The core success metric the Mayor's office uses is "exits to permanent housing". The idea here is to collect data about which services create the most exits to permanent housing, then create "efficiencies" by only funding the services that have the most exits.
-
-
Prikaži ovu nit
-
But we have a huge selection bias problem. Different services are targeted toward different populations, who have different needs and different resources available to them.
Prikaži ovu nit -
Maybe white men are more likely to get into permanent housing than women of color because of systematic discrimination. If we go by "exits to housing", services that serve white men will seem like they perform better, but really only reflect underlying discrimination.
Prikaži ovu nit -
In the nightmare scenario, we only fund services targeted towards the least-disadvantaged groups because our "success metrics" make it seem like those services are performing "the best".
Prikaži ovu nit -
Also, if the supply of affordable housing is limited, "exits" into housing seems much more determined by the amount of affordable housing than the efficacy of the services. Have we asked service providers about how they feel about the metrics that we're using to measure them?
Prikaži ovu nit -
Underlying all of this is the language and culture of tech/business creeping into government. Government must serve everyone, while businesses are designed to prioritize whoever makes them the most money. Success metrics for a business are very different from success for a govt
Prikaži ovu nit -
Thanks to
@ericacbarnett for a great story. Support local journalism!https://thecisforcrank.com/support/Prikaži ovu nit
Kraj razgovora
Novi razgovor -
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.