displacement, Expand democracy and the right to the city, Ensure just policing and court systems.
The results were initial recommendations under each policy area, and metrics to measure progress. The assumption was that the city would then need to set 3, 5, 10- and 20-year goals around equity.
ADAPTING THE ALL-IN-CITIES MODEL- STARTING TO DEFINE EQUITABLE DEVELOPEMENT Simultaneously in February 2016, PolicyLink came to Pittsburgh to work with the local team to interview key stakeholders (see appendix for list of interviewees). The interviews were done through a series of cohorts, and included various sectors, including developers. The purpose of these interviews was to: • • •
Begin creating a definition of equitable development for Pittsburgh and continue outlining a policy/action agenda, with input from additional community leaders Shape the process for developing this definition and agenda in a way that garners maximum action and momentum Gather input on key project questions and list of interviewees (see following pages)
The interviews took place between Feb. 1-3, 2016. Stakeholders were asked the following questions: 1. We are trying to develop a working definition of equitable development for Pittsburgh. What do you think is important to the definition? 2. What do you see as the biggest challenges to achieving equitable development in Pittsburgh? Of these challenges, which is the toughest issue to tackle and why? 3. What are the biggest opportunities? Where does Pittsburgh have real potential to make progress? 4. What needs to happen within different sectors to advance equitable development or inclusive growth? Please focus on your own sector first then speak to any other sectors. 5. Are there particular promising strategies or policies from outside of the region that you think could be models for Pittsburgh?
Page 6
6. What role do you want to play in advancing equitable development? 7. Are there others we should be speaking with? The effort to define a comprehensive justice, equity, and inclusion agenda for Pittsburgh resulted in the release of the report: Equitable Development in Pittsburgh: Moving from Vision to Action. The report articulated why an equity agenda was so crucial for Pittsburgh, articulated a Pittsburgh specific definition for “Equitable Development”, and 16 specific recommendations under five major issue areas to ensure that everyone benefits from investment in our city. At this time, PolicyLink also worked with the local team to establish a workplan and timeline to develop an equitable development strategy for Pittsburgh. PolicyLink shared how they have defined equitable development nationally and in older industrial cities and provided an overview of equitable development tools/strategies to frame a discussion about the definition and strategy for Pittsburgh.
NOVEMBER 2016: RELEASE OF “EQUITABLE DEVELOPMENT IN PITTSBURGH: MOVING FROM VISION TO ACTION” The report included 16 recommendations and was organized into the following sections: I. II. III. IV. V.
Raise the Bar for New Development Make All Neighborhoods Healthy Communities of Opportunity Expand Employment and Ownership Opportunities Embed Racial Equity Throughout Pittsburgh’s Institutions and Businesses Build Community Power, Voice, & Capacity
Equitable development is a positive development strategy that ensures everyone participates in and benefits from the region’s economic transformation—especially lowincome residents, communities of color, immigrants, and others at risk of being left behind. It requires an intentional focus on eliminating racial inequities and barriers, and making accountable and catalytic investments to assure that lower-wealth residents: •
live in healthy, safe, opportunity-rich neighborhoods that reflect their culture (and are not displaced from them);
This report was just one of several complimentary • connect to economic and ownership efforts including the Housing Opportunity Fund, opportunities; and and recommendations for legislation and policies • have voice and influence in the decisions that developed by the joint City-County Affirmatively shape their neighborhoods Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Task Force addressing inequities in Pittsburgh. The report was released at a press conference at the August Wilson Center in September of 2016. Subsequently, a community meeting was hosted at the Grayson Jr. Center to begin implementation. During the meeting at the Grayson Center, participants were broken up into smaller groups to discuss the topics of housing, employment, and livelihoods. The purpose of the meeting was to identify what were the most pressing issues, and to prioritize strategies. This was a somewhat
Page 7
difficult meeting, and it became clear that there needed to be some structure by which to prioritize implementation efforts. Therefor the team reconvened with PolicyLink to determine a way forward. Based on the outcomes of that meeting, PolicyLink recommended establishing a steering committee to guide the work. This committee was formed based on participants in the development of the report, and those that attended the Equity Summit. The local team ensured that this committee was multi-sector and included a strong community voice.
