abc kearney revitalization plan - america's best … revitalization plan 2015 ... had six...

130-P497-001

AMERICA’S BEST COMMUNITIESAMERICA’S BEST COMMUNITIES

REVITALIZATION PLANREVITALIZATION PLANTeam KearneyTeam Kearney

City of Kearney, NebraskaCity of Kearney, Nebraskafor the

This page was intentionally left blank.

Table of ContentsChapter 1: Introduction...............................................................................................................1

Introduction..............................................................................................................................................2Figure 1.1: Locations of Quarter inalist Communities....................................................................................2Figure 1.2: Kearney Micropolitan Statistical Area and City of Kearney Corporate Limits...................4Executive Summary...........................................................................................................................................5

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions..................................................................................................7Demographics...........................................................................................................................................8Table 2.1: Population by Race.................................................................................................................................8Table 2.2: Population Composition........................................................................................................................9Figure 2.1: Population Pyramid...........................................................................................................................10Table 2.3: Educational Attainment......................................................................................................................11Economy............................................................................................................................................12Figure 2.2: Share of Total Output by Industry..................................................................................................12Figure 2.3: Share of Employment by Industry..................................................................................................13Table 2.4: Employment & Real Wage Growth by Industry............................................................................14Table 2.5: Employment & Wages by Occupation..............................................................................................17Table 2.6: Growth in U.S. Prices by Index Type................................................................................................18Housing.............................................................................................................................................19Figure 2.4: Building Permits Issued for Single-Family Homes.....................................................................19Figure 2.5: Building Permits Issued for Multi-Family Homes.......................................................................20

Chapter 3: Public Input.............................................................................................................21Stakeholder Interviews.................................................................................................................................23Town Hall Meetings.......................................................................................................................................24Focus Group Meetings...................................................................................................................................26Figure 3.1: Public Input Matrix............................................................................................................................29Community Challenges..................................................................................................................................31Figure 3.2: Unemployment Rates, United States and Nebraska..................................................................31

Chapter 4: Goals & Strategies..................................................................................................37Best Practice Models.....................................................................................................................................38Mid- and Long-Term Goals..........................................................................................................................41Short-Term Goals............................................................................................................................................43

Chapter 5: Implementation......................................................................................................47Figure 5.1: ABC Team Kearney, 11-Month Gantt Chart, Kearney Works.................................................49Process for Measuring Outcomes...........................................................................................................51Table 5.1: Measurable Outcomes........................................................................................................................52Table 5.2: Demonstration of Success..................................................................................................................53

AcknowledgmentsThe development of this Revitalization Plan would not have been possible without the America’sBest Communities Sponsors, including: Frontier Communications, DISH, CoBank, and The WeatherChannel; as well as the America’s Best Team Kearney adopt-a-community sponsor, HBO. In addition tothis corporate support, was the time and dedication of the America’s Best Team Kearney Committeemembers, the Revitalization Plan project team, key stakeholders, business owners, community leaders,and residents. This vested interest, shown throughout the public input process by many concernedcitizens of Kearney, is responsible for the life of this project. The effort made to continually improvethe community as a place to live, do business, work, and play truly makes Kearney, Nebraska one of America’s Best Communities.

Revitalization Plan Project Team Members:Miller & Associates:

Brenda Jensen, AICP - Project ManagerEric HellriegelJennie Kozal

University of Nebraska at Kearney:Bree Dority, PhDShawn Kaski, PCED

Committee Members:Denise Zwiener, Buffalo County Community PartnersStan Clouse, Kearney MayorMarion McDermott, Kearney Area Chamber of CommerceDarren Robinson, Economic Development Council of Buffalo CountyKelsey Hemman, Economic Development Council of Buffalo CountyJoAnn Andersen, City of KearneyJonathan Nikkila, Kearney City CouncilPat Compton, Downtown Kearney AssociationShayne Zwiener, Frontier CommunicationsKristin Gottula, Frontier CommunicationsCarol Renner, Kearney Public SchoolsTodd Gottula, University of Nebraska at KearneyMeredith Collins, Community Action Partnership of Mid NebraskaJudi Sickler, Kearney Area Community FoundationJan Rodehorst, Business OwnerAmanda Shoemaker, Royal Neighbors – Kearney ChapterKyle Means, University of Nebraska at KearneyDana Wright, Viaero Event CenterMichelle Toukan, Buffalo County Community PartnersSarah McCaslin, Buffalo County Community PartnersJosh Jelden, Younes CenterMichael Garretson, Central Community CollegeKelly Christensen, Central Community College

Chapter 1: Chapter 1: IntroductionIntroduction

2

Chapter 1: Introduction

Kearney Revitalization Plan 2015Miller & Associates and University of Nebraska - Kearney

Figure 1.1: Locations of Quarter inalist Communities

Introduction

Frontier Communications, Dish Network, CoBank, and The Weather Channel formed the America’sBest Communities competition as an initiative to stimulate economic revitalization in small towns andcities across the United States. The quarter inalist round included the selection of 50 top communities,as depicted in Figure 1.1 above, from a pool of over 135 initial applicants. The 50 quarter inalistshad six months and $50,000 to shape and re ine their revitalization plans and compete for furtherprizes. Kearney also had the support of HBO, Kearney’s adopt-a-community sponsor, through thequarter inalist round. HBO served as a strategic mentor during the planning process offering support regarding marketing efforts, ways to attract young professionals, etc.

The City of Kearney was selected as one of America’s Best Communities in a competition sponsored by Frontier Communications, Dish Network, CoBank, and The Weather Channel. Kearney was selected asone of the top 50 communities in the United States and, along with the other 49 quarter inalists, wastasked with completing a Community Revitalization Plan. America’s Best Team Kearney Committee,comprised of leaders from the City, employers, human and social service agencies, educational facilities,and various industry professionals, sent out a Request for Quali ications and conducted interviewsto hire a consultant to complete a Revitalization Plan for Kearney that focused on ive key areas:workforce shortage, skilled labor, housing, transportation, and poverty. These ive key focus areaswere essential to the Community Revitalization Plan and played an important role in the outline of the public input process. They have and will continue to serve as the framework for the revitalizationefforts in Kearney. America’s Best Team Kearney Committee contracted with Miller & Associates(M&A) and the University of Nebraska at Kearney (UNK) to complete the Plan(M&A) and the University of Nebraska at Kearney (UNK) to complete the Plan.

3Kearney Revitalization Plan 2015Miller & Associates and University of Nebraska - Kearney

The next steps in the competition include submitting Kearney’s application to be considered for thesemi- inalist round which includes the selection of 15 communities to attend the America’s Best Communities summit to present their strategies. After the presentations, eight inalists will beawarded an additional $100,000 to continue implementation of their plans. In April 2017, America’sBest Communities will name its three competition winners. The winning communities will be awarded$3 million, with $2 million for second place, and $1 million for third place.

<135 initial applicants

50 quarterfinalist communities

15 semifinalist communities

8 finalist communities

$1,000,000 third place$2,000,000 second place

$3,000,000 first place

4



The Community Revitalization Plan focuses on the City of Kearney which serves as a hub for many surrounding communities. Although data gathering and public input processes were focused onresidents, employees, and business owners in Kearney, it is understood that any improvements inKearney will also bene it the surrounding region. Kearney micropolitan statistical area (Kearney),shown on Figure 1.2 below, is comprised of Buffalo County and Kearney County and is located in theCentral Economic Region of Nebraska. Of the nine micropolitan statistical areas in Nebraska, Kearney is the largest and has experienced the largest population growth since 2000. The estimated populationof the Kearney micropolitan statistical area is 54,441 and nearly 60 percent of the area’s population isconcentrated in the City of Kearney, which has an estimated 2014 population of 32,469.

Figure 1.2: Kearney Micropolitan Statistical Area and City of Kearney Corporate Limits

MMaMaMaMaMaMaMaMaMaMaMaMaMaMaMaMaMMaMaMaMMMaMaMaMMMaMaMaMaMaMaMaMMaMaMMM p p pp ppp p pppp p p pppppppppp ppppp prprprprprprprpprprprprprprprprprpprprpppprprprprprrprprprpprprpprrrp ovovovoovovovovovovovovovovovovovovovovovovooovovvoo ididididididididididididididiiddididididididddidididdiddididididddedededededededededdeddeddddededddedededdddededededededdededdedededededdededededdddeddeeddede bbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbbyyyyyy y y y y yyyyy yyyy yyyy y yyyyyyyyy yyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy thththhhthhthththththhthththththththththththhthththththhhthtthththhthhthhhththtththheeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee eeeeeee e e ee CiCiCiCiCiCiCiCiCiCiCiCiCCiCiCiCiCiCiiCiiiCCCCCC tytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytytyytyytytytytytyyytytytytytytytytytytytytytyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooof f ff f f f f ff fff f ffffff f ffffffffff f fff fffff ff ffffffffffff KeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKKKKKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeKeeKeKKeKeKeKeKKeKKKKKKKeKeKKeKKKeeKKK arararararararararararararararararraraaaraaararrarararrarararaaaraarara nenenenenenenenenenennenenenenenenennnenenennennnneneneneneneneennnennenneneneneen y.y.yy.y.y.yy.y.yy.y.y.yy.y.yyyyy.yyy.y.y.y.yy.yy.y.yyyyy.yyyyyyyyp p y y f y


Executive SummaryBackgroundKearney’s Revitalization Plan was completed through America's Best Communities (ABC) competition,a competitive-process hosted by Frontier Communications, Dish Network, CoBank, and The WeatherChannel. Kearney was selected as one of America's top 50 communities. During the quarter inalist round the City was awarded $50,000 and tasked with completing a Revitalization Plan. America'sBest Team Kearney Committee, comprised of leaders from the following sectors: human and socialservice agencies, businesses, educational institutions, City staff and of icials, and other community stakeholders. Committee members contracted with Miller & Associates and University of Nebraskaat Kearney (UNK) to facilitate a multi-phase public input process, data gathering and analysis, and toassist with goal prioritization and determination of necessary implementation steps. America's Best Team Kearney Committee outlined ive key focus areas including: workforce shortage, skilled laborforce, housing, transportation, and housing.

Public Input ProcessMiller & Associates and UNK's CRRD Director were instrumental in facilitating multiple phases of public input including key stakeholder interviews (phase 1), town hall meetings (phase 2), and focusgroup meetings (phase 3). Public input discussions were centered on the ive key focus areas of workforce shortage, skilled labor force, housing, transportation, and housing. All ive key topic areaswere discussed in length and solution options, ideas, and goals were shared for all ive focus areas.After public input sessions were completed, a public input matrix (Figure 3.1, shown later in this Revitalization Plan) was completed to show the similarities and connections between the three phasesof public input. America's Best Team Kearney Committee members focused their efforts on the topsix solution options which included: soft skills training, centralized location for agencies, person(s)providing labor services, permanent bus route, short-term certi icate training, and additional incomesubsidized housing because these solution options were discussed during all three public input phases.These solution options helped them prioritize the top short-term goal based on its opportunity forsustainability, its ability to be implemented in the short-term, and whether or not another group ororganization was focusing existing efforts on the goal.

Short-Term GoalsIt was important to America's Best Team Kearney Committee members to ensure all goals and solutionoptions with general consensus between community groups could be documented followed-up onas time and funds allow. A short-term goal solution option that could be implemented in 11-monthswith $100,000 had to become the priority for committee members. Focusing efforts on the top sixsolutions options heard during the three public input phases helped committee members prioritizethe goals. Solutions centered on soft skills training, centralized location for agencies, and person(s)providing labor services were all solution options that could be implemented in the short-term, couldbe sustainable, and were not receiving any existing synergy.

Through this prioritization the committee members began focusing efforts on a facility and/orprogram that would be able to provide these three pillars of service: soft skills, certi icate training, andcoaching/mentoring. The program and facility has been titled Kearney Works referencing the servicesthat will be provided and how they relate to employment and the ability for Kearney to work welland work together. This became the main area of focus for implementing a short-term goal because it would bene it many low-income individuals and in-turn would provide a bene it to the employers inthe community.

6



Kearney Works ProgramThe goal of Kearney Works is to provide comprehensive services and resources to the unemployedand underemployed by providing three pillars of service. There are three main objectives to providecomprehensive services for the unemployed and underemployed and each objective has a set of tacticsneeded to reach the objective. The list below outlines each objective and the associated tactics:

1) Establish a soft skills/pre-employment training curriculum focusing on key life skills likemoney management, time management, problem solving, interview preparedness, etc.

2) Determine certi icate training opportunities itting the needs of individuals to provide somelevel of skill training prior to job seeking.

3) Provide coaching/mentoring services for individuals through a volunteer system to ensureindividuals have assistance when putting the soft skills training to use in their own personalsituations.

ImplementationAn 11-month implementation schedule, in the form of a Gantt Chart which can be seen in Figure 5.1 inChapter 5 of this Revitalization Plan, outlines the necessary steps to launch and sustain a pilot programfor Kearney Works. Each category in the Gantt Chart ranges in necessary completion time from twomonths to eleven months. The main implementation categories include the following:

• Establishment of Kearney Works• Hiring Kearney Works Director• Establishment of Volunteer System• Establishment of Soft Skills Training Program• Establishment of Certi icates Programs• Establishment of Mentorship Program• Marketing of Kearney Works• On-going Processes• Tracking Measurable Outcomes• Launch Kearney Works 6-Month Pilot Program• Assess Additional Needs for Future Implementation

Measureable OutcomesIn order to gauge success for the Kearney Works program many different aspects of the programwill need to be analyzed. Data should be gathered on many different topics including the numberof participates, number of volunteers recruited, leveraged funds through in-kind services and afundraising campaign, employment status of participants after they have been through the Kearney Works programs, job retention, and many more as outlined in the last chapter of this RevitalizationPlan. Thresholds had to be set in order to gauge the successfulness and sustainability of the Kearney Works programs. Those thresholds, which can be seen in Figure 5.2 later in this Revitalization Plan,are set on six main topics which outline the program and whether it is bene icial and can be sustainedover time.

Chapter 2: Chapter 2: Existing Existing

ConditionsConditions

8

Chapter 2: Existing Conditions


DemographicsThe residents of Kearney are the lifeblood of the community. The people who live, work, and visit Kearney everyday are what makes the community “tick”. Understanding the population is just asimportant as understanding the wants and needs of that population. Demographic analysis becomesthe basis for understanding and prioritizing community needs; it helps decision-makers plan for social,economic, and physical infrastructure needs with the purpose of meeting the community’s needs andfuture demands.

The 2010 Census data, which was released during the irst few months of 2011, shows Kearney’spopulation experienced a 12.23 percent increase with a 2010 population of 30,787 and a 2000population of 27,431. The US Census Bureau estimated Kearney’s 2014 population to be 32,469 whichwould be an additional 5.5 percent growth between 2010 and 2014. Of the total population, Kearney has 7.3 percent, or 2,243, residents who are Hispanic or Latino of any race and 92.7 percent, or 28,544of residents are not Hispanic or Latino. Other racial make-up characteristics for Kearney can be foundin Table 2.1 below.

