GovReport

On climate, energy, infrastructure, and technology

Digital

New Mobile App Gives California Residents a Warning Seconds Before Quakes Hit

by

When it comes to emergencies, especially natural disasters, seconds can mean the difference between life and death.

MyShake is a mobile app that alerts California residents a few seconds before an earthquake hits, allowing time to take cover or get to a nearby safe spot.

The mobile app is managed by the Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES). According to Cal OES Director Mark Ghilarducci, the MyShake app is the country’s first publicly available statewide earthquake warning system.

“Cal OES’s leadership facilitated making warnings publicly available. The public can now have moments of warning before previously unexpected natural disasters. It is changing the world of mitigation and emergency management,” said Ghilarducci in a press release.

MyShake uses statewide ground-motion sensors to sense earthquakes before humans can feel the tremors and sends an alert to users’ phones to “drop, cover, and hold on.”

As a reminder to how important earthquake safety is, The Great Shakeout Earthquake drills (a worldwide movement) are generally held on the third Thursday of October, falling on October 21 this year. MyShake app users are able to register and participate in these drills and will receive a “test warning” at 10:15am that morning with “guidance to Drop, Cover, and Hold on.”

According to Cal OES, the appropriate safety responses to an earthquake are as follows:

  • Drop onto your hands and knees where you are
  • Cover your head and neck with one arm and hand
  • Crawl underneath a nearby sturdy table or desk for shelter
  • If no shelter is nearby, crawl next to an interior wall (away from windows)
  • Stay on your knees, bend over to protect vital organs
  • Hold on until shaking stops
  • While under shelter: hold on to it with one hand and be ready to move with your shelter if it shifts
  • No shelter: hold on to your head and neck with both arms and hands

Visit www.earthquake.ca.gov for more information about the MyShake app and earthquake preparedness.

AI activists warn California officials against hidden threats to privacy and civil liberties

by

Tesla’s Elon Musk labeled artificial intelligence as our “biggest existential threat.” Apple’s Tim Cook described its potential perils as “profound.” And Microsoft’s Bill Gates likened A.I. to nuclear energy, projecting it to be “both promising and dangerous.”

Yet, for Ashley Casovan, A.I.’s most significant and immediate threat has nothing to do with machine monarchs or dystopian futures. To Casovan, the executive director of the advocacy group Responsible A.I., the real problem today stems from A.I.’s inconspicuous decision-making. Depending on its programming or data, she said A.I. can make biased judgments, and even complete errors and governments should be watching.

“We want to make sure that when thinking about policy development or any sort of practices related to implementing AI in government—but really anywhere—that they are being done in a way that is responsible,” Casovan said, speaking to the California Department of Technology on June 30. “So, we need to design, build, and deploy them throughout their entire life cycle in a way that’s fair and impacts people in a positive way.”

Casovan’s organization, which operates under the acronym “RAI,” is warning California regulators of A.I.’s potential harm (if unchecked) and advocating the use of its certification system to safeguard governments from A.I. bias in lending, fraud detection, health systems, employment, and automated diagnosis. With A.I.’s explosive growth in recent years, RAI is advocating states to amplify their scrutiny of tech vendors.

A study by the tech firm PUC, estimated that by 2030 AI will contribute more than $15.7 trillion to the global economy annually. This figure is greater than the current contributions of China and India combined. Further, between 2021 and 2028, researchers at Fortune Business Insights project the A.I. industry itself will grow from $47.5 billion to $360.4 billion, increasing 33.6 percent each year.

RAI sees these figures as a wake-up call for government policymaking.

“A.I. systems are completely ubiquitous and becoming more and more prolific, and we really need to understand then those policy measures….” Casovan said. “How do we work with government, industry, academia, and civil society to put safeguards around these different types of tools and systems.”

 Seeing the hidden hazards

A.I.’s growth notwithstanding, it may be easy to dismiss its risks. That indifference may come from its portrayal as a future technology or its promotion as a tool so advanced, it’s inaccessible to local government.

To visualize risks and dangers, Casovan recommended agencies apply a broader definition, one that is scalable, starts at basic algorithms, and extends upward into analytics, machine learning, and the cutting-edge deep learning systems employed by the likes of Google. The wide lens is pragmatic. It boils down A.I. to any tech that can automate, or be a significant influencer, in decision-making.

“When we talk about artificial intelligence, we don’t know necessarily what that means. And for me, I’m not really interested in defining artificial intelligence,” Casovan said. “I think that, especially when we’re thinking about this from a policy perspective. It’s really important to go where people are.”

