Community Investment for Equitable and Resilient Outcomes: Evaluating Evidence-Driven Collaborative Governance

• In Event: Place-Based Investments and Local Policy Implementation

Abstract

As governments pursue more equitable, resilient, and transformative policy outcomes, increasing attention has turned to evidence-driven, collaborative governance mechanisms that structure community investment. Traditional infrastructure funding models—often based on competitive grantmaking—can disadvantage under-resourced jurisdictions, fragment long-term strategy, and limit opportunities for coordination and inclusion. A growing body of scholarship calls for investment approaches that center collaborative governance, evidence-informed implementation, and equity-focused policy design (Emerson & Nabatchi, 2015; Gooden, 2021; Sandfort & Moulton, 2015). Yet few institutional models have been systematically evaluated for how well these principles are implemented—or whether they consistently produce the outcomes they promise.

This paper evaluates the Community Economic Revitalization Board (CERB) in Washington State as one of the most comprehensive state-level examples of evidence-driven collaborative governance. Over the past 20 years, CERB has funded more than 500 planning and construction projects aimed at supporting infrastructure for private-sector job creation in rural and economically distressed areas. It operates through a non-competitive, multi-sector board composed of representatives from state agencies, tribal governments, ports, business, and labor. Funding decisions are made through structured deliberation, guided by standardized evidence: job and wage projections, infrastructure readiness, economic distress, industry alignment, and local public-private collaboration.

This study is grounded in theories of collaborative governance (Emerson & Nabatchi, 2015), polycentric institutional design (Ostrom, 2010), and evidence-based implementation (Head, 2010; Sandfort & Moulton, 2015). Methodologically, it employs a multi-method evaluation design. A typology is developed to classify CERB’s portfolio of planning and construction investments. Multivariate regression and event history models test relationships between project type, applicant characteristics, and follow-on investment. Construction outcomes are evaluated using job creation, wage levels, tax revenue, and industry sector alignment. Qualitative analysis of over 150 project reports and interviews with CERB board members, tribal leaders, and local officials explores governance dynamics, institutional learning, and perceived impact. Process tracing links institutional design features—such as deliberation rules and embedded evidence—to measurable and qualitative outcomes.

Findings suggest that CERB’s governance structure expands access for under-resourced communities, facilitates coordination across governments and sectors, and aligns public investment with durable economic development goals. Projects supported by CERB demonstrate measurable returns in high-wage employment, private-sector leverage, and local fiscal capacity. In communities with sustained CERB engagement, outcomes also include improvements in workforce stability, health access, and educational attainment. While elements of this model appear in programs such as Massachusetts’ MassWorks or North Carolina’s RIA, few fully integrate collaboration, evidence, and implementation authority at the institutional level.

This study contributes to debates in policy design, implementation science, and public management by evaluating how institutional mechanisms—when intentionally structured to foster collaboration and evidence use—can refine investment decisions and deliver transformative, equitable, and resilient public outcomes.

 

Author

• Sandra O Archibald, University of Washington
  Presenting Author