Table 2.1: Population by Race, Kearney, 2010

Populationper Race

Percentage of Total

Population

Total Population 30,787 100.0White 28,416 92.3Black or African American 315 1.0American Indian or Alaskan Native 93 0.3Asian 548 1.8Native Hawaiian or Paci ic Islander 7 0.02Some Other Race 967 3.1Data Source: 2010 U.S. Census

Kearney, unlike many other rural communities, has been experiencing growth and population increasesfor several years. Kearney is experiencing the national trend of growing minorities, but minority population growth is smaller in Kearney than in other communities in Nebraska. The Hispanic orLatino population almost doubled between 2000 and 2010, as did the Asian and Black or AfricanAmerican populations in Kearney.

Age and Gender are other facets to consider when analyzing the population. Kearney’s male-to-femaleratio is 48.9 to 51.1. The median age for women is 30.4 years-old which is higher than the male medianage of 27.9. The median age for all of Kearney’s residents is 29.0. This is signi icantly lower thanthe State’s median age of 36.2; with the presence of the University of Nebraska at Kearney (UNK),Kearney has a higher percentage of 18-24 year-olds living within the corporate limits. Age and genderdifferences can affect housing, recreation, community services, and businesses that will be desired inKearney because of the differences in wants and expectations for amenities between men and womenas well as between the differing ages. Therefore, it is important to monitor and understand the changesin the community and how the overall needs for the future of the City are affected.

Courtesy Photo.


The Census Bureau divides the total population into four-year age groups called “cohorts”. A cohort is a set of individuals, grouped together based on experiencing the same event within the same timeinterval. Each decennial Census presents population data in cohorts. These cohorts range from underive years of age to the last cohort which is 85 years and over. Table 2.2 shows all 18 cohorts, from the

2010 Census, and the corresponding percentages of the total population for each cohort.

The cohort making up the largest percentage of population in Kearney is the 20-24 year-olds whichcan be expected for a college town. The next largest cohorts in Kearney are the 25-29 year-olds, 15-19year-olds, and the under 5 year-olds. The cohorts in Kearney that comprise a smaller portion of theCity’s population include the four cohorts that account for residents over 70 years-old. Each of thesefour cohorts individually comprise 2.25 percent of the population or less.

Table 2.2: Population Composition, Kearney, 2010

Cohort Male Female Total Persons in Cohort

% of Total Population

Total Population 15,055 15,732 30,787 100.00%Under 5 years 1,168 1,132 2,300 7.47%

5 to 9 years 1,061 884 1,945 6.32%10 to 14 years 839 778 1,617 5.25%15 to 19 years 1,235 1,379 2,614 8.49%20 to 24 years 2,319 2,331 4,650 15.10%25 to 29 years 1,459 1,280 2,739 8.90%30 to 34 years 977 1,023 2,000 6.50%35 to 39 years 881 790 1,671 5.43%40 to 44 years 746 737 1,483 4.82%45 to 49 years 791 875 1,666 5.41%50 to 54 years 823 902 1,725 5.60%55 to 59 years 770 869 1,639 5.32%60 to 64 years 623 697 1,320 4.29%65 to 69 years 431 507 938 3.05%70 to 74 years 311 381 692 2.25%75 to 79 years 241 374 615 2.00%80 to 84 years 200 354 554 1.80%

85 years and over 180 439 619 2.01%Data Source: 2010 U.S. Census

10



3000 2000 1000 0 1000 2000 3000

Under 5 years5 to 9 years

10 to 14 years15 to 19 years20 to 24 years25 to 29 years30 to 34 years35 to 39 years40 to 44 years45 to 49 years50 to 54 years55 to 59 years60 to 64 years65 to 69 years70 to 74 years75 to 79 years80 to 84 years

85 years and over

Figure 2.1: Population Pyramid, Kearney , 2010 Census

Male Female

Reported by the 2010 Census, approximately 62.7 percent of the population in Kearney is under18 years-old. Of the City’s 2010 reported population of 31,787 residents only 4.4 percent, or 1,363people, were 65 or older in 2010. Figure 2.1 shows a population pyramid for Kearney’s 2010 Census population based on age and gender. A population pyramid is a series of bar charts set on a verticalaxis. The 18 bars represent each of the 18 cohorts with the male population represented on the left side of the chart and the female population numbers represented on the right side of the chart. Apopulation pyramid showing a healthy viable population will have a large base of children and youngadults and a much smaller number of elderly persons, creating the shape of a pyramid and indicatinga self-sustaining population base for the community. A population pyramid uses two assumptions,with the irst assuming that the community exists to meet the need of its residents. The government and other quasi-governmental agencies provide public/quasi-public uses including schools, Churches,medical facilities, emergency services, and public infrastructure to meet the needs of the public. Thesecond assumption is that people have needs and expectations that change with age.

The population pyramid for Kearney shows a self-sustaining population with a larger based of youngercohorts and a smaller top portion of the pyramid depicting a small percentage of elderly residentsin Kearney. The one area that acts as an outlier, standing out from trend of the pyramid is the 20-24year-old cohort showing a substantially large number of residents living in Kearney aged between 20and 25. This cohort is typically comprised of residents obtaining higher education; therefore, it wouldbe assumed that Kearney’s population would have a large percentage of 20-25 year-olds because of UNK. Kearney would not have to rely on in-migration to continue to grow; however, the City is very attractive for many different age groups and many residents will continue to migrate to Kearney whichin-turn will show more drastic population increases.


Table 2.3: Educational Attainment, Kearney, 2013

Educational Attainment EstimatePopulation 25 years and over 18,052 (±310)Less than 9th grade 1.8% (±0.5%)9th to 12th grade, no diploma 4.8% (±0.9%)High school graduate (includes equivalency) 24.4% (±2.0%)Some college, no degree 25.8% (±1.9%)Associate's degree 8.6% (±1.5%)Bachelor's degree 23.8% (±2.1%)Graduate or professional degree 10.7% (±1.5%)Data Source: ACS 2009-2013

Educational attainment is yet another component to analyzein order to better understand your community’s populationbase. The 2009-2013 American Community Survey (ACS)reported 18,052 (±310) people that are 25 years-old orolder living in Kearney. Educational attainment levels forKearney’s residents can be found in Table 2.3.

Courtesy Photo.

12



Kearney has a strong economy and has for many years. Economic growth and development has beenbooming within the City with many new retail, service, and restaurant businesses as well as expandingmanufacturing companies and improving educational facilities. Through the public input phases,many residents shared their belief about Kearney’s economic success and the bene its it provides forthe community. It is important to continue experiencing economic success as a community; however,existing challenges including low unemployment rates could begin to hinder economic growth inKearney. The following information shows a snapshot of Kearney’s economy.

Figure 2.2 shows the share of total output contributed by the industry sectors of Kearney.1 Of all output generatedin the Kearney economy, the manufacturing sectorcontributes the most followed by the agriculture sectorand the trade, transportation, information, and publicutilities sector. The manufacturing base of Kearney consists of a mix of small to mid-sized local companies aswell as branch plants of larger companies headquarteredelsewhere. Examples include: Baldwin Filters, MorrisPrinting Group, Inc., Marshall Engines, Royal EngineeredComposites, Inc., Eaton Corporation, Gibbon Packing,West Company, Chief Industries, and Leprino Foods.

1 For manufacturers, the value of output re lects sales plus/minus the change in inventory; for service sectors, it re lectssales; and for retail and wholesale trade, it re lects gross margin sales.

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35%

Government (Federal, State, & Local)Educational Services

Arts, Entertainment, and RecreationAdministrative and Waste Services

Professional and Technical ServicesInformation Services

Management of Companies and EnterprisesOther Services

Accommodation and Food ServicesFinance and Insurance

Real Estate and Rental and LeasingHealth Care and Social Assistance

Trade, Transport., Information, and Pub. UtilitiesManufacturing

ConstructionMining

Agriculture

% of Output

Figure 2.2: Share of Total Output by Industry,Kearney

Economy

Courtesy Photo.

Data Source: Minnesota IMPLAN Group, Inc.


0% 2% 4% 6% 8% 10% 12% 14% 16%

Educational ServicesArts, Entertainment, and Recreation

Administrative and Waste ServicesProfessional and Technical Services

InformationManagement of Companies and Enterprises

Other Services, Ex. Public AdminPublic Administration

Accommodation and Food ServicesFinance and Insurance

Real Estate and Rental and LeasingHealth Care and Social Assistance

UtilitiesTransportation and Warehousing

Wholesale TradeRetail Trade

ManufacturingConstruction

Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas ExtractionAgriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting

% of Total Employment

Figure 2.3: Share of Employment by Industry, Kearney, 2014

The diversity of Kearney and the strength of other sectors are illustrated when the share of employment by industry sector is considered. Figure 2.3 shows that although 35 percent of the Kearney labor forceis employed in manufacturing, agriculture, and trade, transportation, information, and public utilitiessectors, nearly 36 percent is employed in the health care, accommodation and food services, andeducation services sectors. Large non-manufacturing employers in Kearney include: Good SamaritanHospital, University of Nebraska at Kearney, Kearney Public Schools, Cabela’s, Wal-Mart, and Cash-WaDistributing.

Courtesy Photo.

Data Source: Nebraska Department of Labor. Kearney county employment is not included becausedata is not reported for 25 percent of the sectors due to con identiality purposes.

Courtesy Photo.

14



Since 2010, total employment in Kearney has increased 7.2 percent (or 1.4 percent annually). Asshown in the irst two columns of Table 2.4, industries with particularly strong employment growth include: Administrative and Waste Services (8.6 percent annually), Agriculture (5.0 percent annually), Management of Companies and Enterprises (4.1 percent annually), Wholesale Trade (3.3percent annually), Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation (2.6 percent annually), Health Care and SocialAssistance (2.4 percent annually), and Construction (2.3 percent annually).2

Long-term projections indicate that total employment will increase by 6 percent (or 0.6 percent annually) in the Central Economic Region by 2022, and short-term employment projections estimatethe largest growth in the following industries: Management of Companies and Enterprises (3.3 percent annually), Professional and Technical Services (2.1 percent annually), and Construction (2.1 percent annually). Currently, Kearney is experiencing a very low unemployment rate of two percent relativeto the national unemployment rate of 5.3 percent, and is below the State of Nebraska’s unemployment rate of 2.5 percent.2 Data Source: Nebraska Department of Labor. Projections are only available for economic regions and metropolitanstatistical areas and are not available at the county or micropolitan statistical level.y p

Table 2.4: Employment & Real Wage Growth by Industry, 2010-2014

Employment Growth (%) Real Average Weekly Wage Growth (%)

Industry

Percent Change2010-14

(1)

AnnualGrowth

Rate (2)

Percent Change 2010-14

(3)

AnnualGrowth

Rate(4)

Total, All Industries 7.2 1.4 -1.9 -0.4Accommodation and Food Services 3.8 0.8 6.5 1.3Administrative and Waste Services 51.4 8.6 10.2 2.0Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing & Hunting 27.9 5.0 27.8 5.0Arts, Entertainment, and Recreation 13.9 2.6 -3.9 -0.8Construction 12.2 2.3 5.1 1.0Educational Services 3.3 0.6 -1.6 -0.3Finance and Insurance 1.4 0.3 10.1 1.9Health Care and Social Assistance 12.7 2.4 -3.7 -0.7Information -8.2 -1.7 5.4 1.1Management of Companies and Enterprises 22.2 4.1 NA NAManufacturing 1.6 0.3 -1.3 -0.3Mining, Quarrying, and Oil and Gas Extraction -6.4 -1.3 2.6 0.5Other Services, Ex. Public Administration -10.5 -2.2 3.6 0.7Professional and Technical Services 4.9 1.0 7.8 1.5Public Administration 1.9 0.4 2.1 0.4Real Estate and Rental and Leasing -4.8 -1.0 15.6 3.0Retail Trade 9.6 1.9 3.3 0.7Transportation and Warehousing -9.3 -1.9 6.0 1.2Utilities 8.3 1.6 13.5 2.6Wholesale Trade 17.9 3.3 4.5 0.9Source: Nebraska Department of Labor. Data is for Buffalo County.


Over the past ten years, wages in all industries haveincreased 2.4 percent (or 0.2 percent annually);however since 2010, wages in all industries havefallen 1.9 percent (or -0.4 percent annually) (seeTable 2.4 columns 3 and 4). The two industries with the largest decline in real wages are twowith relatively strong employment growth: Arts,Entertainment, and Recreation (-0.8 percent annually) and Health Care and Social Assistance(-0.7 percent annually). The other industrieswith real wage declines have a relatively largeshare of total employment in Kearney and includeEducational Services (-0.3 percent annually) andManufacturing (-0.3 percent annually). Overall,these four industries employ 39 percent of allworkers in Kearney.

Courtesy Photo.

16



Although overall wages are lower today thanin 2010, several industries have experiencedexceptional real wage growth: Agriculture(5.0 percent annually), Real Estate, Rental, andLeasing (3.0 percent annually), Utilities (2.6percent annually), Administrative and WasteServices (2.0 percent annually), and Finance andInsurance (1.9 percent annually). However, theseindustries only employ 9 percent of all workers inKearney.

Occupations are de ined by the type of work a person does and provide a different view of the workforce than employment and wages by industry. Table 2.5 shows employment, hourly entry wage, average hourly wage, and hourly experienced wage information for the 23 majoroccupation groups. The occupations are orderedfrom the lowest to highest paid occupation basedon the average hourly wage, and the averagehourly wage for all occupations in Kearney is$17.70 or $36,816 annually. This average rate isbelow the statewide average hourly wage for alloccupations which is $19.75 or $41,080 annually.

