Institutional Performance: Summary and Implications
We've measured Institutional Performance in three areas — local government, public schools and higher education. Each chart or graph on these pages was assigned a rating based on how the Kansas City region compared to its peers or, in the case of indicators only available for the Kansas City area, on how favorably they reflected on the region. The ratings are shown in the chart below:
Average Rating: 1.49
The Kansas City region's social and physical development patterns mean it spends a considerable amount on roads and policing. Local governments in the Kansas City area are generally efficient when it comes to repairing roads, but road quality appears to be suffering — and it is apparent that residents care more about quality than efficiency. Meanwhile, local governments in the area generally spend more on police than other areas to deal with the spillover effects from a high central-city violent crime rate.
The region's public schools appear to perform about average compared to those in peer metropolitan areas. But the disparity between the performance of students in poor districts versus those that are not in poor districts is largest here, so that some children are indeed being left behind. Meanwhile, area universities rank near the bottom in innovation capacity and innovations produced.
In general, local governments in the Kansas City region appear not to be keeping up with the demands placed on them as, on average, they are underspending on roads and, despite higher than average public safety budgets, they are unable to bring violent crime rates down to match the region's best performing peers. As a result, there is little excess capacity to invest in new initiatives to increase economic competitiveness.
While the percentage of students in area's public schools that are proficient in reading and math is about average compared to those in peer metros, this is likely not sufficient for students to be truly prepared for a competitive global economy when “average” means two-thirds of students are not proficient. Moreover, poor districts are doing comparatively worse here, which means whole segments of the population will not have the skills to achieve even average success in the future.
Area universities are underperforming their peers in research and patents, which reduces the pipeline of potential future innovations that can launch new businesses or improve existing ones in the region. Without improvement in this area, the region's economic performance can be expected to suffer.
What can we do to improve as a region? Read our policy recommendations, and let us know what you think.
Next set of indicators: Human
Capacity
"Institutional Performance" main page | Indicators
main page