2017 LAYING THE GROUNDWORK FOR IMPLEMENTATION April 2017: Strategic Session with PolicyLink & Local Partners In April of 2017, Michael McAffee, Director of PolicyLink, traveled to Pittsburgh to facilitate a working session with the core team to: • • • •
Establish how to set a container to accelerate results, agree on the 12- month process for moving stakeholders from talk to action, agree on who would take the lead on facilitating to process to co-design and obtain buy-in to the results framework, and agree on an initial list of steering committee members and their roles and responsibilities.
During this meeting, the team discussed what success would look like after 6 months, and how to move from talk to action. PolicyLink noted the importance of facilitating a process that keeps results at the center and can move multi-sector stakeholders into alignment. There was also an acknowledgement that building trust would be the defining factor in achieving success. Spring 2017: A Results Based Accountability Framework
Target Population: 340,000 people
PolicyLink introduced a results-based accountability living at or below 200% of poverty, in framework to organize the implementation of the report Allegheny County with an initial focus of 105,000 who live in the city recommendations and set measurable outcomes for each policy area. This model had been used in their All-In Cities work and served to track measurable results. They coached the core team on creating a framework for Pittsburgh, and it became the organizing element for the implementation phase. The Results Framework: 1. Identifies the target population for our efforts 2. Identifies indicators by which to measure success 3. Prioritizes strategies to reach results Our Result: Lower wealth residents:
Page 8
• • •
live in healthy, safe, opportunity-rich neighborhoods that reflect their culture (and are not displaced from them), connect to economic and ownership opportunities, and have voice and influence in the decisions that shape their neighborhoods.
Our Target Population: The team established a population that was most at risk in Pittsburgh. This provided the ability to track specific results down the road and kept us accountable to measurable goals. The team decided to prioritize the population within the city, recognizing that many residents are being pushed out to the county- and therefore kept in mind policies that would benefit the overall target population. Our Initial Focus: Based on issue areas identified in the report, the team identified “headline” indicators. While often there are sub-indicators, it was important to name indicators that could be influences and measured. Based on early discussions with the core team and steering committee in 2017, the following initial focus areas rose to the top: • • • • •
Expanding access to entrepreneurship and employment opportunities, Improving pathways to homeownership, Tenant co-powerment (when tenants are equally empowered with information and resources as landlords, and can advocated against eviction or displacement), Land for equitable development, Institutionalizing an equitable approach throughout city government.
The common thread among these was ensuring community ownership. These were narrowed down further as the year went on given the capacity of the coalition. The team reviewed the criteria for indicators that would be selected for each area. Indicator Selection Criteria: 1. Ability to impact our overall result statement (see above) 2. Ability to collect and track consistent data for indicator over time 3. Ability to be disaggregated by race, age and when possible, by neighborhood 4. Reflects shared Steering Committee priorities 5. For Housing, the selection of indicators that impact both renters and homeowners 6. For Employment & Entrepreneurship, the selection of indicators that impact poverty, employment, and business development 7. The recommended indicators are intended to be primary indicators which will help track progress at the highest level A Data Informed Approach The approach to All-In-Cities was grounded in the existing data about the inequities in Pittsburgh, particularly outcomes for African American residents. The chart below illustrates the breakdown of poverty levels when this work began.
Page 9
The team looked at the neighborhood patterns and patterns of poverty of where the Black population lived. The maps demonstrated the clear need for equitable development strategies in particular neighborhoods that were experiencing higher levels of displacement, including the Hill District, Hazelwood, and Homewood. PolicyLink and Neighborhood Allies took the lead in the data analysis and supported the action teams in providing necessary information when needed. The data was used to identify potential indicators by which to gauge the success of certain strategies. Later in the process, indicators were identified by each of the action teams working on potential solutions. The team agreed indicators would be disaggregated by race, age, and geography when possible. Summer 2017: establishing The Steering Committee The core team assembled a steering committee in early 2017 to drive the decision-making around which recommendations to tackle first. The vision for a steering committee began with a discussion around which individuals and institutions were critical in facilitating buy-in into this equity agenda. To achieve collective impact, it was critical that a governance structure be implemented to hold the identified results as a high priority. This body was comprised of leaders that could influence policy or practice, could leverage resources, and have the authority to hold stakeholders accountable for making measurable improvement on an indicator. The team identified stakeholders that could impact the primary indicators: •
Building wealth/living wage
•
Homeownership
•
Land use
•
Tenant protections stakeholders
Page 10
Throughout that summer, the team formalized the role of the steering committee as follows: Mission: Establishes the Results Framework, holds us accountable to making progress, can leverage and align resources, remove barriers, and model equitable development. Who: A diverse group of respected leaders across various sectors (public and private sector, nonprofit, philanthropy, and community organizations) that are committed to advancing racial equity and equitable development throughout Pittsburgh. •
The final composition of the steering committee consisted of over 40 organizations and individuals that were either involved in the formation of the report or could influence change in one of the areas that were identified (see appendix for a list of steering committee members).