Overall, 73 percent of all workers earn less thanthe average hourly wage for all occupationsin Kearney whereas 27 percent of all workersearn more. Six of the 23 occupations haveaverage hourly wages between $9 and $14 andinclude: Food Preparation and Serving-RelatedOccupations ($9.22), Personal Care and ServiceOccupations ($10.64), Building and GroundCleaning and Maintenance Occupations ($11.44),Farming, Fishing, and Forestry Occupations($13.19), and Healthcare Support Occupations($13.94). Those employed in these low payingoccupations comprise 22 percent of all workers.If entry level wages are considered, then 16 of the23 occupations have hourly entry wages between$8 and $12.3

3 On January 1, 2016, the minimum wage in Nebraska will increase to $9 per hour.


Table 2.5: Employment & Wages by Occupation, Kearney, August 2015

SOC Code Standard Occupational Code Title

Est.Employment

May 2014

% by Occupation

Hourly Entry Wage

AverageHourly Wage

Hourly Experienced

Wage

35-0000 Food Preparation & Serving-Related 3,620 13.3% $8.29 $9.22 $9.69

39-0000 Personal Care & Service 580 2.1% $8.28 $10.64 $11.81

37-0000 Building and GroundsCleaning & Maintenance 990 3.6% $8.27 $11.44 $13.03

45-0000 Farming, Fishing, & Forestry 280 1.0% $8.28 $13.19 $15.6431-0000 Healthcare Support 570 2.1% $10.03 $13.97 $15.93

43-0000 Of ice & Administrative Support 3,990 14.7% $9.85 $14.46 $16.77

53-0000 Transportation & Material Moving 2,460 9.1% $8.69 $14.79 $17.84

27-0000 Arts, Design, Entertainment,Sports, & Media 360 1.3% $9.50 $15.02 $17.78

41-0000 Sales & Related 2,580 9.5% $8.38 $15.27 $18.72

21-0000 Community & Social Services 510 1.9% $10.15 $16.24 $19.27

51-0000 Production 2,540 9.4% $12.07 $16.60 $18.8647-0000 Construction & Extraction 1,220 4.5% $11.85 $17.58 $20.4400-0000 Total all Occupations 27,150 100.0% $8.97 $17.70 $22.0733-0000 Protective Service 330 1.2% $11.20 $18.58 $22.28

49-0000 Installation, Maintenance, & Repair 1,090 4.0% $11.70 $18.87 $22.45

25-0000 Education, Training, & Library 1,650 6.1% $11.80 $23.24 $28.95

19-0000 Life, Physical, & SocialScience 160 0.6% $17.26 $23.87 $27.17

15-0000 Computer & Mathematical 360 1.3% $15.94 $24.37 $28.59

13-0000 Business & FinancialOperations 790 2.9% $18.59 $28.79 $33.89

17-0000 Architecture & Engineering 240 0.9% $15.98 $29.47 $36.2323-0000 Legal 120 0.4% $25.00 $30.78 $33.66

29-0000 Healthcare Practitioners &Technical 1,970 7.3% $17.42 $33.30 $41.23

11-0000 Management 740 2.7% $20.93 $41.08 $51.14Source: Nebraska Department of Labor, Occupational Employment Statistics, August 2015. Data is for Buffalo County.

18



The average hourly wage for all occupations nationwide is$22.71 or $47,237 annually. Eight of the 23 occupations earnaverage hourly wages above the national average and include:Education, Training, and Library Occupations ($23.24), Life,Physical, and Social Science Occupations ($23.87), Computerand Mathematical Occupations ($24.37), Business and FinancialOperations Occupations ($28.79), Architecture and EngineeringOccupations ($29.47), Legal Occupations ($30.78), HealthcarePractitioners and Technical Occupations ($33.30), andManagement Occupations ($41.08). Those employed in thesehigh paying occupations also comprise 22 percent of all workersnationwide.

Table 2.6: Growth in U.S. Prices by Index Type, 2010-2014

Consumer Price IndexPercent Change2010-14

(1)

AnnualGrowth Rate

(2)

All items 8.6 1.7Food and beverages 10.2 2.0Housing 7.8 1.5Apparel 6.7 1.3Transportation 11.7 2.2Medical care 12.1 2.3Medical care services 13.0 2.5Recreation 2.0 0.4Education and communication 5.8 1.1Other goods and services 7.0 1.4Data Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics

The cost of living is lower in Kearney compared to the nationalaverage; however, the national price indexes can be used tounderstand how prices have been changing over time andwhether they are outpacing wage growth such that purchasingpower is eroding. Table 2.6 shows the growth in prices in the U.S. by index type.

Overall, prices have been rising 1.7 percent annually since 2010.Prices have been growing the quickest for medical care services(e.g., hospital and related services and health insurance), medicalcare commodities (e.g., drugs and medical equipment andsupplies), transportation, and food and beverages. In conclusion,if prices are assumed to be growing at similar rates in Kearney,purchasing power has fallen for the average Kearney resident given wages have also fallen in Kearney since 2010.


HousingDuring 2014, 529 homes sold in Kearney. This is a 21.9 percent increase from 2013 and a 19.3 percent increase from the average number of homes sold during the three year period from 2011 to 2013. Since2011, the real average sales price of a home has increased 13.1 percent (or 3.1 percent annually) from$169,295 to $191,473. The estimated homeowner and rental vacancy rates are 1.5 percent and 5.3percent, respectively.

Overall, single family home construction activity, measured by the number of single family homespermitted, has improved in Kearney since 2010 (see Figure 2.4). During 2014, 99 single family homes were permitted, which is a 50 percent (or 6.4 percent annual) increase in the number of permits issuedin 2010 (66 permits). Examining permit data over nearly 20 years indicates that the number of permitsissued in recent years has leveled off to where it was in the late 1990s. Based on data from January 2015 to June 2015, 48 single family permits have been issued thus far, which is on pace to reach totalpermits issued in recent years.

Average Homes Sold per Year 2011-2013:

443

Homes Sold in 2014:529

Average Home Sale Price 2011:

$169,295

Average Home Sale Price 2014:

$191,473

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

1996

1997

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

Figure 2.4: Building Permits Issued for Single-Family Homes, Kearney, 1996-2014

Data Source: City of Kearney

20



Figure 2.5 shows multi-family units permitted in Kearney from 2001 to 2014. In 2014, permits wereissued for 168 units, which is nearly three times the number of units permitted in 2010.

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

220

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Figure 2.5: Building Permits Issued for Multi-Family Units, Kearney, 2001-2014

Data Source: City of Kearney

The City of Kearney’s housing market has seen growth and new development for several years whichis a problem many rural communities would like to face. Although new home construction is much-needed and positive for the community, the newly constructed single-family homes it in higher priceranges with an average cost of approximately $242,000 in 20141. Newly constructed rental units from the private market also have a higher price tag for monthly rental costs. New home construction isimportant for Kearney’s current and future needs; however, there is a lack of “affordable” units, bothrental and for purchase.

1 Data Source: City of Kearney, total construction valuation

Chapter 3: Chapter 3: Public InputPublic Input

22

Chapter 3: Public Input


America’s Best Team Kearney Committee had outlined the original community input process toinclude input from key community stakeholders, the general public, and focus groups. UNK’s Center forRural Research & Development (CRRD) Director was essential in gathering public input; the detailedreport prepared for this portion of the public input process can be found in Appendix 1. UNK’s CRRDDirector conducted 31 key stakeholder interviews which included 36 participants. Additional townhall meetings were held for the general public and facilitated by Miller & Associates with assistancefrom UNK’s CRRD Director and Buffalo County Community Health Partners staff. The CRRD Directoralso facilitated three focus groups, two of which were conducted at locations serving low to moderateincome populations in the community and the other focus group was conducted at the UNK with localyoung professionals who had received notoriety for leadership capacity. Miller & Associates, alsofacilitated a public input forum focusing on human and social service agencies in Kearney. The goalwas to better understand their constraints and discuss possible improvements to aid each agency andimprove the overall level-of-service available to residents in need.

All public input sessions were facilitated by Miller & Associates and UNK’s CRRD Director. Data gatheredfrom each of the public input phases was shared with America’s Best Team Kearney Committee inorder to keep committee members informed of the on-going planning efforts centered on the ive key focus areas. Other forms of public input came through public engagement and education efforts lead by a social media/marketing team. Team members, who were also volunteers recruited by the America’sBest Team Kearney Committee, continually engage local residents by providing project updates, key facts about Kearney, and current City happenings. Engaging in public outreach efforts was important to the planning process and it remains a crucial step in the America’s Best Communities competitionprocess. It is important to keep the public engage and informed about the process and the City’s goals andimplementation. Because there was some much time and effort spent on public input, many residentsare encouraged about this revitalization process and want to stay involved and informed. This can beaccomplished through continued social media posts, press releases, and general community outreach.

Courtesy Photo.


Courtesy Photo.

Stakeholder InterviewsThe key stakeholder interviews consisted of 31 face-to-face interviews (36 participants) and wereconducted with local issue experts selected by local volunteers serving on the America’s Best TeamKearney Committee. The interview selection criteria was based on perceived knowledge of community issues outlined as key focus areas including workforce shortage, skilled labor, housing, transportation,and poverty. This community engagement process (phase 1) was completed during the month of August.

StrengthsThe majority of owners/managers participating in interviews cited the biggest strengths werefriendliness of community, supportive/open/progressive leadership, and a quality labor force. A friendly small town atmosphere with progressive big city amenities were also common themes mentioned by human service, elected, and education leaders. Several leaders from all sectors mentioned there isgood collaboration among industry, education, and publics services. A few business and elected leadersmentioned our economic strength and stability is a result of a balanced industry mix of education,manufacture, healthcare, and retail employers. Public and Human Service sector leaders mentionedthat there are many opportunities for engagement in social causes, education, athletics, arts, culture,and local politics.

ChallengesThe centralized themes for challenges, as perceived by the key stakeholders, included labor shortageand limited short-term skill training options as the primary challenges expressed by owners/managers.High cost of housing was re lected across all segments, but was the most serious concern for humanservice leaders (i.e. a severe shortage of low cost housing options). In lexible busing/taxi choices weremore commonly mentioned by human service/education of icials. Unreliable air transportation wasa common concern of major employers. Other concerns mentioned by human service and educationof icials concluded in increasing youth poverty rates.

24



Town Hall Meetings

Courtesy Photos.

The town hall meetings (phase 2) which were open to the general public, included two different meetingtimes and two different locations for the meetings to offer opportunities for a variety of Kearney’sresidents to provide their input. The irst meeting was held on a Sunday evening at Holy CrossLutheran Church and the second town hall meeting was held at the Harmon Park Activity Center on aTuesday morning. Both meetings were held in September and approximately 20 people attended theSunday evening session and more than 30 residents were in attendance during the Tuesday morningsession. These meetings were used to share data gathered during key stakeholder interviews andallow residents an opportunity to discuss feasible solutions focusing on the ive key focus areas of workforce shortage, skilled workforce, housing, transportation, and poverty.


The format of the town hall meetings included an overview of the stakeholder input, general discussionregarding the stakeholder input, and brainstorming solutions for one of the ive key focus areas that was determined as a priority. The majority of the town hall meeting attendees agreed with thestakeholders and the challenges and solution options they shared during their stakeholder interviews.Meeting attendees shared their desires for some employer-led solutions and workplace changes tohelp remove or lessen barriers felt by many employees including transportation, child care, housing,continuing education or advancement in training. Many key stakeholders also discussed the needto have employer-driven changes to some of the workforce challenges. Between the different smallgroups, that meeting attendees were broken into, priorities were selected; all of the top ive key focusareas, except transportation, were determined to be priorities.

StrengthsThe majority of town hall meeting attendees discussed Kearney’s strengths including the people, thegrowth, the economic success, and the collaboration. Town hall meeting attendees feel that Kearney’sresidents always come together to work through solutions, even if there is no personal gain for thevolunteers. The growth and economic success in Kearney are both strengths, but through the rapidgrowth and business expansions new challenges with the City’s housing market and low unemployment rate/shortage of employees have become barriers to provide an environment for continued growth.

ChallengesThe general consensus heard during the town hall meetings was the concern over the City’s housingmarket and labor pool. Residents believe housing shortage and increasing prices created many challenges for residents and potential residents sharing a few stories of friends moving away fromKearney and their job because they could not ind housing in Kearney. Although housing wasdiscussed as the major challenge or barrier for Kearney and its residents, town hall meeting attendeesdiscussed the need for private involvement in the housing market. Other challenges included the lack of workforce and need for more skilled laborers. The latter point, coupled with housing challenges,are both related to poverty levels in Kearney. Town hall meeting attendees wanted to be able to indsolutions for the housing market; however, when pressed to discuss feasible solutions that could beimplemented in one year participants had a hard time inding options. Because of the poverty levelsand need for skilled workers, participants also believed it may be bene icial to provide solutions forexisting residents making minimum wage. If their wages could be increased, they may be able to affordhousing in Kearney. Participants discussed ways to help residents in poverty ind training options toincrease their opportunities for higher paying jobs in Kearney. This would provide a solution for theskilled labor force and would also help with housing, not by lowering housing prices, but by increasingincome levels so housing can become affordable for residents.

26



Focus Group MeetingsThe focus group meetings (phase 3), conducted in September, were broken into different categoriesincluding three sessions conducted by UNK’s CRRD Director and one facilitated by M&A. The threeconducted by UNK’s CRRD Director included two sessions held with low-to-moderate income persons.The socio-economic pro ile of these two groups (14 persons) had experienced low income/homeless,underemployment, and many employment barriers including public transportation and childcareissues. The third group facilitated by UNK’s CRRD Director was comprised of six leaders on theKearney Chamber Young Professionals committee. The fourth small group meeting which focused onnon-pro it agencies in Kearney was facilitated by M&A. Approximately 15 agency providers attendedthe session at the Kearney Public Library and shared on-going challenges and constraints they faceas well as discussions focusing on improvements for agency providers in Kearney. Solution optionscentered on the need for a referral network to help agencies communicate and refer those in need moreef iciently. Bringing different agencies together in one location was also discussed as a possibility tobetter serve residents in Kearney and the surrounding region. The central location, would not haveto be a permanent location for any speci ic agency but it could provide a space for multiple agencies togather during set times. The hope for this solution option would be to provide residents in need withone central location to get to when they are in need of assistance.


StrengthsThe majority of focus group participants cited thebiggest community strengths were friendlinessand safety. High quality public school teachers andsupport staff was also mentioned by both low-to-moderate income (LMI) and young professionalgroups. The primary strengths listed by theyoung professionals were similar to those of the education and elected of icials interviewed;friendly small town atmosphere with a goodvariety of activities for personal or professionalengagement. A great variety of high-quality park systems, playgrounds, and public recreationalareas spread throughout the community was alsomentioned by all groups.

ChallengesLimited options for short-term skill training,public transportation, and childcare were theprimary challenges expressed by LMI focus groupparticipants. Of the LMI participants who workedfull or part-time, many desired to increase theirskill or education but could not ind reliable andaffordable childcare or transportation to attendclasses\training. Of those who had access totheir own vehicle and had applied to enter theirchildren in subsidized day care programs (i.e.Headstart), there was frustration due to theincome thresholds depending on if they or theirspouse had a different job from one month to thenext. While all of the LMI group participants hadvisited multiple local human service agencies,many expressed frustration that they were not eligible for many programs due to poor credit history or a spouse making too much money.Without regular public transportation, many LMIparticipants had dif iculty accessing the multiplehuman service agencies spread throughout thecommunity. Lack of low income housing optionswas another key issue mentioned in all groups.Lack of quality affordable irst time homebuyer options was a major concern of the youngprofessional group. While they acknowledged that the labor shortage was a key issue for community growth, even if recruitment was successful therewere few options for skilled labor to live.

28



A matrix, Figure 3.1, was created outlining the top solutions discussed during each of the publicinput phases, phase 1-key stakeholder interviews;phase 2-town hall meetings, and phase 3-LMIfocus groups. Although phase 3 included focusgroup meetings with the young residents showingleadership strengths and non-pro it agencies,it was important to highlight the solutionsdetermined by the LMI focus groups because they were the targeted population included duringmany discussions. Low-to-moderate incomeresidents were also among the residents that were determined as the target population to helpthrough this process; therefore, their solutionsare the ones shown on the public input matrix. It was important to prioritize the solution matrixto show speci ic areas of overlap determinedbetween each of the public input phases. Forexample, the top six solutions (highlighted in thedarkest red) show the solutions with overlap fromall three public input phases. The next nine rows(a shade of lighter red) shows the solutions that have overlap from two of the three public input phases and the inal three rows show solutionsthat were only mentioned during one public input phase. The far right columns show categorizationof the solutions in relationship to the key focusarea(s) that would be positively affected throughimplementation of the solution discussed.