Calling out top threats, Casovan highlighted predictive policing, automated health decision making, misuse of biometrics (such as facial recognition), and A.I.-based hiring system as especially problematic. Yet said improper use of A.I., whether for service design or funding decisions, can also be an issue if the data is bad or the algorithm is biased.

Take predictive policing. At face value, the act of using historical crime data to project areas and people most likely to commit crimes may seem like a positive use of technology. Yet if mismanaged, predictive policing can also turn into harassment as officers increase surveillance on targeted suspects and neighborhoods without any crimes to point to.

An article from the Brookings Institution listed numerous examples of error-prone predictive policing. The data-driven policing programs showed officers adding innocent citizens to gang databases in Los Angeles, labeling clusters of low-income children as potential life-long criminals in Pasco County, Florida; and police tying a fictional gang name to protestors in Phoenix.

“There is no evidence that predictive policing or gang databases have been or can be cleaned of bias,” said Brookings’ Angel Diaz, who is also a lecturer of law at the University of California Los Angeles. “While there are important efforts to uncover and mitigate the ways that racial bias can infect machine learning, there is no excuse for continued funding and deployment of policing tools whose only consistent track record is a string of scandals.”

Outside the justice system, AI issues have popped up across numerous industries. The insurer Lemonade was caught bragging about using facial recognition to deny claims and increase profits. Amazon had to scrap an A.I. recruiting system after learning it discriminated against women. Google’s image recognition A.I. mistakenly applied the racist epithet of guerilla to African Americans. And the list goes on.

“When I say ‘harm,’ I can mean it in the most subtle sense,” Casovan said. “It could be a lack of access to credit. It could be not being recommended for a job because of a facial recognition system…these are the things we’re working on now.”

Policies, certifications, and other solutions

In its role as an industry regulator, governments may feel hard-pressed to find a solution to monitor and enforce such a highly sophisticated industry like A.I. Departments are often overwhelmed with daily operations, budgets can be tight, and tech expertise out of reach. Yet one regulatory tool that has proved highly effective for California, and nationally, is state-wide legislation and the costly legal liabilities that come from non-compliance.

On Jan. 1, 2020, the California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) took effect, requiring companies to disclose personal collected data to consumers, the data shared with third parties, and give consumers the right to opt-out of such sharing. The law not only applies to businesses with a physical address in California but those who do business with California consumers, a caveat that essentially gives the CCPA national reach. The legislation is strengthened by California Privacy Rights and Enforcement Act, which also applies to A.I. applications gathering data. Whether data is compiled directly, or taken from multiple sources and data services, companies still have to account for their data consumption.

“Companies that are not in compliance not only run the risk of financial ramifications through fines but also put their brand reputation on the line,” said Christy Wyatt, CEO of the tech company Absolute to Forbes. “Today’s modern enterprises, those that want to win, need to be laser-focused on transparency and trust–and ready for rapid response when that trust is misplaced.”

Outside of legislation, RAI has designed an A.I. certification system, which in simple terms, is basically an A.I. framework and evaluation service for organizations and government agencies to prevent bias and errors in analytics and A.I. programs. Casovan said RAI designed the certification in 2019 with support from the Global AI Action Alliance for the World Economic Forum (WEF).

The certification has four performance levels to rank a system and measures factors such as accountability, data quality, robustness, bias and fairness, as well as interoperability and “explain-ability” (the ability to explain how an A.I. processes data and comes to its conclusions).

The process helps certification applicants with assessments tools and resources. Then provides a professional assessment, a technical audit, followed by an official awarded ranking. Casovan said the group’s goals are doing away with black box A.I. — a term to describe scenarios where few know how an A.I. is operating — and to ensure legal compliance for organizations wherever they may be operating.

“We are doing this in partnership with the World Economic Forum and we’re building off of various work that’s been out there,” Casovan said. “Things like Google’s What-If Tool or IBM’s Fairness 360 Toolkit, these and other resources have really been driving…our work in defining what fairness means and how to measure it in a mathematical way.”

Legislature Approves New Office of Wildfire Technology Research and Development

by

California is notorious for being in flames in what seems like an endless wildfire season. Factors including climate change and an increasing population in locations with flammable materials—like fuel and dry brush—all contribute to wildfires and the unpredictable damages they cause.

November 2018’s Camp Fire is the most destructive and fatal in California—causing 85 deaths, burning around 153,000 acres, and destroying nearly 19,000 structures. In 2020, the August Complex Fire burned more than one million acres.

Needless to say, emergency responders need to be able to quickly assess these fires by having access to reliable and timely information, and the ability to quickly share it.