Commitment: Members of the steering committee agreed to the following working principles: •
To serve for 12 months
•
To attend quarterly meetings
•
To help to educate others as part of building public will
•
To develop a common language/talking points among members
•
Action Areas from the report • •
•
Make all neighborhoods healthy communities of opportunity Raise the bar for new development—new development should be more than just bricks and mortar, should have a positive benefit on the immediate neighborhood (jobs, affordable housing, amenities, transit, etc.) Ensure access to safe, quality affordable housing for renters and owners
To agree that diversity among the members is a principle
August 2017: 1st steering committee The steering committee first convened to prioritize the 15 recommendations included in the report. Two issue areas came to the forefront: housing security & jobs. One outcome of the steering committee was to create two action teams that would tackle each priority areas. Hence a housing team, and an employment and entrepreneurship were formed. The steering committee continued to meet quarterly for the next two years to review policy proposals, provide guidance, and direction to help prioritize the work of All-In-Pittsburgh.
FALL 2017 TO SUMMER 2019: ACTION TEAMS Two teams were established to finalize and track a results accountability framework for each issue area. Each team was responsible for setting indicators, metrics, and strategies to achieve results at scale. 1. Housing Action team 2. Employment & Entrepreneurship Action Team
Page 11
Who: The teams were a subset of the steering committee, and therefore represented a cross-sector partnership of public and private sector, nonprofit, philanthropy, and community organizations. They later grew to include more stakeholders as the work gained momentum. Later a policy group evolved to work with elected officials on equity policies within government. These teams met almost monthly continuously for two years to identify strategies, respond to pressing issues, and try to advance the conversation on making progress together on an equity agenda. See the appendix for a full list of the organizations that participated.
SECTION 3: GOALS, METRICS AND OUTCOMES Implementation efforts began in earnest with a letter to Mayor Peduto seeking action on a few key recommendations in June of 2017. The letter included the following requests (see appendix for a full copy of the letter): • •
• • •
Take executive or legislative action to adopt equitable development as a goal Develop a citywide equitable development strategy. After adopting equitable development as a goal, the city should develop a strategy for implementing equitable development over the next five years. Prioritize economic and ownership opportunities through citywide policy and on specific development projects. Give equity greater weight in the implementation of the P4 performance measures. We also recommend that the group formed to oversee the implementation of the P4 performance measures: o include representatives from vulnerable groups including low-income tenants and tenants’ rights organizations; and o conduct an analysis of how well the initial round of projects performed in terms of equity outcomes and make recommendations for strengthening the metrics to promote equity.
The All-In-Pittsburgh action teams continued to meet over a two-year period to implement strategies and to course correct as specific priorities came up that affected Pittsburgh’s underserved residents. The work of the action teams is summarized below:
HOUSING ACTION TEAM The work of the action team was very complex given the interest of competing forces at the table. While everyone agreed in principle on the need for healthy, accessible, and affordable housing, there was also a recognition that existing structures sometimes make that difficult to achieve. While it took longer to come to agreement, the group did come to a shared list of working principles that kept everyone engaged in the work for two years. Goals: Low-wealth residents live in healthy, safe, opportunity-rich neighborhoods that reflect their culture (and are not displaced from them).
Page 12
Working Principles • • • • • •
Discriminatory housing policies led to housing disparities. We strive to reverse some of the resulting segregation and housing patterns through new policy initiatives. We are committed to minimizing displacement. All neighborhoods should be neighborhoods of opportunity. All residents should have access to safe, quality, affordable housing. We should strive for mixed income neighborhoods.