In order to assist with prioritization of the many solutions and goals discussed through the publicinput phases, America’s Best Team Kearney Committee focused their primary efforts on thetop six rows of solution options because therewas consensus built among the three publicinput phases around similar solutions. As thecommittee members continued to move forward,these six solution options which included: soft skills training, centralized location for agencies,person(s) providing labor services, permanent bus route, short-term certi icate training, andadditional income subsidized housing, werethe main area of focus. Although these solutionoptions centered on overall goals or best practicemodels, there was unity around workforceshortage, skilled labor, and poverty.

Figure 3.1: Public Input MatrixspuorG sucoF IMLsgniteeM llaH nwoTsweivretnI tnamrofnI yeK

-ssorc()sredael ycnega dna ,htlaeh ,ssenisub ,noitacude yliramirp( slaudividni emocni etaredom-ot-wol()cilbup lareneg fo noitces )

Curtis and Associates Model - Soft Skills Person(s) to Bring Together All Agencies and Businesses Face-to-Face Site for Agencies x x x 3xxxseicnegA rof noitacoL dezilartneCseicnegA neewteb noitaroballoC/noitacol lartneCseicnegA rof esuoH gniraelC 3

Person(s) to provide Dept. of Labor Services-locally Person(s) to provide Dept. of Labor Services-locally Face-to-Face Site for Agencies x x 2xxxxetuoR suB tnenamrePetuoR suB tnenamrePetuoR suB tnenamreP 4

xxgniniarT etacifitreC mreT-trohSgniniarT etacifitreC mreT-trohSgniniarT etacifitreC mreT-trohS 2xxgnisuoH derettacS dna ,8 noitceS ,IML ,TFARledoM gnisuoH IML dna TFARledoM gnisuoH TFAR 2xxxdeeN ni snosreP rof gnihcaoC/gnirotneMledoM ytrevoP fo tuO segdirB 3

Director of Talent Development and Recruitment Di xxtnemtiurceR dna tnempoleveD tnelaT fo rotcer 2xxxeracdlihC dedivorP loohcS/reyolpmEeracdlihC reyolpmE 3

ydutS gnisuoHydutS gnisuoH x x x 3aksarbeN fo edistuO tekraMgnitekraM ytinummoC - ratS htroN x x 2

xx.cte ,CK ,revneD ta sdraoblliB-ecrofkroW esaercnIledoM sboJ saH sllaF xuoiS 2gnisuoH lanoitisnarTledoM IG-ytinummoC gniviL laitnediseR keerC reppoC x 1

xxxxmargorP elttuhS/naV reyolpmEmargorP elttuhS/naV reyolpmE 4ledoM gnisuoH ecrofkroW senuoYledoM gnisuoH ecrofkroW senuoY x 1

Voucher for Childcare x x x 3Employee Ride-Share Program x x 2

Voucher for Transportation x x x x 414 13 4 11 4

SLF - Skilled Labor ForceH - HousingP - Poverty

T - Transportation

Source: Public Input collected by Miller & Associates & UNK, 2015 WS - Workforce ShortageTotal Solutions Offered by Challenge

# of Challenges Solution AddressesTPHSLFWS


Community ChallengesAs shown through the public input opportunities, Kearney is a wonderful community to be a part of because of the great amenities, high quality of life, and collaboration/unity experienced by our residents,employees, business owners, stakeholders, etc. However, the fast growth and strong economic climatedo not come without challenges. Housing, including lack of available housing and increased prices, createmany on-going challenges for residents, potential residents, and employers. With a strong economy and expanding businesses, Kearney’s unemployment rate is one of the lowest in the State; Nebraska, inturn, has the lowest unemployment rate in the nation. Figure 3.2 shows the State unemployment rates across the United States along with the unemployment rates for the counties in Nebraska. With thehigh cost of housing and low unemployment rate, Kearney also has a high percentage rate of residentsliving in poverty compared to the State average (16.8 percent and 12.8 percent, respectively1). The next section outlines the existing conditions and the challenges they create for the City of Kearney. Thesubsequent section, after Existing Conditions Re lecting Community Challenges, outlines the publicinput data received and how that also re lects the current challenges Kearney is facing.1 Data Source: ACS 2009-2013 Estimates.

6.2

5.4

6.0

6.4

5.9

4.8

5.4

5.4

3.6

4.6

3.74.7

5.85.4

5.9

4.75.27.5

5.2

5.7

6.5

6.24.2

4.5 5.6

5.8

5.8 4.75.0

5.34.6

3.8

4.0

3.0

3.8

2.7

4.64.3

4.1

4.0

4.1

3.6

6.1 6.5

6.7

6.2

6.8

5.9

5.3

6.7

3.7

Sioux2.8

Dawes2.1

Box Butte2.4

Sheridan2.7

Garden2.2

Morrill2.6

Scottsbluff3.1

Banner2.6

Kimball3.4

Cheyenne1.9 Deuel

2.3

Arthur3.7

Keith2.3

McPherson1.6

Logan2.5

Custer2.1

Loup3.4

Rock2.0

Brown3.4

Keya Paha1.9

Boyd2.0

Holt2.1

Garfield2.2

Wheeler2.4

Valley2.6

Greeley2.6

Sherman2.4

Howard2.4

Buffalo2.2

Dawson2.8

Hall2.8

Lincoln2.5

Perkins2.8

Chase1.8

Dundy1.8

Hitchcock4.1

Hayes2.1

Frontier2.0

Red Willow

2.8

Furnas2.5

Gosper2.1

Phelps2.3

Harlan1.9

Franklin2.2

Kearney1.8

Adams2.7

Webster3.4

Nuckolls2.2

Clay2.6

Fillmore2.9

Thayer2.0

Jefferson2.3

Saline2.4

Seward2.4

York2.6 Lancaster

3.2

Gage3.2 Pawnee

2.3Richardson

3.4

Nemaha3.5Johnson

2.7

Otoe3.0

Cass2.9

Sarpy2.5

Douglas2.9

Washington2.7

Burt3.3

Dodge2.9

Cuming2.4

Stanton2.2Madison

2.4

Antelope2.1

Knox2.6

Pierce2.0

Boone2.1

Wayne2.2

Cedar2.0 Dixon

2.8 Dakota3.9Thurston

6.1

Saunders2.7

Butler2.4

Platte2.5

Colfax2.4

Polk2.3

Hamilton2.1

Merrick2.8

Nance1.9

Cherry2.2

Grant1.7

Hooker3.2

Thomas3.1

Blaine3.8

Data Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, July 2015 and Nebraska Department of Labor, May 2015.

Figure 3.2: Unemployment Rates, United States and Nebraska, 2015

32



Existing Conditions Re lecting Community ChallengesBased on the existing economic conditions, Kearney is facing the following challenges: lowunemployment, falling purchasing power, and lack of affordable housing.

Kearney’s unemployment rate is two percent. A low unemployment rate typically indicates a strongeconomy; however, it may also mask persistent problems in the local labor market. First, a healthy economy leads to businesses seeking to hire workers, as is the case in Kearney. However, becausethe pool of job candidates is small, inding a good match for positions is often dif icult. This results inbusinesses either settling for a candidate who does not have the necessary skills or leaving the positionun illed. The former may lead to high employee turnover which pushes up labor costs. The latter oftenleads to the current stock of employees being overworked which may result in declining employeemorale and lower productivity. Second, compounding the problem of a mismatch between the skillsof job seekers and the skills required for available jobs is the fact that many job seekers eventually drop out of the labor force altogether because they have become so discouraged. To illustrate, at thenational level, more than 5.5 million adults 16 years and older are classi ied as discouraged workers(e.g., dropped out of the labor force but available for work). To put it into perspective, this is about 70 percent of individuals who are classi ied as unemployed. Moreover, only about three percent of discouraged workers are in school or training, which is concerning, because unless these individualscan learn a new skill set or improve their existing skills, they may ind it dif icult to land a job in thefuture.

Since 2010, real wages in all industries in Kearney have fallen 1.9 percent (or -0.4 percent annually),and those industries that have experienced the largest real wage declines employ 39 percent of allworkers in Kearney. Moreover, nationwide prices have been rising 1.7 percent annually since 2010, andas a result, purchasing power among consumers in the Kearney area has eroded. This is particularly dif icult for ixed income citizens which include social security and welfare recipients, retirees receivingprivate pensions, and workers who have signed long-term labor contracts. Also, another subset of the population who is adversely affected by this challenge is college students. To illustrate, current poverty rates indicate that 17.3 percent of all people in Kearney are below the poverty level; however,when college students not living with relatives are excluded from the calculation, those living belowthe poverty line signi icantly drops to 11.9 percent, which is comparable to the state’s poverty rate of 11.6 percent.2

Since 2011, the real average sales price of homes in Kearney has increased 13.1 percent (or 3.1 percent annually) from $169,295 to $191,473. Although purchasing a home in this sales range may be manageablefor households who are at or above the median household income in Kearney ($46,282), those belowthe median household income will ind relatively few affordable housing options in Kearney. Moreover,the lack of affordable housing is closely linked to Kearney’s inability to attract additional workers tosupport the hiring needs of existing businesses. Overall, this could be detrimental to the long-rungrowth of Kearney as new businesses or existing businesses who want to expand begin lookingelsewhere to meet their workforce needs.

2 Data Source: Bishaw, Alemayehu. (2013) “Examining the Effect of Off-Campus College Students on Poverty Rates,” U.S.Census Bureau, Social, Economic & Housing Statistics Division, Poverty Statistics Branch, SEHSD 2013-17.


Public Input Indicating Community ChallengesThe existing conditions outlined on the previouspage re lect the current challenges facing many residents in Kearney today. Low unemployment,falling purchasing power, and lack of affordablehousing are all linked together and impact many residents and employers in Kearney. Through thepublic input process, these challenges were brought up and discussed time and time again. Housing,unemployment, and skilled labor are three majorconstraints facing the City and challenge thefuture capacity for continued growth in Kearney.These challenges play into the ive key focusareas previously determined by the America’sBest Team Kearney Committee. Housing, skilledlabor force, and transportation challenges aredirectly connected to poverty; housing and laborshortage are also directly connected. In a sense,all ive key areas are interconnected creating atrue conundrum relating to the old adage “whichcomes irst, the chicken or the egg”? Residentsspoke about the need for more workers to moveto Kearney however they struggled to determinehousing solutions that would provide places forthese workers to live. Another goal discussed wasthe desire to decrease poverty rates in Kearney which could be accomplished through increasingskilled labor opportunities, but it is still hinderedby housing and transportation barriers that many residents in poverty currently face.

With poverty levels for all residents in Kearney,reaching 16.8 percent, it is important to indways to reduce employment barriers and housingcosts while increasing wages and employment opportunities to help reduce poverty in thecommunity. As previously reported, 16 of the 23occupation categories in Kearney have hourly entry wages between $8 and $12, by industry.These wages barely meet the living wage for asingle person working with bene its, which isestimated to be $11.44 an hour in Buffalo County3. Maintaining adequate employment is furtherchallenged by employment barriers such astransportation and childcare.

3 Data Source: Women to Work-Living Wage for BuffaloCounty as reported by Meredith Collins, Community ActionPartnership of Mid-Nebraska.p

34



Through the public input process, it was determined that the following challenges created the most urgency for Kearney. The common challenges expressed by key stakeholders as reported during interviews included:s

• Workforce shortage, especially skilled and reliable labor• Lack of low cost and entry level housing options/units, especially for pet owners seeking rentals• Lack of lexible public transportation options• Lack of reliable air service; especially important for business travel and professional recruiting.• High rate of youth poverty, as expressed by higher than state average student free and reduced

lunch percentage• Lack of mental health support resources

The above challenges are listed by highest frequency mentioned among all participants.

The common challenges expressed during town hall meetings included:• Lack of affordable housing• Lack of low-cost, quality rental units• Low unemployment rates• Dif icult to ind and/or qualify for help, when needed• Lack of family-friendly work environments

The common challenges expressed by low-to-moderate income residents as reported during focus groupsincluded:

• Lack of lexible and affordable childcare options (barriers to education/training and/oremployment)

• Lack of lexible local public transportation options (barriers to education/training and/oremployment)

• Lack of low cost rental housing options/units, especially for those with poor credit• Lack short term skill training options not af iliated with a temporary hiring agency or employer.

The focus group session with non-pro it agencies in Kearney enforced the same ideas and challengesheard during the LMI focus groups, while the young leaders’ focus group duplicated many of the samechallenges as discussed by key stakeholders. Although not surprising from the mixture of residentswho attended the town hall meetings, challenges during the sessions included a mixture of the two setsof challenges listed above with housing and workforce challenges topping the list.


Residents examined many solution options and pointed to best practice models for ways to improvethe housing market and skilled labor opportunities while reducing poverty levels and existingemployment barriers. Many residents and key stakeholders discussed the state’s Department of Laborof ice and the hole it left in the community when the state determined, for their own speci ied reasons,to close the Kearney location. Residents and stakeholders believed this of ice was a true attribute inthe community and provided many services for a variety of residents including LMI residents. TheDepartment of Labor of ice assisted with unemployment bene its, referral services for job/skill training,pre-employment services, and much more. Many residents shared that the closing of the Department of Labor of ice was disadvantageous to the community. Another model residents discussed was the lack of soft skills training, as was once provided by Curtis and Associates in Kearney. In 2000, Curtis andAssociates sold their company which was founded in Kearney, to a larger company from the northwest region of the United States. The Curtis and Associates business model included soft skills and pre-employment training workshops for residents who received Aid-to-Dependent Children subsidies fromNebraska Department of Health and Human Services (NDHHS). Although these workshops were only available for a small portion of the community, residents saw the value they provided and believedthese soft skills training workshops were bene icial for residents and could be utilized for more thanthe portion of residents receiving Aid-to-Dependent Children subsidies. ResCare is a company, witha branch location in Kearney that provides similar services to families receiving Aid-to-Dependent Children subsidies. However, residents would like to see the same type of services available to moreresidents without stipulations of qualifying for other resource assistance.

Ideas for increasing the workforce and skilled labor training opportunities were brainstormed by residents during town hall meetings and by leaders during key stakeholder interviews. Many citizensbelieved the idea of “needing a degree to succeed” was not true in today’s society and today’s localeconomy. This societal change of believing a degree is necessary to secure a good paying job can beseen all around the country, but it creates a cause for concern revolving around the hard push forcitizens to earn a degree and incur debt in the process. Many jobs across the country, including severalemployment opportunities in Kearney, do not require a degree. There are options for employeeswithout a degree and many times, it may be more bene icial for someone to begin working out of highschool as opposed to bearing thousands of dollars in debt to obtain a degree prior to working. Thereare employers in Kearney that begin hourly pay at $12-$15 for workers, without any degree or training.These opportunities need to be explored and potential employees need to be educated on the existingopportunities and the possible income earnings through employment opportunities in Kearney. Theseoptions were heavily discussed by residents, employees, and employers in Kearney during the publicinput sessions. Employers at many of the manufacturing companies in Kearney feel there is still anegative stigma for “factory jobs” including dirty working environments, hard physical labor, andunattractive job opportunities. This may have been true of all manufacturing jobs 20-30 years ago andmay still be true for some jobs today; however, more can be done to educate and inform residents about the income opportunities and bene its available while working at a manufacturing facility or having a“factory job”. This will bene it many residents who are in need of a 40-hour work week which may not be an option at their current job or a higher income than what they are currently earning.