Senate Bill (SB) 109, by state Senator Bill Dodd (D – Napa), passed the Legislature on September 7 to establish the Office of Wildfire Technology Research and Development (OWTRD) within the Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CalFIRE). The OWTRD’s mission is to conduct research and test emergency technologies to improve the detection of and response to wildfires.

“17 of the 20 largest wildfires in California history have occurred since 2000, with six of the seven largest wildfires occurring in 2020 alone. Collectively, the fires have claimed hundreds of lives and caused tens of billions of dollars in damage,” said Dodd. “The escalating frequency and devastation caused by wildfires demands that we seek out emerging technology to address this urgent threat. This bill will help develop advancements and tap innovation from the public and private sectors. It will allow us to work smarter to protect life and property.”

Understandably, the bill received no opposition.

It was strongly supported by many associations including Breathe California, California Fire Chiefs Association, California State Association of Counties, and Fire Districts Association of California—just to name a few.

The Napa County Board of Supervisors wrote in support of SB-109, saying:

“[E]xtreme weather events and natural disasters are occurring more frequently and becoming more severe. Among other challenges, California has been confronted with persistent drought conditions, warming temperatures, all of which have led to an unprecedented tree mortality crisis. Dead and dying trees, among others, have been identified as key factors in the devastating fire seasons in recent years and will continue to increase the likelihood of more severe wildfires in the future…

While Napa County is working on investing in technologies to help prevent wildfires, the Board believes there should be a statewide agency responsible for studying, testing, and advising with regard to the procurement of emerging technologies and tools in order to effectively prevent and suppress fires, something the counties cannot do on their own.”

The coordination needed research, testing, and evaluation wildfire tools and technologies will cost approximately $1.6 million in the first year, and an ongoing $1.4 million (General Fund) to CalFIRE, according to the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

CalFire predicts needing new staff positions—including an Assistant Chief with subject matter expertise to oversee field testing.

SB-109 now awaits final approval by the governor.

California Selects Nonprofit as Broadband Partner

by

As part of a massive effort to improve broadband infrastructure, the state today announced it is partnering with a third-party administrator (TPA) to oversee California’s middle-mile broadband initiative. CENIC California Middle-Mile Broadband Initiative, LLC will serve as the TPA to manage the development and construction of broadband networks as part of this year’s state budget allocation to build high-speed fiber networks aimed at closing the digital divide.

Senate Bill (SB) 156, a $6 billion legislative proposal, was approved by Governor Newsom in July with the goal of providing equitable access to broadband service by expanding infrastructure in unserved and underserved populations. The legislation includes:

  • $3.25 billion over the next three years to build, operate and maintain an open access, state-owned middle-mile network—high-capacity fiber lines that carry large amounts of data at higher speeds over longer distances between local networks
  • $2 billion to set up last-mile broadband connections that will connect homes and businesses with local networks. The legislation expedites project deployment and enables Tribes and local governments to access this funding
  • $750 million for a loan loss reserve fund to bolster the ability of local governments and nonprofits to secure financing for broadband infrastructure

The proposal also created an advisory committee, with members of the Administration and Legislature, to oversee the effort to provide open broadband access for Californians.

“We are pleased to retain CENIC California Middle Mile Broadband Initiative, LLC to manage the construction and establishment of the middle-mile network,” said California Department of Technology Director Amy Tong. “We look forward to partnering with them on this historic project to close the state’s digital divide and make possible equitable access to high-speed internet for all Californians.”

The TPA will develop the fiber network and partner with CalTrans to manage construction of the middle-mile infrastructure along state highways and rights of way. CENIC will also collaborate with the California Public Utilities Commission on locations for middle-mile infrastructure and last-mile connectivity.

“We are honored to be a part of the most ambitious state digital equity effort in the history of the public Internet,” said Louis Fox, President of CENIC California MMBI. “Our goal, in partnership with the state, is to ensure that every community—rural, urban, tribal—has access to broadband technologies and to do this work with alacrity.”

The construction of the middle-mile network is estimated to last through December 2026, with an expected significant increase in connectivity in rural, tribal, and underserved urban areas.

Image: iStockphoto.com

This story has been updated to include information provided by the California Department of Technology. 

Bill to Regulate Algorithm Bias Dies in Senate

by

Legislation aiming to eliminate algorithm bias in state IT systems has died in the State Senate. 

AB 13 by Assemblymember Ed Chau passed in the Assembly on June 1, 2021 and has been amended multiple times before it was placed on suspense last week. 

Introduced in December 2020, AB 13, also known as The Systems Accountability Act, sought to eliminate bias within automated decision systems that serve the public.