Indicators: •
•
•
•
Housing burden for renters and owners (share paying 30% of income on housing costs) o Managing housing costs for residents will allow them to stay in their neighborhood, or possibly move to another neighborhood of choice; allows for resident mobility Homeownership rate in opportunity-rich neighborhoods o Residents are more able to stay in their neighborhood, indicates stable income and ability to buy; a commitment to the neighborhood and willingness to invest in a particular place; there’s an assumption that the neighborhood is healthier if people are buying there The number of affordable housing units (available to households at or below 80%, 50%, and 30% of median) in opportunity-rich neighborhoods. o Ensure that there is affordable housing in all neighborhoods, not just the neighborhoods of last resort; ensure that neighborhoods offering desirable amenities, including connections to transit and employment, also have affordable housing. Defining “opportunity rich neighborhoods” (refer to Healthy Neighborhoods framework http://neighborhoodallies.com/what-we-do/healthy-neighborhoods/)
Strategies: Policy, programs, and systems change 1. Implement a tenant protections policy that will enhance tenants’ ability to stay in safe, quality housing (program/policy) • Formed a tenant protection working group with key stakeholders, and funded the Housing Alliance of PA to identify the best practices and locally appropriate models 2. Advocate for equitable development early in the development process • 2018: Started a dialogue with DCP that resulted in opening a public comment period for the pending Neighborhood Plan Guide • P4 metrics- Collaborated with the URA on the implementation of p4, with a specific focus on the equity metrics within the broad framework • Collaborated with city council members and the Department of City Planning to study an Affordable Housing Impact Statement for developments of a certain size that might lead to additional displacement 3. Advocate for the creation of a new PA housing tax credit (policy)
Page 13
•
Supported the Housing Alliance of PA to pass a new source of funding for affordable housing
The group also identified strategies for future consideration:
Action Areas from the report •
Increase the share and number of contracts on publicly supported projects going to underrepresented entrepreneurs Strengthen and grow existing businesses in Pittsburgh's lowerincome communities; increase access to capital for underrepresented entrepreneurs Increase the share of quality livingwage jobs created through development and public investment going to residents who face barriers to employment
1. Advance policies that prevent displacement and address gentrification (policy). The Affirmatively Furthering Fair • Housing Task Force (AFFH) named some of these potential policies: • AFFH policy #4 (segregation prevention): policy that requires consideration of the market and segregating • patterns when proposing new development • AFFH policy #6: increasing investment in Black neighborhoods- Strategic investment in neighborhoods traditionally suffering disinvestment and threatened by gentrification • Support the development of community land trusts in gentrifying neighborhoods 2. Inclusionary zoning (policy) 3. Home ownership- protect and stabilize existing low-income homeowners, increase the number of units, and prepare people for ownership • Look for partnerships between banking and philanthropy to increase home ownership opportunities for African Americans (Cleveland model). o Banks create financial pathways for residents to purchase homes, and strengthen rent-to-own programs, ensuring they are not predatory. • Increase the number of units through varied ownership models (community land trusts, etc.) • AFFH policy #7: Section 8 home ownership program, expand use of 4% tax credits- help existing homeowners
EMPLOYMENT AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP ACTION TEAM While there was debate about the nature of traditional employment and entrepreneurship, the coalition decided to tackle this together- recognizing that there are different mitigating factors. The action team included representatives of both more traditional employers, and individuals and organizations that support entrepreneurship (see appendix for full list of participants). Goal: Expand quality employment and entrepreneurship opportunities for low-wealth residents. • • • • •
Page 14
Connect people to jobs and increased economic opportunity Increase MWDBE participation on publicly supported projects Increase local hiring Grow and support minority businesses Uplift the p4 Opportunity Metric
Indicators: Participants identified the following indicators to measure progress on the goals above. • • •
Percentage of residents living at or below 200% of poverty o Jobless rate (share of working-age population not currently employed) Moving forward we must keep in mind the Gig economy and how it factors in (stat: by 2020, 40% of people will be part of the gig economy) Number of minority-owned businesses (not necessarily certified) o In subsequent years would like to track jobs being created by minority-business