36



Kearney leaders believe in growing the skilledlabor force to meet employment challenges.Barriers include available workforce, jobtraining, community college access, and creatingsustainable workforce development strategies.Kearney leaders were determined to reach out to human and social service agencies, educationleaders, employers and human resourcepersonnel, and LMI residents to open the lines of communication to help overcome these issues by focusing on root causes of poverty, skilled labor,workforce shortage, transportation, and housing.

Additional opportunities and solution optionswere shared during the public input phasesand many of the solutions can be found in thisCommunity Revitalization Plan in Figure 3.1,the public input matrix. However, there wasa general consensus to ind a solution hingedon reducing poverty by increasing wages forthe unemployed and underemployed. Thissolution priority revolves around the need forsoft skills or pre-employment training, coachingor mentoring services, additional skilled labortraining opportunities, and connections betweenbusinesses, potential employees, agenciesproviding social services, and the educationsector.

Chapter 4: Chapter 4: Goals & Goals &

StrategiesStrategies

38

Chapter 4: Goals & Strategies


Career Pathways Institute – Grand Island, NE • Program for students to become both career and college ready

• Introduction to career exploration: 6th Grade• Introduction to various pathways: 8th Grade

• Three Campuses: Grand Island Senior High, Adams Street Campus,Central Community College

• Programs Offered: Agriculture, Food, and Natural Resources; Business,Management, and Administration; Finance; Hospitality and Tourism;Marketing; Arts/AV Technology and Communications; InformationTechnology; Health Sciences; Education and Training; Design and Pre-Construction; Construction; Manufacturing; Automotive; Welding

• Helps provide area businesses with a well-trained workforce; couldpigeon-hole students

*Kearney High School will incorporate this philosophy into curriculum in theFall of 2016.

Best Practice ModelsSeveral Best Practice Models (BPMs) were researched during the public input and prioritizing stagesof the revitalization plan process. Short descriptions of several of the researched BPMs can be foundbelow. BPMs were researched to provide feasible implementation ideas and practical solutions forKearney’s challenges. Researching and reviewing the BPMs helped to outline and provide initialframework for Kearney’s goals. Each BPM was also categorized to include the key focus areas eachBPM initiative would bene it.

Bridges Out of Poverty – National Program y• Move individuals from poverty to self-suf iciency• Reduce social costs related to crime, poor health, and welfare• Strengthen educational attainment and job skills• Enhance economic development• Improve on-the-job productivity• Revitalize neighborhoods• Build sustainable communities where everyone can live well

Workforce ShortageSkilled Labor Force


Workforce ShortagePoverty

Central Nebraska Career Academy Project (CNCAP) – Grand Island, NE• Central Community College program for high school juniors and seniors• Promotes teaching and learning through a balance of academic and

career training• College level courses, exploration of careers in high demand, visit job

sites, job-shadowing, general job skills that will help in their career of choice; currently offering Health Science Career Academy and BusinessAcademy; developing an Agribusiness Academy

• Gives students a head start for college or the workforce• Can result in a certi icate depending on program

*Kearney High School will implement a similar program in 2016, known as theScott D. Morris Institute.


Cincinnati Works – Cincinnati, Ohio; Houston, Texas; Covington, Kentucky• Enables persons in poverty to achieve economic self-suf iciency

through long term employment• Comprehensive support includes behavioral counseling, legal advocacy,

spiritual support, childcare resources, and transportation assistance.• Foster care transitional mentoring• Programs don’t just serve the unemployed and underemployed, but

also work with Employers whom have entry and mid-level positionsavailable.

(through marketing)Workforce ShortageSkilled Labor Force


Poverty

Workforce ShortageTransportation

Poverty



Curtis and Associates – Past Business in Kearney, NE• Private, for-pro it company began in mid-1980s, contracted labor• 5-day workshop on Interview Training and Job Preparation

• Wednesday – Tuesday: 9am – 4pm (8 hour day), professional attirerequired for participants

• Treated participants as equals and taught skills for success;participants took ownership of job

• Partnership between program and local businesses• Low unemployment may limit involvement; no job/skill training

Director of Talent Development and Recruitment – Norfolk, NEt• A full-time staff member to coordinate efforts between several

organizations, the Chamber of Commerce, Northeast Community College, Nebraska Department of Labor, Norfolk Public Schools, andNorfolk Area Economic Development Council

• Development of short, mid, and long terms goals for recruitment andretention

• Work on initiatives of youth out-migration and guiding them towardscareers in the area

Nebraska Department of Labor Of ice• State-run program• Provides services to for employees, potential employees, veterans, and

unemployed persons• Services include assistance with unemployment bene its, job training

and preparation, job search, workers’ rights, etc.

North Star – Completed branding for Brookings, SD and Broken Bow, NE• Community Branding Company• Develop customized brand for community through research, creativity,

and action• Includes 6 to 36 month strategic plan for brand implementation• Helps identify target audience to bring to community• Can target potential residents or tourism

• Stronger brand can reach larger populations not familiar withcommunity; help with workforce shortage

• Branding could cause discord in community if residents do not agree;• Potential residents may have hard time inding housing

40



One-Stop Resource Center – Beatrice, NE• Available to all non-pro it agencies; rented from Southeast Community

College• Rent ranges from $7.25 - $9.00/sq. ft. (phone/internet not provided)

• Houses non-pro it agencies;• “Anchor” agency is Nebraska Department of Labor• Communal Conference Room with no use fee• Easier communication between agencies• Multiple services offered from one location

• State entity involvement; connection to the College

HousingWorkforce Shortage

HousingPoverty

(through non-pro its)HousingPoverty


These BPMs served as a basis for research and solution development. There are many pros and consto each of the BPMs, these were noted and heavily discussed in order to determine the best solutionmethods for Kearney. Not all of the models were a perfect it for Kearney; however, lessons were learnedfrom each of the models and a practical solution was outlined to it the needs of our community. Goalsfocusing on the ive key areas along with solutions receiving consensus from public input groups werebroken into short-term and mid-and long-term goals for Kearney. These goals can be found later in thischapter.

RAFT – Kearney, NE• Provides structured residential program to help families rebuild their

lives; 24-hour on-call staff; program is six months min. to two yearsmax.

• Family is required to develop their own goals and a service plan• Program includes additional counseling, work requirements (adults

must work or attend training 40 hours/week), support and trainingprograms, monthly budget meetings, support for various life skills

• Requirements: must be a family as de ined by HUD, must be homelessas de ined by HUD, head of household must be at least 18 years old

• Serves an area of need in Kearney; limited eligibility for program

Younes Employee Housing – Kearney, NE• Younes Hospitality: 300 full-time employees in Kearney • Workforce housing available to employees with good, 3-month work

history at Younes Hospitality• 20, one-bedroom apartment units (currently under construction)• Rent - $495, utilities and cable included in rent• Located on same campus as jobs• 40 additional units planned for 2016, with some two-bedroom units• If employment is terminated, renters will have until the end of the

following month to ind other accommodations


Mid- and Long-Term GoalsAs previously mentioned, there were many goals and solution options discussed during the threepublic input phases, BPM research, and through the America’s Best Team Kearney Committee meetings.It was important to committee members to retain all of the feasible goals discussed, especially theones centered around the ive key focus areas of workforce shortage, skilled labor force, housing,transportation, and poverty. As described in the following section, the short-term goal was determinedby the need to better serve the unemployed and underemployed through a focused effort that could beimplemented in 11-months with $100,000. Although there are many other goals that could have beenimplemented matching the above criteria, it was important to committee members and community members to prioritize options to help with employment and poverty in the community. In order todocument, as well as progress on goals as time and funds allow, the remainder of the goals shared duringthe public input phases have been broken into a second group: mid- and long-term goals. Committeemembers want to follow-up on these mid-and long-term goals during the coming years which may include designating appropriate community groups to work towards completing goals. It was alsodetermined that other community organizations have already been focusing efforts on some of thegoals that were shared during the public input sessions. America’s Best Team Kearney Committeemembers will share data gathered with the appropriate organizations to help these organizations withtheir existing efforts.

Below is a listing of mid- and long-term goals, as determined through the three public input phases, BPMresearch, and through the America’s Best Team Kearney Committee meetings. Committee memberswill continue to follow-up on these goals and it is the committee members’ ambition to see many of these goals through; however, short-term efforts will be focused on the short-term goals outlined inthe following section. Kearney’s mid- and long-term goals centered on the ive key focus areas are thefollowing:

Housing


PovertyAgency Event Fair• Develop annual (at a minimum) event fair for human/social service

agencies• Would allow persons in need to attend fair to learn about the different

agencies and programs they would qualify for• Fair should be held in locations comfortable to target audience

Employer Led Housing Initiatives – Workforce Housing• First Option – Invest in housing development for employees (like

Younes model)• Promotes employee retention and high job satisfaction levels• Second option – voucher system for rent or mortgage payments• Third option – down-payment assistance for employees

Housing Study• Determine key areas for housing development• Establish price points and housing needs for owner and renter units• Analyze effects of Kearney’s housing market on other sectors of the

community• Research feasible ways to develop “affordable” housing

42



TransportationPoverty






Poverty


Human Resource (HR) Referral System• Develop system for Human Resource personnel to encourage referral

of quality candidates• Prevents quality candidates from “falling through the cracks”• Promotes increased communication between businesses

Increase Number of “Affordable” Housing Units• Determine “affordable” housing price points for rental and owner

units• Find feasible development solutions

Labor Recruitment• Explore option to hire Director of Talent Development and

Recruitment• Goals include recruiting needed talent and workforce numbers

• Promote Kearney and labor needs/low unemployment rates

Student Work Experience for Credit• Work with High School (and other education institutions) to develop

work-for-credit programs• Bene it of work and real-life experience• Could include hourly, retail or service work or work in a potential

career ield• Utilizes pool of labor currently existing in Kearney

Technical Training Opportunities (other than 4-year degree programs) • Establish relationship between businesses and educational

institutions to ensure needed training opportunities are available• Market training opportunities• Work with Central Community College to help with their goal of

expanding training courses available in Kearney

Transportation• Permanent bus route

• RYDE is currently in study phase for transportation improvements• Work with RYDE to share public desires for permanent bus route

• Van-Share program led by employers• Employee Ride-Share program


Short-Term GoalsThe City of Kearney is con ident in its ability to have continued, manageable growth in alleconomic sectors. As an economic hub for theregion, Kearney anticipates challenges in thenext twenty years to revolve around harnessingprivate growth and maintaining the existinghigh quality of life and citizen satisfaction whilepopulation expands. This may mean an increasedlocal focus on public transportation, housing,and targeted economic incentives to ensure that all demographics within the community receiveequal bene it from growth and are engaged invisioning for a sustainable future.

Many short-term solution options were discussedduring the public input phases and America’s Best Team Kearney Committee meetings. However,committee members wanted to focus theirattention on solution options that had consensusbuilt between the varying groups of residentsin the community, i.e. key stakeholders, generalpublic, and focus group participants. This wasdetermined through the public input matrix(as explained in the public input section of theRevitalization Plan). The top six rows showingconsistency of solution goals between all threepublic input phases were the solution optionswhere committee members concentrated theirefforts.

Through the public input process and prioritizingchallenges and solution options, America’s Best Team Kearney Committee has determined to focus their revitalization efforts on providingcomprehensive services for the unemployed andunderemployed. This in-turn, will help employersby providing services including pre-employment and soft skills training, certi icate trainingassistance, and coaching or mentoring to ensureresidents are employable, ready and wantingto be employed, and knowledgeable about thebene its of gaining and maintaining employment to help reduce other barriers they face.

44



It became the main short-term goal to create aprogram that would bene it the unemployed andunderemployed persons in Kearney with hopes of helping these individuals increase their incometo improve their overall quality of life. Solutionoptions focusing on assisting these individualsincluded the need to offer soft skills and pre-employment training, provide assistance foradditional certi icate training, and extend helpthrough volunteer coaches or mentors that couldprovide one-on-one assistance when workingthrough the skills learned during soft skillstraining. This approach creates solution optionsthat correlate with three of the ive key focusareas including poverty, skilled labor force, andworkforce shortage.

Through this prioritization the committeemembers began focusing efforts on a facility and/or program that would be able to provide thesethree pillars of service: soft skills, certi icatetraining, and coaching/mentoring. The programand facility, as detailed in this section, has beentitled Kearney Works referencing the servicesthat will be provided and how they relate toemployment and the ability for Kearney towork well and work together. This became themain area of focus for implementing a short-term goal because it would bene it many low-income individuals and in-turn would provide abene it to the employers in the community. Thisbalance is important because Kearney needs tobe able to continue its strong economic growth;however, the City cannot focus all efforts solely on economic development with hopes of servingother individuals.


Kearney Works ObjectivesGoal:To provide comprehensive services and resources to the unemployed and underemployed.

Strategy:Develop a program providing three pillars of service for the unemployed and underemployed.

There are three main objectives to provide comprehensive services for the unemployed andunderemployed and each objective has a set of tactics needed to reach the objective. The list below outlines each objective and the associated tactics:

1) Establish a soft skills/pre-employment training curriculum focusing on key life skillslike money management, time management, problem solving, interview preparedness,etc.• Determine soft skills training categories and identify curriculum for each• Develop a schedule for soft skills training classes• Recruit and train volunteers to teach soft skills training classes• Complete screening process of volunteers

2) Determine certi icate training opportunities itting the needs of individuals to providesome level of skill training prior to job seeking.• Determine other certi icate training programs and develop certi icate programs, as

necessary to meet the needs of employers and ills the training gaps in the community• Determine and secure location(s), computers, etc. needed for individuals to complete

certi icate training

3) Provide coaching/mentoring services for individuals through a volunteer system toensure individuals have assistance when putting the soft skills training to use in theirown personal situations.• Develop coaching/mentoring guidelines and procedures• Complete background checks of volunteers• Recruit and train volunteers for coaching/mentoring positions• Develop mentor and mentee pro iles

The Kearney Works program will require hands-on efforts from many people in the community.This will include volunteers to assist with training, coaching/mentoring, “in-house” assistance withcomputer training and intake needs; a Board of Directors established to oversee the Kearney Worksprogram, a hired Kearney Works Director to organize and employ all necessary efforts related to thethree pillars of services; and unemployed and underemployed individuals to participate in the Kearney Works program. It will be necessary to establish and maintain relationships between existing agencies,businesses, and educational institutions because these relationships will be crucial to establish becauseit will provide a better understanding of the ever-changing needs and ways the needs can be met.Other relationships include connections between the Director of Kearney Works, Board of Directors,volunteers, and individuals participating in the Kearney Works program.