“If thoughtfully designed and implemented, algorithm-driven decision systems can assist government by improving operations and in the delivery of services,” said Assemblymember Ed Chau. “However, government also has the responsibility to ensure these systems do not harm the legal rights, health and well-being of individuals. It is therefore necessary to establish criteria for the procurement of high-risk algorithms to minimize the risk of discriminatory impacts resulting from their design and application.”

AB 13 would require the Department of Technology to establish public guidelines that identify high-risk automated decision systems as defined by the measure and to submit a report to the Legislature within two years of passage, repeating the process every two years.  The original date for the first report was set for July 31, 2023, with follow-up reports set for 2025 and 2027. 

The report would specify each high-risk automated decision system, how it functions, whether it poses any risks to privacy or security of personal information, and whether it poses any potentially discriminatory impacts on the basis of the Unruh Civil Rights Act. 

Opponents of the bill cited changing definitions of what constituted an ADS and said the reporting requirement for vendors would negatively impact the state’s procurement process.

EDD Seeks Firm to Help Improve Business Processes and Modernize Benefits System

by

With the hope of improving customer service after an unprecedented surge and backlog of claims, the Employment Development Department is retooling the way Californians gain access to unemployment insurance benefits.   Earlier this month, the California Department of Technology issued a Request for Proposal (RFP) to hire a firm that will provide Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) Services as it works to replace EDD’s beleaguered claimant benefit system.

According to the RFP, the department “seeks to assess, analyze, and redesign the business processes that impact the customer experience into a customer-centric business framework that leverages improvements and supporting technologies to deliver world-class customer service.”

As part of its Re-Imagining Benefit Systems Modernization project, EDD wants to improve service delivery, eliminate unnecessary complexity in their service process, and reduce administrative burden, among other needs, says to the 281page document.  

The department has faced ongoing criticism during the most critical juncture of the COVID-19 pandemic, failing to deliver unemployment benefits to claimants as well as falling victim to fraud.

In a Jan. 2021 statement, the department noted that “between March 2020 and January 16, 2021, EDD processed 19.5 million claims and paid out $114 billion in unemployment benefits. EDD confirmed that 9.7 percent of payments have been made to fraudulent claims.”

The recently approved state budget includes $11.8 million from the General Fund to “reengage the planning and modernization of the EDD’s information technology systems” after years of planning and lessons learned from the pandemic.   The department first started modernization efforts in 2015.

In Sep. 2020, Gov. Gavin Newsom appointed a strike team, led by Government Operations Secretary Yolanda Richardson and Code for America Founder Jennifer Pahlka, to address and implement necessary reform within the department. 

In a report from the Richardson-led strike team, it’s noted that the backlog of unprocessed claims can be attributed to issues related to workflow and logistics.

In his revised state budget, Gov. Newsom acknowledged that “the pandemic has exposed many of EDD’s antiquated processes and outdated infrastructure, resulting in a delay or inability for many Californians to access (unemployment) benefits.”

The RFP seeks to hire a firm for a nine-month engagement with a firm that will start the project by the end of September.

 

California to Pilot ‘Digital ID Ecosystem’

by

As part of its Vision 2023, state technology officials are proposing a system to enable California residents to use a single username and password to access any state government service online. The system would allow users to easily update their information, as needed, on a single website.

The proposal, dubbed the “Digital ID Ecosystem,” envisions a day when Californians don’t have to have separate log-in information for each service they use, whether scheduling a driver’s test, making an unemployment claim or enrolling in Medi-Cal. To get started, Governor Gavin Newsom asked for $1.1 million in Fiscal Year 2021-22 and 2022-23 to deliver a proof of concept.

“It’s a question of convenience for the residents of California,” said Rick Klau, the state’s new California Chief Technology Officer. “Anyone who has any digital interaction with more than one state department or agency, like renewing a license, getting a campground permit or paying taxes, knows that many of them require a username and password. That is an inefficient process.”

Klau emphasized that the program prioritizes user privacy and consent. As proposed, the system would be fully compliant with applicable state and federal statutes and policies, including the Information Practices Act, and the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA). Also, every user would be required to consent to and designate each service authorized to receive personal information for the creation of the digital ID.

Because every agency and department now runs its own login systems, the proposed ID ecosystem would facilitate better oversight and monitoring for potential fraud through centralization, Klau said.

“Currently there are 50 sets of login systems where there is no centralization of visibility into the log-in activity, which means if there is bad actor who is trying to compromise accounts or attack the systems, it’s not visible at the state level,” he said. “When you centralize information, you give us better insight to be able to distinguish good activity and bad activity that we would want to stop.”