Strategies 1. Advance equity in the workplace- change hiring (and retention) behavior and policies at organizations & corporations (systems) • Confirm commitments from Steering Committee member organizations to implement the Rooney Rule in hiring or purchasing (within one year), and join a community of practice • Encourage organizations to assess their practices, and use a tracking tool for the workplace such as: o Workplace Equity Challenge o JUST Label (a national transparency label for organizational diversity and inclusion practices within an organization) o Diversity Scorecard (Vibrant PGH)- an annual measuring tool • Promote the Allegheny Conference Diversity Supplier Initiative 3. Advance policy that eliminates barriers to employment • Continue to support clean slate legislation for people with criminal records, and work with partners, such as the Allegheny Conference, on other policy initiatives • Partner with the PBEOC to introduce legislation that ensures greater accountability within city government 4. Increase access to capital- in partnership with forward cities • Work with participating banks to create more funding opportunities for minority entrepreneurs • Promote the URA’s micro enterprise loan program • Consider an Equity Quotient Scorecard as a tool for Steering Committee member funders to guide funding decisions • Simplify access to information- Gather all existing capital opportunities (and business assistance) available to minority entrepreneurs in one place 5. Connect existing workforce development efforts • Improve connections to jobs at “anchor” institutions, universities, etc. • Encourage major institutions to prioritize opportunities for our target population • Explore scaling the University Talent Alliance program
Page 15
INSTITUTIONALIZING EQUITY THROUGHOUT CITY GOVERNMENT TEAM The team worked closely with the PBEOC (Pittsburgh Black Elected Officials Coalition) and the Office of Equity to identify opportunities to ensure greater accountability within government. The team explored opportunities to adopt policy that would ensure the following: -
Greater accountability in government spending Understanding the impacts of new development on displacement and affordable housing Adopting measures that would require implementation of the All-In-Pittsburgh report recommendations Ensure future transparency and coordination between City Council, the Office of Equity, and the general public on equity measures
OVERARCHING OUTCOMES Sustained infrastructure and Expanded Operations of the Collaborative •
•
•
•
Forged a Core Team: of Neighborhood Allies, MonWin Consulting, UrbanKind Institute and PolicyLink to help drive the work of the Collaborative through regular convenings, policy research, community engagement activities, coalition-building, fundraising, communications, advocacy, and financial investments for the activation of equity projects/initiatives. Solidified a Steering Committee & Two Action Teams: Housing & Employment/Entrepreneurship o Represents over 50 individuals and 30 organization that comprise the All-In Pittsburgh Equitable Development Collaborative. The individuals and organizations remained engaged and committed for 2 years consistently and have helped shape the current agenda and strategies. Launched Our Communications Platform: in addition to the All-In Pittsburgh website, a communications consultant team was selected to help bring greater awareness to the work of the Collaborative, the mission, and targeted results. Their work was to tell the stories of Pittsburghers that reflect our target population (those living at or below 200% of poverty in the city of Pittsburgh) as well as lift the values of All-In-Pittsburgh. Initiated a Three-year All-In Pittsburgh Sustainability Plan (2020 – 2023): held a strategic planning retreat to guide the work into the future by revisiting priorities, clarifying our strategic niche, identifying our financial sustainability model, expanding, and solidifying partnership agreements.
Housing • •
Page 16
Funded the Housing Alliance to convene a tenant protection working group and issue specific recommendations for Pittsburgh in the Spring 2019 (see attachment) Passed legislation to establish an Affordable Housing Impact Statement Legislation in 2019a tool to measure impacts on displacement and affordable housing for large scale developments
• • • •
Studied the impact of LERTA as a potential tool to fund additional affordable housing citywide Supported the Housing Alliance of PA to pass a new funding source for affordable housing (PA housing tax credit) Supported the Lawrenceville Initiative in passing an interim zoning overlay for Lawrenceville Appealed to the city concerning cuts to the URA’s 2019 budget with the support of 22 organizations resulting in $2.5 million restored to their budget.