Conceptual logos courtesy of America’s Best Communities Team Kearney Committee.t C iti T K C ittC t l l t f A i ’ B

46



In order to engage the benefactors, America’s Best Team Kearney Committee will continue public input and outreach efforts over the next several months. It is a primary goal of the committee to keep thecommunity engaged and informed throughout this process. Through community outreach, committeemembers will work closely with local human and social service agencies to begin sharing informationregarding Kearney Works and the opportunities this program can provide for many residents,especially those who are unemployed or underemployed. The committee members will also have tofocus efforts on securing a Board of Directors to oversee the Kearney Works program and the Kearney Works Director. Many other volunteers will be needed in order to ful ill the needs of the Kearney Works program; therefore, committee members will have to work alongside the Board of Directors tohelp recruit volunteers for the various needs at Kearney Works.

Volunteers may come in different forms including retired teachers and professionals, church groups,college students for associated departments (i.e. social work or counseling school programs), etc.Although attracting and retaining volunteers can be challenging, it was important to ind solutionsthat could be sustainable without placing an extra inancial burden on community members or already struggling non-pro it agencies. Volunteers will be asked to provide their time and talents to help withcoaching/mentoring, teaching soft skills training, assisting with job application, resume development,and other certi icate training needs, etc. Through the development of the Revitalization Plan, many different residents expressed their desire to help the vision for Kearney come to fruition. Residentsknow it will require a community effort to provide comprehensive services for the unemployed andunderemployed; a strong volunteer system is the only way to provide services without adding ainancial burden to the community. The hope is to engage many volunteers and have different options

for necessary volunteer services. Kearney residents have always been successful community advocatesand volunteers; therefore, setting up a system for volunteers to help provide services may be a morefeasible option than relying on the need to ind inancial donors to pay for these services.

The Kearney Works model began to take shape with the main goal of providing training and mentoringservices for the unemployed and underemployed. The competition’s guidelines forced the committeeto put parameters on the items they could accomplish in the short-term. This was bene icial in somesenses because it would become very challenging to focus efforts on all of the solution options andoverall goals that came from public input phases. Once the committee members were able to direct efforts on a goal that could be implemented in 11 months with $100,000, programming needs weredeveloped.

Through this goal, three of the original ive key focus areas will be addressed. The Kearney Worksprogram will provide assistance to persons in poverty, with the goal to help individuals step-out-of-poverty by earning increased income levels. Through the Kearney Works program these individualswill receive training focused on job skill needs as well as real-life skills necessary to be successful;therefore, there will be a higher level of skilled labor entering the workforce. With more individualstrained and prepared for employment, and an opportunity for individuals to seek help from a facility in the community without having to meet prerequisite federal standards or state guidelines, moreresidents may feel prepared to enter the workforce thereby increasing the number of employees inKearney.

The following information presented in the Revitalization Plan focuses on the Kearney Works Programincluding the steps that need to be implemented prior to launching the pilot program as well as ensuringsustainability and successful outcomes through the pilot program, the overall strategies and objectives,and the necessary measurable outcomes to determine success of the initiative.

Chapter 5:Chapter 5:ImplementationImplementation

Chapter 5: Implementation

48 Kearney Revitalization Plan 2015Miller & Associates and University of Nebraska - Kearney

An 11-month implementation schedule, in the form of a Gantt Chart, has been established in Figure5.1 to outline the necessary steps to launch and sustain a pilot program for Kearney Works. The Gantt Chart shapes the framework of essential steps associated with implementation and sustainability.Each category ranges in necessary completion time from two months to eleven months. The mainimplementation categories include the following:

• Establishment of Kearney Works• Hiring Kearney Works Director• Establishment of Volunteer System• Establishment of Soft Skills Training Program• Establishment of Certi icates Programs• Establishment of Mentorship Program• Marketing of Kearney Works• On-going Processes• Tracking Measurable Outcomes• Launch Kearney Works 6-Month Pilot Program• Assess Additional Needs for Future Implementation

The Gantt Chart is broken into 48 weeks (which equates to approximately 11 months). Each category is marked to show the approximate length of time it should take to complete the category. There areseveral steps listed under each category. There is more speci ic timing associated with each step. Thered and blue colors on the chart do not indicate any differences beyond the sequential steps. Thedark red and blue colors indicate the speci ic timing outlined for each step. The light red and bluecolors indicate the speci ic timing for the overall category. The timing is important to follow becausemany steps cannot begin until previous steps are completed. The entire process is comprised of many dependencies; therefore, the steps need to be followed carefully and with respect to the outlinedtimeframe.

The Gantt Chart is an outline for America’s Best Team Kearney Committee, the yet-to-be-establishedBoard of Directors, and future Kearney Works Director to follow. Each sequential step has beenthought through and detailed to allow for the implementation of a six-month pilot program. Detailedinformation about the implementation can be found on the Gantt Chart.

WEEKSIMPLEMENTATION CATEGORIES & STEPS 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48Establishment of Kearney Works 2 MONTHSCreate a Board of DirectorsSubmit requirements to secure 501(c)3 statusSecure location for Kearney WorksDevelop and approve Kearney Works operating budgetHiring Kearney Works Director 2 MONTHSCreate a hiring committeeCarry out pre-hiring activities* Post job opening and complete interviews for Kearney Works DirectorHire Kearney Works DirectorEstablishment of Volunteer System 2 MONTHSSet-up screening process procedures for volunteersSet-up contact and communication system for volunteers and DirectorDevelop structure for each volunteer type**Develop management system to organize volunteer schedulesEstablishment of Soft Skills Training Program 2 MONTHSDetermine soft skills training categories and identify curriculum for eachDevelop schedule for soft skills training classesRecruit and train volunteers to teach soft skills training classesEstablishment of Certifi cate Programs 2 MONTHSDetermine other certifi cate training and develop certifi cate programsDetermine and secure location(s), computers, etc. for certifi cate trainingEstablishment of Mentorship Program 2 MONTHSDevelop coaching/mentoring guidelines and proceduresRecruit and train volunteers to coach/mentorDevelop mentor and mentee profi lesMarketing of Kearney Works 4 MONTHSDevelop branding & marketing planDeploy marketing planEngage in outreach tactics***Outreach and education to participants about Kearney Works On-going Processes 11 MONTHS Develop fundraising strategy to ensure sustainabilityDevelop on-going relationships***Tracking Measurable Outcomes 9 MONTHSDevelop and fi nalize intake assessment evaluationEstablish methods to gather information****Begin gathering and tracking necessary data/outcomesAnalyze gathered data/determine successful outcomesLaunch Kearney Works 6-Month Pilot Program 6 MONTHSOpen doors to begin Kearney Works Pilot ProgramIntake of Kearney Works recipientsMatch mentors and menteesImplement soft skills training program curriculumMatch Kearney Works recipients with appropriate Certifi cate ProgramsAssist Kearney Works recipients with Certifi cate Program completionComplete Kearney Works 6-month Pilot ProgramAssess Additional Needs for Future Implementation 2.5 MONTHSWork with employers to analyze additional training needsAssess soft skills training coursesDevelop agency referral system for serving those in crisis

NOTES:* Develop and fi nalize “job” description and

requirements, interview questions, reference questions, salary approval, etc.

** Includes “job” descriptions, guidelines, and minimum requirements for each volunteer type (e.g., teachers vs. mentors vs. administrative, etc.; length of time; etc.)

*** This activity includes businesses, agencies, and educational institutions

**** Gathered information should be based on approved measurable outcomes.

LEGEND:Overall Category TimeframeImplementation Step DurationCategory Duration

Figu

re 5

.1: A

BC T

eam

Kea

rney

: 11-

Mon

th G

antt

Cha

rtKe

arne

y W

orks

Created by: Miller & Associates & UNK, 2015

“A w

orkf

orce

dev

elop

men

t so

lutio

n fo

r un

empl

oyed

and

und

erem

ploy

ed

thro

ugh

trai

ning

and

com

mun

ity c

olla

bora

tion.

”


Process for Measuring OutcomesCommunity Revitalization Plan. Although there are many other feasible solution options and theKearney Works program will not solve all of the challenges facing Kearney, this solution option willprovide much needed services to many residents in Kearney. Kearney Works will focus on providingcomprehensive services for the unemployed and underemployed which in turn, will help employersby providing pre-employment and soft skills training, certi icate training assistance, and coaching ormentoring to ensure residents are employable, ready and wanting to be employed, and understand thebene its of gaining and maintaining employment to help reduce other barriers they face. Outcomes tobe measured include the number of individuals who receive bene it from Kearney Works, the impact of local volunteers, and the bene it Kearney Works can provide for local employers. More detailedinformation can be found in the section below; however, these three key areas are crucial to the successand sustainability of Kearney Works.

The Director of Kearney Works is responsible for establishing methods to gather information about Kearney Works programs. At a minimum, the information presented, on the following page, in Table 5.1, should be collected on a regular basis. Methods to collect the information may include, but are not limited to:

• Inquiry logbook that identi ies if the individual 1) only inquired about Kearney Works, 2) was permitted to a Kearney Works program, 3) was put on a waiting list for a Kearney Works program, and/or4) was referred to another human or social service agency in the area

• Logbook for each program that identi ies 1) the number of individuals permitted to the program and2) the number of individuals awarded a certi icate for completion of the program

• Intake forms• Post-program surveys (e.g., mentor and mentee level of satisfaction/helpfulness)• Post-program interviews (e.g., wage, employer, job title 3 and 12 months post program)

The collected data should be analyzed on a regular basis so that the effectiveness of the programs canbe determined. At a minimum, the analyzed information should be reported by the Kearney WorksDirector to the Board of Directors on a quarterly basis.



Table 5.1: Measurable Outcomes, Kearney Works Program, 2015

Measuring Foot Traf ic through Kearney Works Overall Number of individuals who inquired about Kearney Works programsNumber of individuals admitted to Kearney Works programsNumber of individuals on waiting list for Kearney Works programsNumber of individuals referred to another social service agencyMeasuring Foot Traf ic through and Completion of Kearney Works Programs Number of individuals admitted to Kearney Works programsNumber of soft skills classes offered per monthNumber of individuals enrolled in each soft skills classNumber of mentee-mentor relationships entered intoNumber of individuals awarded a Kearney Works certi icate (i.e., graduates)Number of X, Y, and Z certi icates awarded (X,Y, and Z to be determined; see Gantt Chart)Measuring Labor Market Success Attributable to Kearney Works Programs Number of individuals admitted to Kearney Works program and who became employed / received higherpay at place of employment

For these individuals, track:Wage, Employer, Job Title when individual entered the Kearney Works programWage, Employer, Job Title when individual is 3 months post Kearney Works programWage, Employer, Job Title when individual is 12 months post Kearney Works program

Average employee recruiting costs among Kearney businesses (prior to and after Kearney Works program)Average employee retention/turnover among Kearney businesses (prior to and after Kearney Works)Measuring Volunteers and Value of VolunteersNumber of volunteers recruitedNumber of volunteer hoursValue of in-kind services rendered by volunteers; $20.62/hr of volunteer in-kind servicesLevel of satisfaction/helpfulness identi ied by the mentor and the mentee in regards to the mentee-mentorrelationshipMeasuring Partnerships and Value of PartnershipsNumber of Kearney Works partnerships with social service agencies, with businesses, and with educationalinstitutionsValue of in kind services rendered by constituents at the social service agencies, businesses, and educational institutionsOtherDuration of Kearney Works Pilot programAmount of money raised (over 11 month period) via fundraising campaign


Measuring SuccessAlthough there are many measureable outcomes and sources of data to collect to analyze the Kearney Works program, successful thresholds need to be outlined and set prior to the implementation. TheAmerica’s Best Team Kearney Committee members were determined to set high thresholds that would prove success and show the bene its gained from the Kearney Works program. The thresholdswere determined as goals that could be achieved, but could not be achieved without effort and duediligence from the committee members, Board of Directors, Kearney Works Director, volunteers, andparticipants. In order to create a “proof-of-concept” and show the gained bene its, the sustainability of the Kearney Works program would be in jeopardy. Therefore, it was crucial to committee members tooutline successful thresholds focused on the Kearney Works program and the efforts made to ensuresustainability of the program beyond the America’s Best Communities competition.

Table 5.2 shows six measurable outcomes that the Director will use to demonstrate that Kearney Works is successful over the 11-month implementation period.

Table 5.2: Demonstration of Success, Kearney Works Program, 2015Measurable Outcome Threshold of Success:Number of individuals awarded a Kearney Works certi icate (i.e., graduates) 20Percent of individuals admitted to Kearney Works program and who becameemployed / received higher pay at place of employment 75%

Number of volunteers recruited to help provide Kearney Works services 50Value of in-kind services rendered by volunteers $100,000Duration of Kearney Works Pilot program 6 mo.Amount of money raised (over 11 month period) via fundraising campaign $100,000

These outcomes will be measured through the data collection outlines previously provided in thischapter. Successfulness and the possibility of sustainability of the Kearney Works program will bemeasured based on the thresholds set in Table 5.2 above. The Board of Directors and Kearney WorksDirector will be made aware of the thresholds that have been set and will have to focus efforts onproviding comprehensive services that will be proven bene icial because of the above thresholds.America’s Best Team Kearney Committee members are committed to the success of this initiative andwant to ensure the sustainability of the program because of the existing community support centeredon the needed services that will be provided by Kearney Works. Committee members are committedto leveraging local resources in both monetary contributions and volunteer efforts to safeguard thefuture of the program which has been based on community needs, data analysis, and public input.

APPENDIX1

America’s Best Community Study: Kearney, Nebraska

September 2015

Center for Rural

Research & Development

Shawn Kaskie Director

University of Nebraska at Kearney

West Center, Room 125E 1917 West 24th Street

Kearney, NE 68849 Phone: (308) 865-8135

e-mail: [email protected] Web Site: www.unk.edu/crrd

Funding for this research was provided by Frontier Communications and Dish Network from the

America’s Best Communities program. All opinions, conclusions or recommendations expressed are

those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Miller & Associates, the Buffalo

County Community Health Partners, The University of Nebraska, and/or other project partners.