Approved in budget legislation, the funds will pay for a “Digital ID Product Owner” to develop the product vision, strategy, and roadmaps, and a “Business Relationship Manager” to lead the partnership with state entities to build and evaluate the business cases to support investment decisions. The product owner would determine which two entities to engage in the proof-of-concept effort.

In a letter to the Governor and legislative leaders, ACLU California Action and the Electronic Frontier Foundation, wrote that the proposal is “vaguely justified and poorly articulated.” The letter questioned why the program is needed and how it will work and cites serious concerns about user privacy and security. The letter said, for example, that the proposal does not stipulate that every level of government that has access to the system’s data is bound by the state Information Practices Act, nor does it require an independent oversight agency or auditor to guard against privacy abuses.

The Assembly Budget Subcommittee No. 4 also raised concerns. Committee staff documented in its May agenda that the proposal’s assertions of privacy protections “are not durable” because they are not included in statutory or budget language.

In response to cited privacy concerns, Klau emphasized that the system will be designed to put users in control of the information they provide and how it will be used.

“It’s fundamental that in order for residents to trust us they need to know their information is theirs, and should they choose to share it in order to effect a transaction or update their information, that they can control it,” Klau said.

He added that the California Department of Technology would report back to the legislature every six months on the project’s progress and to address any concerns as they emerge.

 

State Broadband Infrastructure to Get $5.25B Expansion

by

Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders have agreed to a budget trailer bill on Monday that will increase state broadband infrastructure spending by $5.25 billion, according to a press release from the Governor’s Office.

The bill (AB/SB 156) was announced by Gov. Newsom, Senate President pro Tempore Toni G. Atkins (D-San Diego), and Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon (D-Lakewood) and will expand the state’s broadband infrastructure, bringing open-access internet connectivity to Californian households and businesses in need. 

“This legislation will yield vital, broadened access for California families by prioritizing the unserved and underserved areas, facilities, households, and businesses that remain disconnected in the digital era,” Gov. Newsom said in the announcement. 

The bill, originally introduced in Jan. 2021, establishes the Office of Broadband and Digital Literacy within the Department of Technology, as well as a “broadband czar” and a nine-person council within the department. 

The bill allocates $3.25 billion to build and maintain high-capacity fiber lines and another $2 billion for “last-mile infrastructure” to connect homes and businesses with local networks.

Little Hoover Commission Calls on Government to Continue Virtual Meetings

by

In its new report, California’s independent government watchdog says that it would be more cost-efficient to make state government more accessible by permitting fully remote public meetings, even after the pandemic is over.

In The Government of Tomorrow: Online Meetings, the Little Hoover Commission highlights the benefits of Governor Newsom’s March 2020 Executive Order allowing state boards and commissions to meet via remote technology. Changing accessibility to make public meetings more inclusive by providing remote access would not only save taxpayer dollars, but it would significantly benefit those who have difficulty interacting with the state government such as low-income citizens or physically disabled persons.

“Governor Newsom has long been an advocate of using technology to make government more accessible, “said Commission Chair Pedro Nava, who also serves on the subcommittee on remote work and state government. “He even wrote a book on the subject—Citizenville. Now, the Governor and the Legislature can use proven technology to increase public accessibility and strengthen government accountability.”

The commission’s report also provides results from its survey of state boards—and other commissions—that met remotely during the pandemic. The survey reveals some substantial benefits to the public including:

  • More than 90 percent of surveyed agencies reported reduced costs from meeting remotely
  • Approximately half of agencies reported better attendance by commission members
  • One-third of agencies responded that they meet more often due to remote access
  • Approximately half of agencies with witnesses said it is easier to secure high-quality speakers

The Commission strongly advises the Governor and Legislature to make it easier for board and commission members to participate remotely to fully capture the benefits of meeting virtually. The commission also says that action should be taken before September 30—when the Governor’s executive order is rescinded—for these reforms to be the most effective.

Californians May Soon Have Option for Digital Driver’s License

by

Some California residents may soon have the option of having a digital version of their driver’s license that can be stored in their smartphone.

With $10 million earmarked in the Governor’s May Revise budget, the pilot would evaluate the use of mobile driver’s licenses and ID cards. The original bill, AB 1503 by Miguel Santiago, was held in the Assembly Appropriations bill, but the program is included in budget trailer bills AB 149 and SB 149.

Santiago envisioned the option to give people quick access to their license, say at a bar to prove a patron is old enough to buy a drink, during a traffic stop to present to law enforcement, or as an alternative if their original is lost or misplaced. While the bill had bipartisan support, opponents cited potential security and privacy risks.

