Mind the Gap: How to Accurately Account for Small Businesses in the Inner City
Who will you meet?
Cities are innovating, companies are pivoting, and start-ups are growing. Like you, every urban practitioner has a remarkable story of insight and challenge from the past year.
Meet these peers and discuss the future of cities in the new Meeting of the Minds Executive Cohort Program. Replace boring virtual summits with facilitated, online, small-group discussions where you can make real connections with extraordinary, like-minded people.
Policymakers and economic development professionals understand that small businesses are important engines for economic growth. In inner cities, small businesses particularly are important because they create jobs and wealth for populations that may lack many alternative employment opportunities. But small businesses in inner cities are difficult to identify and track, which makes it challenging not only to create effective policies and programs that help small businesses grow, but also to understand the impact of policies on small businesses.
For example, for more than two decades, Massachusetts’s public transit system, the MBTA, ran through two of Boston’s lowest-income neighborhoods, Dorchester and Mattapan, with very few stops. The MBTA has reconfigured the “Fairmont/Indigo” line to include six new and renovated stations along this corridor. Local advocates have argued that the new stations will be a boost to the inner city economy. The Boston and Garfield Foundations engaged ICIC to measure the impact of the transit line changes on businesses within the Fairmont corridor. ICIC teamed up with Northeastern University’s Dukakis Center to conduct a thorough inventory and analysis of the existing businesses.
We found that commonly used databases contained inaccurate and missing information on small businesses in Boston’s inner city. When we compared public and commercial databases, we found that city and state databases did not include 43 percent of the businesses listed on a leading commercial database. Further, a walking inventory of commercial districts along the Fairmont corridor revealed that 30 percent of the businesses in the commercial database no longer existed and 380 “new” businesses were not included.
This data gap has significant consequences for small businesses in the inner city. The “missing” businesses may lose out on potential contracting opportunities with large anchor organizations such as universities, hospitals and corporations. ICIC has worked with numerous anchor organizations on procurement strategies in cities across the U.S. and we have found that identifying small businesses within certain industries is a major challenge.
The many “buy local” consumer campaigns that have sprouted nationally also may be overlooking some small businesses and perhaps those that need it most. If such campaigns cannot find all of the businesses in a city, some small businesses will be unintentionally excluded from their directories and from new customers.
Finally, these businesses may not have the chance to take advantage of local business programs designed to support urban entrepreneurs. From management education to accessing alternative forms of capital, ICIC research finds that these programs are critical to inner city business growth. Given our own experience over the past fifteen years identifying small businesses for our urban business initiatives, Inner City 100, Inner City Capital Connections and as a national partner on the Goldman Sachs 10,000 Small Businesses initiative, we understand the significant challenges associated with this task.
In an effort to develop better inner city business datasets, ICIC has developed a multi-pronged approach or, a “Roadmap for Inner City Business Data Collection”.
- Collect data from public and commercial sources. Firm-level business data can be obtained from a number of public and commercial sources, though the scope and quality of data vary by source. Small business data typically will be included in city, county and state databases. Commercial datasets may also be purchased from InfoUSA, Dun and Bradstreet/Hoovers and the National Establishment Time-Series Database, among other sources.
- Compare the sources to highlight inconsistencies. If it is not possible to compare the complete small business databases for a city, a statistically significant sample may be used to get a sense of the scope of inaccuracies.
- Conduct a website search of companies and update business information. Comparing even basic data between databases and websites can help determine the degree of information discrepancies in a city or community. However, it is important to note that many small businesses may not have active websites. In the Boston study, ICIC found that only 37 percent of the businesses in the sample had active websites.
- Carefully consider surveying the businesses—conventional surveys often are not effective for small business populations. In an ideal world, researchers would survey all existing businesses in the target geography to create an accurate dataset. However, a combination of factors – including limited business data/contact information and cost – may make this impractical. Moreover, the response rate to surveys is usually low. A 50% response rate would be considered extremely high.
- Initiate a walking inventory of businesses, if possible. A visual check to confirm database information is the best way to ensure the accuracy of basic business information. Yet, as with surveys, this can be cost- and labor-intensive.
- Explore the creation of an online interactive directory that pulls data from governmental databases, small business intermediaries and businesses. In addition to public and online databases, local CDCs and Main Street organizations can serve an important role in data collection. Establishing relationships with these organizations can help with efforts to aggregate data and maintain comprehensive records of the local business community.
Moving forward, new databases need to be established that collect timely and accurate information on small businesses to ensure the effectiveness and reach of the programs and initiatives that support urban small businesses. We hope the multi-pronged data collection strategy outlined above will help other organizations collect better inner city firm data across the U.S.
Leave your comment below, or reply to others.
Please note that this comment section is for thoughtful, on-topic discussions. Admin approval is required for all comments. Your comment may be edited if it contains grammatical errors. Low effort, self-promotional, or impolite comments will be deleted.
Read more from MeetingoftheMinds.org
Spotlighting innovations in urban sustainability and connected technology
Housing that is affordable to low-income residents is often substandard and suffering from deferred maintenance, exposing residents to poor air quality and high energy bills. This situation can exacerbate asthma and other respiratory health issues, and siphon scarce dollars from higher value items like more nutritious food, health care, or education. Providing safe, decent, affordable, and healthy housing is one way to address historic inequities in community investment. Engaging with affordable housing and other types of community benefit projects is an important first step toward fully integrating equity into the green building process. In creating a framework for going deeper on equity, our new book, the Blueprint for Affordable Housing (Island Press 2020), starts with the Convention on Human Rights and the fundamental right to housing.
Since the Great Recession of 2008, the housing wealth gap has expanded to include not just Black and Brown Americans, but younger White Americans as well. Millennials and Generation Z Whites are now joining their Black and Brown peers in facing untenable housing precarity and blocked access to wealth. With wages stuck at 1980 levels and housing prices at least double (in inflation adjusted terms) what they were 40 years ago, many younger Americans, most with college degrees, are giving up on buying a home and even struggle to rent apartments suitable for raising a family.
What makes it hard for policy people and citizens to accept this truth is that we have not seen this problem in a very long time. Back in the 1920s of course, but not really since then. But this is actually an old problem that has come back to haunt us; a problem first articulated by Adam Smith in the 1700s.
More than ever, urban transit services are in need of sustainable and affordable solutions to better serve all members of our diverse communities, not least among them, those that are traditionally car-dependent. New mobility technologies can be a potential resource for local transit agencies to augment multi-modal connectivity across existing transit infrastructures.
We envision a new decentralized and distributed model that provides multi-modal access through nimble and flexible multi-modal Transit Districts, rather than through traditional, centralized, and often too expensive Multi-modal Transit Hubs. Working in collaboration with existing agencies, new micro-mobility technologies could provide greater and seamless access to existing transit infrastructure, while maximizing the potential of the public realm, creating an experience that many could enjoy beyond just catching the next bus or finding a scooter. So how would we go about it?