2

Table of Contents

Background & Research Objectives 3 Methodology 3 Business/Participant Profile Tables 8 Limitations 9 Key Findings & Recommendations 10 Conclusions 13

Appendix

Appendix A: Referral Screening Guide 15 Appendix B: Focus Group Invitation 16 Appendix C: Data Collection Procedures 18 Appendix D: Focus Group Interview Results 20

3

Background & Research Objectives In spring of 2015, Kearney was nominated as one of America’s Best Communities. The 50 quarter-finalist communities are competing for a three million dollar first prize to focus on the strengths, deepen their connections, and together increase prosperity in rural communities like Kearney. The Kearney ABC Committee has contracted with Miller & Associates and UNK CRRD to explore Kearney’s strengths and challenges from local residents and key stakeholders/experts. This includes gaining the community’s perspective on current and proposed revitalization plans, reconsidering their approach to revitalization and how to best engage, organize, and mobilize the communities. This project aimed to understand the specific challenges the revitalization plan will address from the perspective of many key stakeholders. Data collected from the community engagement phase one directed the long-term vision, strategies, and short-term tactics reflected in the revitalization plan. The purpose of this study is to understand the key strengths and challenges in Kearney, discover solutions to the challenges from both local experts and users of related services, and understand perceptions related to planned solutions from potential users of related programs/services. Primary Research Objectives:

a. Explore the expert perceptions on strengths, challenges, and solutions to challenges facing the community-Community Engagement Phase One - (31) interviews conducted in August 2015

b. Explore community/user perceptions on key community strengths, challenges and proposed solutions with potential users or populations directly affected by proposed solutions/programs/services. –Community Engagement Phase Two -(3) focus groups conducted in September 2015

Objectives: (1) Discover the range of strengths in Kearney (list terms/phrases)

a. Prioritize competitive/core strengths (operationally defined by frequency of terms/phrases with similar meaning)

(2) Discover the range of challenges in Kearney a. Prioritize Urgency of Challenges

(3) Explore the visions and preferred methods of solving the challenges a. Long Term Solutions b. Short Term-11 months

Methodology

The request for proposals submitted by the Kearney ABC committee directed researchers to interview a minimum of 36 community stakeholders and conduct five focus groups in efforts to understand the perception of the proposals from the interviews. 31 interviews were conducted including 36 participants. Three focus groups were conducted. Two focus groups were conducted at locations serving low to moderate income populations in the community. One

4

focus group was conducted at the University of Nebraska at Kearney with local young professionals who had received notoriety for leadership capacity. Miller and Associates in partnership with the Buffalo County Community Health Partners facilitated additional town hall style sessions. The additional town hall sessions replaced the input planned for in the two focus groups not conducted in the original request for proposal. 31 face-to-face interviews (36 participants) were conducted with local issue experts selected by a local steering committee of over 20 community leaders volunteering/serving on the Kearney ABC project. The interview selection criteria was based on perceived knowledge of community issues listed in the Referral Screening Guide-Appendix A. This community engagement process (phase 1) was completed during the month of August. 3 focus group sessions (20 participants) were held in Kearney, Nebraska. The socio-economic profile of 2 groups (14 persons) had experienced low income/homeless, underemployed, public transportation issues. The other group was comprised of 6 leaders on the Kearney Chamber Young Professionals committee. Local Resource providers forwarded focus group invitation letters to clients or other contacts they perceived to match the community topics/issues under consideration. Referring service providers did not participate in the same session with contacts they referred as verifiable by a confirmed group attendance list securely stored in the UNK CRRD office not accessible to the project administrators or other project partners. This community engagement process (phase 2) was completed during the month of September. Participant Group Characteristics

Table 1 highlights key characteristics of the participating businesses and their respective communities. Twelve interviews were conducted with business and industry stakeholders in the community. 15 owners, managers, and/or coordinators participated representing firms that employed over 3000 people in the region. The 12 participating firms averaged 254 employees each and the leaders representing those firms had an average of 20 years of professional experience in their field. The total amount of experience from the business leaders interviewed was over 300 years; these individuals have lived or worked in Kearney for a combined 375 years. Nine interviews were conducted with human and service industry directors and/or coordinators. Firms they represented averaged 16 employees each for a total of 157 employees working in the Kearney area. Of the 10 leaders interviewed, they average 20 years of professional experience in their field with a combined 200 years of experience. The average time living in Kearney for human service industry leaders was about 22 years and 220 years of collective tenure in the community. 11 leaders were interviewed representing the education and/or arts and culture sector in addition to local elected or appointed officials. The 10 firms represented in these interviews employed nearly 3000 people in the Kearney area. The professionals interviewed had been in their field for an average of 15 years and collectively over 165 years. The average time each education or elected official has lived in Kearney was about 23 years and 253 years collectively. Of the 36 persons interviewed and 31 sessions, 12 represented low to moderate income clients as part of their core mission. The firms represented in these interviews employed nearly 5,300 persons in the Kearney area with an average employment of 171 persons per firm. The average age from business and industry sector participants was 40-60 years. The average age for those in the human service sector was 30 to

5

low 50s. The average age for education and elected/appointed officials was also 30-50 years. Nearly all community leaders had or did have children who attended the local school system and spouses working as full-time professionals in the community. Most leaders represented were active in several local service organizations or volunteered time to the community on a regular basis. They all lived in or near Kearney and owned homes. The leaders interviewed had over 665 years of collective professional experience in their field and have lived in Kearney for over 848 years representing a wealth of knowledge, history, and background about the community and their industry.

Table 1 – Interview Participant Profile

*Combined/total years professional experience of interview participants/key stakeholders

**Combined/total years tenure/lived in Kearney of interview participants/key stakeholders

Observations-Common Themes from Key Stakeholder Interviews

Strengths - The majority of owners/managers participating in interviews cited the biggest strengths were friendliness of community, supportive/open/progressive leadership, and a quality labor force. A friendly small town atmosphere with progressive big city amenities were also common themes mentioned by human service, elected, and education leaders. A major service industry employer said Kearney is “the best place in the world”. Several leaders from all sectors mentioned there is good collaboration among industry, education, and publics services. One leading employer mentioned Kearney was formerly self-branded as “Can Do Country” as a result successfully completing multi-stakeholder community projects. A few business and elected leaders mentioned our economic strength and stability is a result of a balanced industry mix of education, manufacture, healthcare, and retail employers. Public and Human Service sector leaders mentioned that there are many opportunities for engagement in social causes, education, athletics, arts, culture, and local politics.

Organization Type

Number of Interviews/

Participating Leaders*

Number representing a majority of

Low to Moderate Income clients

Firms: Full Time

Equivalent Labor (est) Range/Avg

Professional Experience

Range (est)/Avg

Total years

Lived in Kearney

area Range

(est)/Avg Total years

Business & Industry

12/15 1 3047/254 10-50/20

300 S6-70/25

375 Human Services

9/10 9 157/16 10-35/20

200 10-50/22

220 Education,

Elected Officials, & arts\culture

10/11

2

2089/190 2-45/15

165 7-50/23

253

All Groups 31/36 12 5293

171-avg 665* 848**

6

Challenges - Labor shortage and limited short-term skill training options were the primary challenges expressed by owners/managers. A couple leading service sector employers noted that McDonald's offering a $100 sign-on bonus and $10 an hour with no experience necessary is a great example that there is a shortage of labor in the community. One business leader summarized the workforce issue this way: most families that can afford to live in Kearney coming from a reasonable commuting distance probably already live here, as a regional employer many people already commute so there may be little opportunity to expand the regional labor pool other than attracting more people to the region, not just Kearney.

High cost of living due to housing was reflected across all segments, but was the most serious concern for human service leaders (i.e. a severe shortage of low cost housing options). One business leader mentioned that a major issue complicating additional housing developments is the high cost of adjacent-undeveloped land controlled by small number 8-10 property owners. Limited public transportation options were also a common concern of most participants. Another participant mentioned that while over 300 new housing units are expected to be completed by the end of 2015, most of the rents or estimated mortgage costs are beyond the price points of the entry-level workers needed by many local retail and service employers. Three human service sector participants mentioned that several of their clients have had to wait nearly 2 years to attain residence through the local housing authority. One stakeholder interviewed suggested that he and his spouse lived on a friend's couch for several months on two different occasions as they could not find suitable housing with their dog.

Inflexible busing/taxi choices were more commonly mentioned by human service/education officials. Unreliable air transportation was a common concern of major employers.

Other concerns mentioned by human service and education officials concluded in increasing youth poverty rates. One education industry leader mentioned that the Kearney public school system has a higher rate of students receiving subsidized lunches than the state average. A few human service leaders mentioned a lack of resources for dealing with mental health issues in the community. Three other human service sector employers mentioned a lack of resources to appropriately fulfill their mission.

Solutions - Nearly all business and industry leaders interviewed mentioned the need for an increase in short-term skilled training programs. Specific examples include the Northeast Nebraska community college vocational trade and training program as a good model, but it will be several years before employers may see graduates since the regional community college system is in the early development stages for expansion into needed trades. Other specific short-term examples to solve the labor shortage and skills include developing a certificate training and supporting scholarship system to support current hourly employees making less than $12 an hour to receive flexible training in fields including professional driving, medical services, and information technology. Flexible evening training hours or online courses would allow short-term certificate completion and the opportunity to apply for available jobs paying $15 an hour. See Appendix D for additional details on suggestions by stakeholder type and issue.

Key stakeholder innovation-employee retention using housing, transportation, and medical assistance - A commonly reported issue mentioned by both key stakeholders and focus group participants included the issue of affordable housing in Kearney. Service industry firms with more than 500 employees averaging less than $13 an hour have experienced difficulty retaining and attracting employees due to

7

limited availability of low-cost housing for employees in this wage range. One large hospitality entrepreneur interviewed used a couple of innovative tactics to mitigate these issues. In times of inclement weather, the company sent a van to collect employees from up to 30 miles away in order to have enough room cleaning service workers present on busy days. He suggested the system could be expanded and coordinated with other major employers in the community with the potential routes serving the adjacent towns based on relevant commuting patterns. Other employers were open to discussing this further when prompted during interviews.

The same employer is also constructing a 20 unit apartment building for staff. It is expected to be completed during the winter of 2015-16. Each one-bedroom unit will have utilities and cable included for the price of $495; which is $2-300 less than comparable lease rates in the community. It is expected that most units will have two occupants. All 20 units are currently under contract with existing employees when ready. Another 40 additional units are planned for later in 2016. These additional units will have some two-bedroom apartments for families. Expected lease rates may be a couple hundred dollars more than the one-bedroom units. Only employees with a good three-month work history would be eligible to apply. Once employment is terminated, the employee would have until the end of the following month to find different accommodations. While this employer acknowledges that offering below market lease rates to employees does not make a profit, the tactic greatly reduces employee turnover and provides word-of-mouth promotional value for the purpose of recruiting other employees. Employers in other industries, such as manufacturing, may not want to be “landlords” for their employees, but in a community with one of the world’s lowest unemployment rates, creative workforce attraction and retention strategies may be necessary.

This same hospitality company and a large manufacturer in Kearney also offer employee health care on the work site. They contract with local medical professionals to provide the service during set operational hours.

Table 2 shows key characteristics of participants who attended the focus groups. Three community focus groups were conducted in September 2015. Two of the groups were composed of low to moderate income and/or homeless residents. A third group was composed of current or former members of the leadership Kearney Chamber of Commerce committee. Six young professionals attended the session; their ages were 40s, 30s, and late 20s. The age range from the low to moderate income group was early 20s to early 60s. More than half of the participants in the low income group had children or grandchildren. Most of the homeless residents interviewed have lived in Kearney less than two years, while those with some local relation in the region and car ownership had lived here an average between five and 45 years. The young professionals in their 20s had lived here in Kearney fewer years than the professionals in their 40s who had many ties and lived here most of their life. All four employees in the low to moderate income group who had full-time jobs were in the service sector.

8

Table 2 – Focus Group Participant Profile

Observations-Common Themes from Focus Group Session

Strengths - The majority of focus group participants cited the biggest community strengths were friendliness and safety. High quality public school teachers and support staff was also mentioned by both low income and young professional groups. The primary strengths listed by the young professionals were similar to those of the education and elected officials interviewed; friendly small town atmosphere with a good variety of activities for personal or professional engagement. A great variety of high-quality park systems, playgrounds, and public recreational areas spread throughout the community was also mentioned by all groups.

Challenges - Limited options for childcare, public transportation, and short-term skill training were the primary challenges expressed by low income focus group participants. Of the LMI participants who worked full or part-time, many desired to increase their skill or education but could not find reliable and affordable childcare or transportation to attend classes\training. Of those who had access to their own vehicle and had applied to enter their children in subsidized day care programs (i.e. Headstart), there was frustration due to the income thresholds depending on if they or their spouse had a different job from one month to the next. While all of the LMI group participants had visited multiple local human service agencies, many expressed frustration that they were not eligible for many programs due to poor credit history or a spouse making too much money. Without regular public transportation, many LMI participants had difficulty accessing the multiple human service agencies spread throughout the community. Lack of low income housing options was another key issue mentioned in all groups. One LMI in each group mentioned waiting nearly 2 years until placement at the local housing authority could occur. A few participants have received subsidized rent vouchers based on income in the scattered site federal housing program, but options were very limited in this regard as well. A few of the homeless expressed frustration with the lack of awareness and/or connectedness by housing agency staff. One LMI participant did not know about a specific emergency rent fund that could have prevented her from eviction until it was too late even though she had visited with staff from the housing authority on at least two or three occasions during the month prior. Lack of quality affordable first time home buyer options was a major concern of the young professional group. While they acknowledged that the labor shortage was a key issue for

Focus Group

Demographic

Number of Groups/

Participants

Participants employed full time

Lived in Kearney area

Range (est)/Avg Total years

Low-to-moderate Income:

2/14 4 S1-45/5

70 Young

Professionals:

6 6 7-30/15

90

Total or Average

3/20 10 1-45/10

160

9

community growth, even if recruitment was successful there were few options for skilled labor to live. Two young professionals even cited cases where colleagues left Kearney as they could not find suitable housing in less than a year.

Solutions – Flexible and affordable childcare, public transportation, and education\training options were common needs mentioned by LMI group participants. Employers or higher education institutions should consider offering subsidized on-site day care for employees\students. A voucher type system where full-time workers/students could apply for day care or transportation funding was perceived as a good idea by both LMI groups. Coordination of poverty related services and greater awareness of all related resources by human service agencies was a key suggestion offered. Having a central location to discuss needs face-to-face at the county courthouse or local library received strong consensus by both groups. One LMI participant summed up the poverty challenge and solution issue this way: We want a hand up, not a hand out.

The key solution offered by the young professional group related to developing a new housing subdivision behind the city’s corporate zoning limits in order to reduce land costs (i.e. Celebrity Homes type-model outside Norfolk). Coordinating with smaller neighboring communities and workforce transportation like the Younes Hospitality model was strongly supported.

See the solutions in Appendix D for additional details on suggestions by stakeholder type and issue.

Limitations An initial analysis was primarily based on detailed notes taken “in-session” by the facilitator and administrative assistant. Further review of the audio-visual recordings using content analysis techniques revealed additional key themes that are represented in Appendix D. However, this method is subject to typical human error and therefore may not have retained every insight expressed by participants.

As with many public sessions conducted in rural areas and among industry peers in nearby communities, participants may not be comfortable enough to completely share all of their perceptions about a discussion topic or concept. This is a typical concern of small communities because rumors or community perceptions, both true and unfounded, can lead to a lack of support for other initiatives that the individual may be pursuing.

10

Key Findings & Recommendations

Discover the range of strengths in Kearney The most common themes for why people choose to live and work in the community included:

Friendly people with a small town atmosphere; “most people go out of their way to help if they're aware of an issue”

Many recreational and professional opportunities and\or amenities; specifically mentioned were great city parks and recreation\sports programs\leagues for all ages

Good and growing cultural and arts opportunities such as the Crane River theater productions at Yanney Park

Great collaboration with higher education institutions such as the University of Nebraska at Kearney and Central Nebraska Community College

Great public and private school systems; including high-quality teachers and special services for children in need.