The new version addresses most of the concerns raised by a coalition of consumer privacy groups and led by the ACLU California Action.

“We wanted to know what information these apps would be collecting, and who would have access to it,” said Becca Cramer-Mowder, the ACLU legislative coordinator and advocate who has tracked similar efforts for the past five years. “With any app on your phone there is the possibility it could collect anything from tracking your location at all times to looking at what websites you’re visiting, who your contacts are and a whole host of things that are completely unnecessary for showing that you have a valid driver’s license.”

In a May 2021 letter to Budget Leaders, the group cited potential problems with the proposed program. Many of the concerns related to inspection of the license by law enforcement officers.

“The Supreme Court has ruled that law enforcement cannot search a phone without a warrant or consent,” Cramer-Mowder explained. “What happens if your driver’s license is on your phone, and you are stopped by a police officer? Do you have to hand over your phone or just show them something on your phone?

They argued that the bill should include a provision stating that handing over a phone for the inspection of the driver’s license does not constitute consent to a search. And they said that the license holder should not be required to show or turn over their phone for identify verification.

Another concern was that an officer inspecting a digital license might see a text message that could be used to show probable cause to get a warrant. A possible solution suggested by potential vendors is use of a scannable code to provide only the license information that the officer would otherwise be able to access on an actual driver’s license.

The civil liberties groups also wanted the bill to require that the license holder give affirmative consent for any piece of information provided on the digital license. For example, a user could choose to put only their photo and date of birth on the digital version of their license. This would prevent the license from being used to remotely racially profile people or deduce someone’s immigration status.

The group also said the participant should not have to pay to have a digital license and should protected from use of their information by anyone contracted with the DMV to develop the app. Any information transmitted to the mobile license should be encrypted and protections should be in place to prevent data from being intercepted while being transmitted from the DMV.

“We also advocated that it needs to be fully optional,” Cramer-Mowder said. “Smart phones are cost prohibitive for a number of Californians.”

As drafted, the trailer bill now includes specific security features to ensure personal information is protected and unauthorized access is prevented. The DMV would be required to submit a report to the Legislature on the pilot by July 2026.

 

 

 

Ca.gov could ‘reinvent’ how visitors access information and services

by

State technology officials have jumpstarted a major overhaul of Ca.gov, California’s official website, to unify department sites and simplify access to services.

The initiative is already underway with an announcement on June 17 by Rick Klau, who took helm as California’s Chief Technology Innovation Officer in February. Klau met with tech companies in a vendor forum hosted by the California Department of Technology, saying the goal of the project is to streamline the state’s patchwork website content, design styles, management systems, and IT infrastructure.

Equally important, if not more so, Klau said the work would increase accessibility for online visitors.

“Today there are dozens [of department websites] that are in WordPress and hundreds across the state currently sharing no common infrastructure,” Klau said.

The project builds on the initial redevelopment efforts of CA.gov, when the site was relaunched in 2019 as a prototype under Alpha.ca.gov. State IT leadership hopes to reimagine how digital services are delivered, modernizing California’s digital presence and potentially reworking outdated or languishing Web applications.   The Governor’s May Revise budget proposes $2.3M for a dedicated team to support the effort.  

The work to house state sites under one IT umbrella is comprehensive and extends to frontend and backend infrastructure. Klau said this means taking a holistic approach and unifying not only content management systems, but also content libraries, user interfaces, design languages, tech stacks, and the digital processes connected to CA.gov.

The vision is for users, no matter who they are or what device they’re using, to have quick access to what they need. At the moment, he said too many users visiting department websites get mired in department directories, unnecessary amounts of file downloads, and other technical difficulties.

“We don’t need to force the residents to understand how the state is structured in order to get the piece of content or access to the service that they need,” Klau said. “Making our sites accessible, regardless of how they come to the content is a big area of opportunity.”

California Department of Technology seeks to break down some of the barriers that have plagued users for years, and especially those with disabilities or those limited to slower online connections and smaller mobile devices. Since he left Google to work for the state, Klau’s first projects have centered around improving usability through strategic design. This included an updated content style guide and continued work on California’s Covid-19 vaccination site Covid19.ca.gov.

With the pandemic receding, Klau and his team are returning to the work of redesigning CA.gov, where accessibility will be a cornerstone. The drive toward greater access also supports Gov. Gavin Newsom’s charge to modernize, a move most visible in funding to innovate firefighting and revamp the Department of Motor Vehicles site and services.

Reaching out to tech company representatives, Klau said the project’s large-scale and nuanced needs would likely seed procurement opportunities and in-house work performed by state digital services.