Employment & Entrepreneurship •
• •
•
•
Advocacy support with passage of House Bill 163 which was signed into law by the Governor. It ends the mandatory suspension of driver’s licenses for low-level, non-driving offenses in Pennsylvania- a barrier that annually impacted over 30,000 Pennsylvanians, disproportionately low-income and people of color. Rallied support and wrote letters of support to help minimize cuts to the URA’s budget that would reduce support for small business and minority entrepreneurs Raised awareness for the various tools available to improve local hiring, and internal practices- to ensure that working environments are supportive of people of color and provide opportunities for growth Held SWOT Analysis Discussion re: Pittsburgh MWDBE practices and Business Acceleration Network; Developed a Scorecard in partnership with the URA, and later the Riverside Center for Innovation Supported the Riverside Center for Innovation in creating a one-stop shop for minority entrepreneurs to find business support
City of Pittsburgh Equity Legislation with PBEOC •
• • • •
• •
Page 17
Resolution declaring the city of Pittsburgh as an “All-In” city by embracing our equitable development definition- thereby also officially adopting all the recommendations in the report Establish Equity reporting requirements for department directors Establish an Equity Implementation Team Affordable Housing Impact Statement- a mechanism to track the impacts of development upon the creation of or preservation of affordable housing All-In-Pittsburgh quarterly policy forumo All-In Cities Leadership Forum and an Annual Conference that will focus on implementing the recommendations from the PBEOC’s Peace and Justice Initiative and PolicyLink’s “Equitable Development: The Path to an All-In Pittsburgh.” Acknowledge racism as a public health crisis- Incorporate into organizational work plans educational efforts to address and dismantle racism, expand understanding of racism Establish the City of Pittsburgh All-In-Cities Investment Fund.
o
Purpose of the All-In Investment Fund is to invest in activities consistent that advance the recommendations from PolicyLink’s “Equitable Development: The Path to an All-in Pittsburgh.”
Catalytic Investments •
$315,000 Equitable Development Catalytic Grant Investments by Neighborhood Allies o $15,000 Housing Alliance- Tenant Protections Policy Analysis o $75,000 Hill District Consensus Group- Tenant Leadership Development o $75,000 Omicelo Cares- Real Estate Co-Powerment Series o $75,000 Riverside Center for Innovation- BizFIT Plus, MWDBE Development o $75,000 Trade Institute of Pittsburgh- Workforce Housing
Institutional and Organizational Commitments •
•
• •
Urban Redevelopment Authority (URA): The URA has adopted the All-In Pittsburgh definition of equitable development and have instituted an internal Equity Working Group to advance diversity, equity, and inclusion within the Authority. The URA has undergone an assessment to ensure that the principles of design, justice and equitable development are integrated into internal workplace culture and external interactions with the communities that they serve. In addition, the URA recently hired a MWBE Program Officer/Director of Performance & Compliance to serve as the URA’s liaison between businesses, contractors, and the public at large to enhance MWBE participation Riverside Center for Innovation: Riverside Center for Innovations has adopted the All-In Pittsburgh definition of equitable development and have embedded it into their programming including BizFit which helps minority, woman, and veteran entrepreneurs in the construction industry to grow sustainable enterprises. We partnered with the CEIR to accelerate the adoption of the Comprehensive Rooney Rulewith results The Allegheny Conference will continue to support their Minority Supplier Initiative and looked to integrate the recommendations from All-In-Pittsburgh in the way they deal with small businesses, and how they communicate the value of inclusion to corporations.
New Partnerships •
•
Page 18
Pittsburgh Black Elected Officials Coalition (PBEOC): formalized partnership with the PBEOC to co-develop legislation to begin to embed equity within city government operations and decision-making. Six Community Based Organizations (CBOs): signed Partnership Agreements in place with the Beltzhoover Consensus Group; the Hazelwood Initiative; Hill District Consensus Group; Homewood Children’s Village; Kingsley Association and the Perry Hilltop Citizens Council/ Fineview Citizens Council. The CBOs serve as a link to activities that are happening in the neighborhoods and ensure that the Equitable Development Collaborative serves the needs of our target population- those living at or below 200% of poverty.
•
•
Corporate Equity & Inclusion Roundtable (CEIR): partnering with CEIR to have a shared definition of the Rooney Rule that is comprehensive and has measurable results. The Comprehensive Rooney Rule advocates that African Americans and people of color be considered for all positions from entry level through the “C-Suite” and for all contracting/procurement opportunities. There were a series of unexpected partnerships that came out of building trust with a diverse coalition. Connections were made between public agencies that are rarely at the same tables discussing how to achieve better outcomes. There were also partnerships between local community organizations and developers that evolved out of working through tough issues together. That enhance the capacity and understand of real estate for some smaller organizations.