Great community leadership. Elected and development officials are accessible, relatable, open to industry and community needs

Solid economic foundation due to a balance and stable mix of industry including a large regional hospital, public university, several manufacturers, and tourism\hospitality companies

Discover the range and urgency of challenges in Kearney The common challenges expressed by community leaders as reported during interviews included:

Workforce shortage, especially skilled and reliable labor Lack of low cost and entry level housing options/units, especially for pet owners seeking

rentals Lack of flexible public transportation options Lack of reliable air service; especially important for business travel and professional

recruiting. High rate of youth poverty, as expressed by higher than state average student free and

reduced lunch percentage Lack of mental health support resources

They are listed by highest frequency mentioned among all participants. The common challenges expressed by low-to-moderate income residents as reported during focus groups included:

Lack of flexible and affordable childcare options (barriers to education/training and/or employment)

Lack of flexible local public transportation options (barriers to education/training and/or employment)

Lack of low cost rental housing options/units, especially for those with poor credit Lack short term skill training options not affiliated with a temporary hiring agency or

employer.

11

They are listed in order frequency mentioned by all participants, and importance based on group consensus as last question for the purposes of ranking. Explore the visions and preferred methods of solving the challenges Participants were asked to prioritize/rank short term solutions to the top priority challenges as a final question (i.e. what would you spend $100,000 on in the next 11 months).

Table 3 – Workforce Workforce Shortage‐ (similar terms include

labor shortage/ tight, low‐unemployment)

N=22

Workforce Development: (similar terms include lack

of skilled labor and/or underemployment) N=11

Short‐Term Program suggestions:

Clearing‐house of service program resources

with face‐to‐face point of contact‐3 (job

openings, assessment, Vocational

Rehabilitation‐Broaden for nondisabled

“healthy” individuals, scholarship programs)

Scholarship‐3 programs for those enrolled in higher

ed.‐ similar to KHOP. Scholarship program to replace

income while training‐CAP CDL Training endowed

scholarship sponsored by John and Sonia Sahling via

Kearney Community Foundation

Establishment of an HR Referral system

among businesses

Business leaders and local service agencies need to

work together to remove barriers‐4 to labor training

program participation‐Consider voucher models with

job training.

(i.e. transportation, childcare, life skills, mental health

issues‐6)

Clearly identify certificate programs offerings in short

and long term: customize and match to industry

demands:

Long‐Term Program suggestions:

Develop Tech‐hire initiative as lack model outside “IT” industry

Employers should offer flexible hours in a family‐friendly work environment

Consider Alternative Education Systems:

Program called “Impact Kearney” should offer parenting skill training, marriage, finances, computer, behavioral health and drug addiction counseling.

Locally funded, private scholarship/internships

Apply money to existing under resourced human service programs. Better assessment and use of underfunded human service programs. Not in favor of new facility.

Lack tourism & recreational amenities – Labor Recruitment/Retention Solution: add fieldhouse (i.e. GI N. St. Fair bldg), spread CVB resources beyond Archway (arts/cultural resources)

12

Table 4 – Transportation and Housing

Transportation Housing

Transportation needs regular bus service for school and

workforce. Employers must be involved with solution to

workforce transportation. (N=12)

Housing incentives to increase number

of low LMI units available.

Increase transportation options to remove barriers to access

(better use of trolley system, bus loop

Increase resources for low cost housing

providers; RAFT Model is great‐2,

Kearney Housing Authority, habitat for

humanity‐2

Transportation‐ have van pick up employees in 30 mile loop.

Could coordinate with other employers to make this a more

systematic process. Need public/ private transportation plan‐

loop 30‐40 miles around community.

Need a good housing study

Additional employer‐led housing

Developments‐Younes Hospitality

model

Long‐Term Program suggestions:

Housing‐ need more units with subsidized rents available. Employers need to have flexible hours and

better pay, offer childcare and transportation options. Business leaders and local service agencies

need to work together to remove barriers for entry level employment positions.

Table 5 – Poverty

Poverty N=5

Best Practice model from Omaha and Lincoln is “safe families”. A pre foster care mentoring system

Removing barriers and relaxing standards for mental health coaching and assistance‐3

Accountability measures to move away from cultural poverty. May include mentoring programs,

private enterprise should contribute to remove barriers for daycare, transportation. Proposed short

term training should be built around the individual as having a job is a big factor in self‐esteem.

13

Need person to act as clearing house for resources available. Including job opportunities, life skill

training, and skill opportunities. See Bridges out of Poverty Model.: Model Evidence Based mentoring

programs such as Bridges out of Poverty, Cincinnati Matters. KPS SLC Program is a good (LT) solution to

increase skill level.

Improve nutrition programs for regular, healthy diets for kids.

Conclusions

The most commonly expressed and urgent challenge was related to short-term labor force expansion and training. There was consensus on providing more short-term training and educational opportunities by all participants in both low income focus groups and community leader interviews. However, there was not consensus on the specific methods for providing this short-term training among leaders and program users. Low to moderate income participants wanted to find and use existing options for short-term training at the community college, but lacked the flexibility or affordability to do so because of barriers including available daycare and/or lack of reliable transportation. They were highly in favor of short-term certificate training in a central community location. Employers and other community leaders interviewed also confirmed that a lack of skilled labor was a key issue. Business and industry leaders preferred a standalone facility such as the Grand Island Career Pathways organization, while human service leaders thought additional coordination and funding for existing programs should be investigated first. Nearly all participants acknowledge that a standalone facility in organization could not be accomplished with $100,000 in 11 months, but additional short-term technical and soft-skill training were feasible with fewer resources. Several leaders interviewed mentioned the need to revitalize core services from two former Kearney-based public service offices; the Nebraska Department of Labor’s Workforce Development Center and Curtis & Associates. Both agencies provided face-to-face referral and soft skill training services to underemployed or unemployed residents. Housing was the second most frequently expressed priority among all groups. Low to moderate income participants and human service providers preferred that publicly subsidized low cost rental options should be considered as a community priority. Business and industry leaders suggested investigating private public transportation options to coordinate labor force flow among neighboring communities. Nearly all participants agreed that while housing was a major issue, it was less likely to be solved in 11 months with $100,000. Increasing rates of youth poverty was also mentioned as a key problem by human service and education leaders in the community. Continued support of new programs such as the HelpCare clinic were suggested by human service leaders. The RAFT family housing support program was another best practice addressing all family needs using a direct accountability system among human service staff and users. Both agencies mentioned the need for additional funding to grow and sustain core services. A few human service agencies mentioned a need for

14

additional behavioral health services in correlation with poverty alleviation. The Bridges Out of Poverty system was mentioned as a nationally recognized solution.

15

Appendix A: Referral Screening Guide

SampleFocusGroupRecruitingCORRESPONDENCE/Email**IRB note: This letter maybe customized/revised after conducting interviews with several agency and

community leaders whom may have additional selection criteria insights relevant to recruiting subjects for

focus groups. Any revised documentation will be shared with IRB prior to conducting focus groups.

Hello, this is Shawn Kaskie from the University of Nebraska at Kearney. You have been identified as a current partner in the Kearney ABC Project (i.e. serving on the Steering Committee, Interviewed Issue Expert, a local Employer, an Agency head or related community leader). We have been contracted by Kearney ABC committee to conduct 5-6 focus group sessions to help gain feedback on proposed solutions to the following community issues:

o Access to short term career training (i.e. searched for local job in last two years; but not hired due to skills gap/experience)

o Public transportation availability/access (i.e. regular* user of RYDE or Taxi; at least once a month for last year on average)

o Affordable housing (i.e currently/recently searching for better housing at under $800 mo rent or mortgage)

o Migrant labor access to services (i.e Hispanic with perceived difficulty accessing 1 or more service agencies in last 6 months)

o Youth Poverty (i.e family income under $40,000 with one or more minors at home and perceived difficulty accessing 1 or more service agencies in last 6 months)

o Skilled Workforce Shortage: (i.e Employer with difficulty filling open positions or retaining employees in entry level positions.

To complete the civic engagement requirement of the ABC Project Revitalization Plan, we need assistance recruiting focus groups candidates you suspect have had direct, recent, and regular experience with one or more of these issues. (e.g. RYDE-Public Transportation; Kearney Housing Authority: Affordable Housing; Community Action>Youth Poverty, Short Term Career Training, and/or skilled Workforce shortage) Please call me to discuss which topics you may have contacts that you would be willing to forward the attached letter to candidates you feel would be a good fit for one or more of the focus group sessions. I do not want names of your clients unless they contact our office to confirm participation in a specific focus group session. Please do ask your clients to confirm participation with you as this may compromise the confidential nature of the results derived from the focus group session. See attached “Bill of Rights” for additional information.

I look forward to your call and any clarifying questions you may have about this process.

Regards,

Shawn Kaskie PCED, MA - Director - Center for Rural Research and Development University of Nebraska at Kearney - College of Business and Technology West Center 125E - 1917 West 24th St, Kearney, NE 68849 308-865-8135

16

Appendix B: Focus Group Invitation

You have been identified as a resident or employee of a Kearney Business who could contribute to a focus group discussion on how to improve the community. The Center for Rural Research & Development at the University of Nebraska at Kearney recently interviewed local leaders who identified several issues under consideration for integration into a community Revitalization Plan. In spring of 2015 Kearney was nominated as one of America’s Best Communities. The 50 quarter-finalist communities are competing for a three million dollar first prize to focus on the strengths, deepen their connections, and together increase prosperity in rural communities like Kearney. The Kearney ABC Committee has contracted with the UNK to explore Kearney’s strengths and challenges from local residents and key stakeholders/experts. This includes gaining the community’s perspective on current and proposed revitalization plans, reconsidering their approach to revitalization and how to best engage, organize, and mobilize the community using existing and/or potential services, programs, and amenities.

Benefits to Participation

Data collected from session may contribute to the improvement of existing services or development of new programs in the community. If Kearney receives Award funds and new programs are implemented, they may be shared as national best practices with peer communities.

Focus Group Session Expectations and Process

Date and Time: September 14, Monday, 5pm-6:15pm

Location: UNK Business College-West Center Building Room 215E

As a focus group participant, you may be asked to share opinions with peers in order to sincerely and confidentially understand the challenges around a community issue. Groups will not be mixed (i.e Resource agency staff will not be mixed with “users” of public transportation and/or new community residents in search of housing will not be matched with employers/owners). There will be no less than 6 or more than 12 participants in a focus group session. Last names will not be shared (except first letter

initial in case of duplicate first names). All questions and responses are voluntary and optional. All

comments will be confidential and not tied to particular person, only aggregated by socio‐democratic

generalizations (i.e. Hotel industry employee). The session maybe videotaped but the recording is only

for data analysis‐report development accuracy. All tapes/digital information will only be stored and

privately replayed in UNK Moderator’s locked office and will be permanently destroyed upon project

completion. Names is will NOT be correlated with comments without specific written permission for

use of exact quote stating exactly when and where information will be displayed. See attached “Bill of

Rights” for additional information.

Participants must be 19 years of age or older.

Participants can expect to meet for approximately 1.5 hours.

Participant selection is based on a first‐come‐first‐serve basis with respective to one of five community

issue/groups to be scheduled in September.

17

If interested, please contact the UNK Center for Research and Development at 308-865-8135 or [email protected].

18

Appendix C: Data Collection Procedures

Subject recruitment & incentive - Local project steering committee members and partnering resource providers will forward clients or contacts an invitation letter (attached) based on perceived direct experience with a community issue. An incentive (i.e. $20 gas card) for their time and potential transportation cost will be offered upon exiting the focus group session. Research Procedures: Data collection documentation tools - Appendix B (Invitation to Attend Interview) was used to confirm subjects’ participation with Phase 1: Expert Identification of Issues and Solutions. Appendix A (Referral Screening Guide) used to recruit focus group subjects will be provided to referring service providers or project partners. The attached interview/discussion guide will be used by a professionally trained moderator (Shawn Kaskie PCED) in each focus group/interview session. Only the researcher’s office assistant who has successfully completed the human subjects research training course was present taking notes during live data collection. Face-to-face interviews lasted 35-55 minutes in duration. Most interviews were conducted in the office location of the expert interviewed or the researchers office with the door closed. Each focus group 3 (N=20) had a 1.5hr duration at the location most convenient for the majority of persons or the UNK Global Market Research Lab. The door was always closed and private sign posted while the session was in progress. Recording: Interviews were AUDIO recorded and focus Groups were VIDEO recorded. Shawn Kaskie has 6 years of qualitative research experience at UNK and has completed a graduate degree related to community/economic development including 9 credit hours or advanced research design and facilitation. He recently completed the CITI refresher course (January 2015). Kaskie successfully completed the Burke Institute Focus Group Moderation training course in Cincinnati, OH (2010). He successfully completed Strategic planning facilitation and Conflict Mediation courses (2005: Univ of Wisconsin); then applied this training with several communities/organizations. Informed Consent was informed but not required as participation was deemed voluntary since a prospective participant could choose not to attend at the time of invitation by referring a service provider or ABC project partner, during the confirmation/screening call, and lack of attendance at scheduled focus group. Each participant was provided the attached information on research ethics and benefits to participation writing prior to the interview or session at the time the survey was presented to them by the researchers. Before the data collection/interview commenced, the researcher asked subjects for clarification on the ethics form or the use of the information related to the project. 2 focus groups involved subjects with vulnerable economic states (i.e. homeless, low-income). They were reminded about the primary purpose of this research: understanding and improving proposed or existing community services. They were reminded that their comments would not be associated with their name, or referring service providers. A $20 gas card incentive for their time and potential transportation was offered and accepted. Only volunteered and minimum contact information was collected from interview and focus group attendees to confirm participation or inform schedule changes. Only first names (and last name first initial if duplicate first names) were written on name placards during

19

groups/interviews. Data collected during live sessions was only replayed and locked in UNK CRRD moderator’s office and destroyed/deleted immediately upon acceptance of results/report to the project funders-Kearney ABC steering committee. The report only includes generalized/aggregated information and quotes will only be used with names with prior written consent from source showing exactly when and where it may be published. Possible risks of harm to participants - Only minimal risks are possible. There could be minor social and psychological discomfort to focus group participants listening to peer/community member stories about struggling to attain services. This minor social discomfort (non-significant distress) is necessary to engage peers that may have experienced similar problems in order to gain feedback on solutions (i.e. best practices) that improve the situation for the future users of key programs/services. Kaskie is a trained and experienced focus group moderator who will redirect the conversation if anxiety levels are unacceptable and/or if comments are not constructive/solution focused and related to project objectives. Subjects were informed about the topic during the invitee’s letter and prior to the session when reviewing the “Respondents Bills of Rights”. Participation benefit to subjects - Each participant is provided the attached information on research ethics and benefits to participation writing prior to the interview or session at the time the survey is presented to them by the researchers. Before the data collection/interview begins, researcher will ask if subjects would like clarification on the ethics form or the use of the information related to the project. The letter includes citation of reasoning and process surrounding the Kearney America’s Best Communities Project. All final results and project updates will be publicly posted and available via hard copy during all interview and focus group sessions.

20

Appendix D: Focus Group Interview Results

abc kearney revitalization plan - america's best … revitalization plan 2015 ... had six...

Documents