“It’s really important to think of this [project] as two complementary things, there’s the technology, the infrastructure that supports the growing family web properties throughout CA.gov, and then there’s the content and the design itself,” Klau said. “When you see that those are two separate but complimentary things, you can then see the lenses through which there are many opportunities for us to partner with a number of [vendors].”

For more information and updates on the CA.gov website and services redesign, visit News.alpha.ca.gov.

Image: Ca.gov.

 

State Capitol: Major Changes Ahead for California Tech

by

California’s future is heavily invested in innovative technology, but numerous legacy IT systems across the state struggle to modernize, exceeding the budget, schedule, or both.  Moreover, the state lacks enterprise collaboration, with countless siloed platforms such as the often-cited example of 79 separate case management systems across 22 departments.

Assembly Bill 1323, introduced by Assemblymember David Chiu (D-San Francisco), aims to centralize all IT modernization projects through the California Department of Technology, giving them statutory authority to “identify and prioritize the stabilization and modernization of legacy IT systems across all agencies and departments.”   Now pending in the Senate, the Assembly recently passed the measure with no opposition.

Existing law states that the chief information officer of each state agency is responsible developing their agency’s enterprise architecture as it relates to legacy system modernization and other IT maintenance. If passed, AB 1323 would transfer the responsibility from the agency CIOs to the review and analysis of CDT.

At present, CDT only has the authority to fix problems rather than prevent them.  “Currently, CDT operates reactively to fix problems that have already occurred, and no central agency proactively plans and oversees IT projects,” according to a legislative analysis.

Additionally, CDT would be required to identify legacy IT system modernization efforts across the state actively and submit an annual report to the Legislature containing “an explanation of how CDT is prioritizing legacy IT system modernization efforts across state government; an estimate of the annual and total preliminary costs for each effort and for the entire state modernization portfolio; and the impediments and risks that could, or issues that already have, led to changes in how CDT identifies, assesses, and prioritizes modernization efforts.”

According to the analysis, the legislation:

  • Would require CDT to identify, assess, and prioritize legacy information technology system modernization efforts across state government.
  • Would require CDT to submit an annual report to the Legislature that includes: an explanation of how CDT is prioritizing legacy IT system modernization efforts across state government; an estimate of the annual and total preliminary costs for each effort and for the entire state modernization portfolio; and the impediments and risks that could, or issues that already have, led to changes in how CDT identifies, assesses, and prioritizes modernization efforts.
  • Would require all state agencies and state entities to submit all of their current IT service contracts to CDT before May 1, 2022.
  • Would require CDT to analyze the contracts submitted pursuant to the section above, and use the information obtained from that analysis to assess state IT investment in order to identify types of uses that are candidates for statewide contracts for commonly used or shared services; to create a replicable analytic approach to better understand user demand; and to inform management approaches regarding demand and supply.

AB 1323 is not without potential hazards or concerns. Primarily, the scope of the task to funnel all IT modernization efforts through one department remains daunting and logistically problematic.

The author hopes to prevent future IT failures, citing examples with FI$CAL, DMV, and EDD.

“When government websites and online systems don’t work, they have very real impacts on our residents,” Assemblymember Chiu said in an April press release. “This bill begins the process of reforming and unraveling the complicated web of antiquated and duplicative technology systems across state agencies.”

Meanwhile, in his May Revise Budget, Gov. Newsom has proposed a one-time $50 million increase CDT to identify and approve projects to quickly repair critical infrastructure in need of modernization.  State agencies will submit proposals to CDT and the Department of Finance to fund solutions that “allows for immediate remediation of risks through quick and efficient solution implementations.”   The effort calls for assessments of existing critical systems, and solutions to be considered for the greatest impact, such as risk reduction, return on investment, and quality of service improvement.

The modernization fund is part of CDT’s Vision 2023 initiative that will also fund projects on an iterative and ongoing basis to support teams that show quick progress.   The department is working with the Office of Digital Innovation to improve the customer experience for Californians.

What Civic Tech Means in 2021: An Interview with Code for America CEO Amanda Renteria

by

Civic tech is evolving, and with that change, so is Code for America.

For the last decade, the non-profit has been a prover and promoter of civic tech, the idea government can be as agile and effective as any Silicon Valley startup.

Jennifer Pahlka founded Code for America in 2009, and since then, the San Francisco headquartered organization has developed a diverse swath of digital solutions for dozens of cities, counties, and states across the U.S. More importantly, the group has shown that these civic tech solutions can solve real problems.

