Better Metrics for Better Economic Development Outcomes in Communities

Traditional economic development and Trauma-Informed Economic Development (TIED) represent two distinct paradigms for assessing community success. While traditional models focus on the size of the economic engine, TIED prioritizes the health, resilience, and inclusivity of the system powering that engine ``.

The following sections contrast the specific metrics and underlying philosophies of these two approaches:

1. Core Objectives and Success Metrics

• Traditional Metrics: These are built on a foundation of measurable growth . Success is quantified through the "language of capital," focusing on capital investment, job creation numbers, and tax base enhancement.

• Trauma-Informed Metrics: Success is defined by resilience and shared prosperity . TIED complements traditional data with human-centered indicators, such as social capital, health outcomes, and collective efficacy.

2. Domains of the Community Resilience Scorecard

The sources outline four key domains used in TIED to measure what "truly matters" for long-term prosperity:

• Economic Security and Opportunity: Beyond simple job counts, this measures the percentage of households below the poverty line, median household income disaggregated by race to track equity gaps, and the prevalence of "housing overburdened" households.

• Social Capital and Cohesion: This tracks the strength of relationships and trust within a community. Metrics include survey-based measures of trust in local institutions, rates of civic participation (voting and volunteering), and the density of informal social networks.

• Health and Well-being: This domain integrates public health data, such as changes in substance use disorder rates, overdose deaths, life expectancy, and access to healthy food and recreation.

• Collective Efficacy and Agency: This measures the degree to which residents feel empowered to shape their future. Indicators include participation in community planning, the formation of new community-led advocacy groups, and the successful implementation of community-initiated projects.

3. Perspectives on Risk, Blight, and Time

The two models differ fundamentally in how they evaluate the environment and the duration of their impact:

• Risk Assessment: Traditional development focuses on market and financial risk . TIED assesses the risk of re-traumatization and further harm to the social fabric.

• Approach to Blight: Traditional methods prioritize demolition and physical redevelopment to get properties back on tax rolls . TIED views the revitalization of blighted spaces as an act of community healing and "re-storying" of place.

• Time Horizon: Traditional projects typically operate on a 2–5 year cycle . TIED adopts a generational horizon (10–20+ years), acknowledging that mending a fractured social fabric requires long-term commitment.

In essence, traditional metrics measure the transaction, while trauma-informed metrics measure the transformation.