CONCLUSION The greatest accomplishment of All-In-Pittsburgh was the sustained, multi-sector commitment to implementing an equity agenda together. This multi-sector collaborative comprised of over 50 individuals representing over 30 organizations work in unison to advance racial equity in our region. The collaborative set up a clear policy and program agenda around two key issues and consistently convened conversations to advance implementation of those policies; it engaged partners to advance the cause and facilitated conversations between groups that are rarely at the same table and made progress together. Having PolicyLink as a national partner provided the team access to best practices nationally on moving an equity agenda that requires complicated systemic change. Their expertise working in other cities helped the local team examine different ways to engage government and local stakeholders. The involvement of PolicyLink helped in the following ways: • • • •
Provided the local coalition with a national network of partners trying to do similar work in other cities- provided resources and support PolicyLink could provide an outside perspective on what was working and what was not, and help the local team adjust accordingly A national partner can sometimes have a more removed, unbiased view of how to approach problem solving- not tied into local politics and biases Involvement of a national partner can sometimes elevate the conversation locally
The All-In-Cities model and the results-based accountability framework helped keep the work focused by: • • •
Page 19
Defining indicators up front kept us disciplined on picking strategies that could move those indicators Grounding conversations in existing data (patterns of poverty, housing patterns, etc.) Recognizing that systems change takes time, having a set results framework for each action team helped focus conversations and kept the collaborative focused on following through on a specific set of strategies
•
Provided a template and living document that could be adjusted as policy priorities changed, and strategies were added
LIMITATIONS One must recognize that making systemic change to reverse the impacts of racism and segregation takes time. While All-In-Pittsburgh laid out an initial agenda to create a more inclusive Pittsburgh, implementing the recommendations in the report is something that will take many years and ongoing support. While the core team set indicators for 3-5 years, we never got to the point of defining the metrics of success. The following were some key limitations: •
•
•
•
•
•
• •
Page 20
Capacity- How much the team could take on was largely dependent on staff capacity and funding. The core team consisted of 4-6 people and only one full-time person. o We chose to tackle two primary issue areas in the report, yet always acknowledge that there needed to be an expanded team to manage broader conversations and include more topic areas. Prioritization: With the serious impacts of systemic racism in the city, it can feel pressing to want to solve everything at once; however, given the time allotted and the need for collaborating and coordinating schedules and people, there is only so much that can be tackled within a timeframe or project. Government: The public sector is crucial to making policy changes and given competing priorities, it was sometimes difficult to have a strong advocate within government and keep these issues at forefront of the mayor’s agenda. Keeping community voices at the table- Keeping community voice at the center of decision-making is something that takes constant effort. It requires dedicated staff, and a compelling reason for why it is worth their time when they are constantly fighting fires at the neighborhood level. o While there was a desire to fight for equity citywide, the work must also impact the day-to-day work of local community organizations. Establishing ownership: While the steering committee and action teams drove much of the work, sometimes it was difficult for some organizations to feel ownership over the processparticularly those doing more grass-roots work. Establishing trust: Trust is critical to the success of any coalition, and it took almost two years to build a basic level of trust. Even so, it became clear we needed to do better when it came to showing up for each other on specific initiatives. Passionate leadership: This is not for the weary and we noticed it requires passionate leaders and advocates for long-term success. Staff turnover- The team dealt with turnover of key personnel at some organizations. Only exacerbated by the fact that talented, young Black professionals often leave Pittsburgh for opportunity in other cities.
FUTURE WORK The initial implementation plans defined activities from 2018-2020. The intention was that at the end of 2020, the collective would revisit the priorities, evaluate the impact of the current strategies, and update the work plan accordingly for the next 2 years. This process was cut short in the Fall of 2019 as the core team strategized on where the work should go. Some of the priorities on the horizon included: •
•
Institutionalizing equity throughout city government- expand a partnership with the PBEOC and Office of Equity to track implementation of the initial legislation and ensure transparency to the public. Look at measures to implement Equitable Development on major development sites given the accelerated pace of development and increasing displacement in the most desirable neighborhoods. o Was intended to be the next issue area given accelerated development efforts.
NEXT STEPS All-In-Pittsburgh demonstrated that it is possible for a cross-sector coalition to work together on a collective agenda over several years even when they do not agree. Yet to sustain the infrastructure needed, it also requires committed funders, dedicated staff, and strong support from local organizations and the residents most impacted by the inequities in our city. To achieve that level of inclusion it is going to require an approach that dedicates a significant amount of time and resources to the following: • • • •
First and foremost, center the resident voice and keep them connected to the efforts of the movement. Create the groundswell and sense of ownership that forces systemic change. A strong communications campaign that can keep the public involved, engaged, and can activate a response to issues in the community quickly. Longer term investment in sustained infrastructure and staffing for 3-5 years to begin to see measurable outcomes. Buy-in and support from local officials who can help champion policy and are anchored by the needs of residents.
Today we can build on the relationships that blossomed out of working together the last two years. Those relationships will have longer term outcomes as they happened across sectors, age, race, and tenures within organizations. Participants of the coalition continue to lead by example at their organizations and are ready to advocate collectively for more equitable outcomes. The momentum created by the last two years of work and conservations with elected officials have set the stage to work together on future policy efforts. The team is poised to expand the coalition even further and begin to tackle other issues that have recently been brough to the forefront such as policing, education, and environmental justice. The coalition has now evolved to meet the current inequities in Pittsburgh, and to be inclusive of more issue areas. These inequities that have been further exacerbated by COVID-19, so the team has
Page 21
evolved to meet the current landscape. Equitable and Just Greater Pittsburgh is evolution of the prior All-In work and is focused on addressing equity in the following issue areas: environment, food, education, livelihoods, health, housing, and transportation. The coalition is now managed by UrbanKind with additional support from consultants which include MonWin Consulting, and Cheryl Hall-Russell of BW3. Equitable and Just Greater Pittsburgh is both a network of people, and a policy platform to correct past injustices, and ensure that Black and brown people can thrive in our city.
Page 22
Appendix: List of Coalition Participants 2. List of Action Teams 3. Letter to Mayor in 2017 re: implementation 4. Summary of Pittsburgh’s PolicyLink Delegation Debrief (includes list of participants) 1.
Page 23
LIST OF PARTICIPANTS IN THE ALL-IN PITTSBURGH COALITION Residents Homewood Children’s Village The Kingsley Association Kelly Strayhorn Theater Beltzhoover Consensus Group Hill District Consensus Group Hazelwood Initiative Perry Hilltop/Fineview Citizen’s Council City Council District 6 Allegheny County District 10 Office of Mayor William Peduto Pittsburgh Black Elected Officials Coalition (PBEOC) University of Pittsburgh | Office of Economic Partnerships Housing Alliance of PA Pittsburgh United Action Housing The Pittsburgh Foundation The Heinz Endowments The Forbes Funds Chatham: Center for Women’s Entrepreneurship Partners4Work The Allegheny Conference Vibrant Pittsburgh Riverside Center for Innovation The URA The Dept. of City Planning Trek Development East End Development Partners City Commission on Human Relations Green Building Alliance Regional Housing Legal Services Allegheny County Dept. of Human Services
Page 24
LIST OF THE ACTION TEAMS Housing Action Team Chairpersons: Malik Bankston & Carol Hardeman The Kingsley Association Hill District Consensus Group Perry Hilltop & Fineview Citizens Council Lawrenceville United Housing Alliance of PA Action Housing Pittsburgh United Green Building Alliance The Forbes Funds UCSUR Trek Development East End Development Partners The Pittsburgh Foundation The Heinz Endowments Public Partners Office of Mayor William Peduto The Department of City Planning The Urban Redevelopment Authority City Council District 6 Allegheny County District 10
Page 25
Entrepreneurship & Employment Chairpersons: Janora Solomon (Kelly-Strayhorn Theater/ Dance Alloy) Beltzhoover Consensus Group Hazelwood Initiative Homewood Children's Village Residents Riverside Center for Innovation Chatham University, Center for Women's Entrepreneurship Partners4Work The Allegheny Conference Vibrant Pittsburgh The Forbes Funds Riverside Center for Innovation Corporate Equity and Inclusion Roundtable (CEIR) Duquesne University Office of Economic Partnerships | University of Pittsburgh The Heinz Endowments Buhl Foundation Public Partners Office of Mayor William Peduto The Department of City Planning The Urban Redevelopment Authority City Council District 6 Allegheny County District 10