Its GetCalFresh enrollment application has helped more than five million low-income Californians receive food stamps. The group’s GetYourRefund.org website has aided more than 500,000 taxpayers with filings in 2020 and distributed over $62 million to families. Whether the issue is health, criminal justice, housing, or even street maintenance, in one form or another Code for America has shown technology and delivery-driven policy can make an impact.

Yet now, the nonprofit is entering the next chapter of civic tech, a phase that demands more of it than ever before. Both Code for America and local governments have realized that modern technology and innovative ideas—though key ingredients—are not enough for lasting change.

It could be said that this applies to many of civic tech’s early rallying cries, this includes the call for open data, the practice of publishing data that’s accessible and free for public use; as well as open-source code, software code that accessible and free for public use. These were thought to be policies that would catalyze digital innovation in an exponential way, and while they still carry this potential, real results often require real investments of time and resources.

In an interview with GovReport, Code for America CEO Amanda Renteria said that today, civic tech requires follow-through: digital solutions that are supported, updated, refreshed, and fed with new content and features—things which don’t happen by default. In addition to this, she said policies often need to work in tandem with digital innovation to clear obstacles.

The idea of follow-through has been a tenet in Code for America’s operational model for the last few years. It has developed a number of fully-supported, in-house solutions for its government partners that include many California jurisdictions. This includes a suite of digital apps and tools within its “Safety Net” solutions. The move offers significant contrast to Code for America’s early days when the organization would send in technologists for year-long government engagements to engineer apps and modernize services.

Renteria, who answered the call to lead Code for America in the middle of the pandemic, said her hope is to build on the group’s 11 years of experience to develop real change and enhance service and citizen outcomes.

In an interview held shortly after the Code for America’s annual Summit, where the group highlights recent work and plans for the future, Renteria outlined her thoughts on what’s next for the civic tech group and potentially civic tech itself.

Q1. How did the Code for America Summit set the stage for its current work and next projects?

As we step back and think about the planning of the convening and the conversations throughout, there was a renewed hope for change, for creating a different kind of government together. Technologists, public servants, administrators, and academics were talking about how we can design a new way of structuring systems, measuring government outcomes, and tech partnering more closely at all levels of government. We talked about the how-tos, and asked what things we need to watch out for in the future as we think about this work.

You could also feel the energy! The [civic technology] ecosystem is rising to meet the moment we’re in. We heard a number of tangible examples where govtech projects have made a difference in serving people with dignity and respect, as well as new ideas and concepts on how to have an equitable lens as we move forward. 

Now, post Summit, it’s about asking ourselves how we take everything we’ve talked about at the Summit and embed that ingenuity within government systems—at all levels of government. For me, that aspect of recognizing and naming that we have to design an equitable government together sets the stage for all of our work as we move forward through and post-pandemic.  

Q2. Early in the Trump Administration, there was a moment of indecision when civic technologists working in federal digital service groups like 18F and the U.S. Digital Service wondered whether they would stay on under conservative leadership—politics that embraced a different interpretation of social equity compared to the Obama administration. Some civic technologists left, while others stayed on to preserve the digital tools and transformation initiatives set in motion. What does this return to Obama-era policies under the Biden Administration mean for Code for America in its efforts to increase social assistance and support equity?

I think, or I hope, we’ve all learned that making government work should be a bipartisan endeavor. During this pandemic, we heard a lot of people saying, “We just need our government to work.” I am thankful for anyone who kept systems together so that communities could get the resources they needed. This pandemic was hard on every state and every community and there was a clear consistent desire – everyone just wanted to make sure people were able to access food and basic needs. 

I am also very hopeful for what is possible in this Administration. More than any other [Administration] in our history, this one has begun its’ term with a clear understanding of our work – both the importance and need for digital delivery and equitable outcomes of government programs. For the first time in my life, we have real efforts to invest in outcomes for all communities and call out tech [modernization] as a way to do that. The ARP provides both the resources and the direction for real change.

Second, we say this a lot at Code for America, we are what we measure. The President declaring a 50% reduction in child poverty sets a clear directive for all of us. Tech can help governments identify and fix barriers that have hindered program outcomes since their inception. It is now imperative for the civic tech sector to do our part to help governments redesign, recreate, or rebuild systems to drive outcomes that lift kids out of poverty. If we do this right, we have a shot at significantly reducing and even ending child poverty.

One last point because it is the new “roads and bridges” for access to opportunity. We must ensure broadband access to all people in the country. As we move to a fully digital age in government, we cannot leave anyone behind and that means everyone has to be able to connect in. 

Q3. You stepped into your role as CEO when everything was remote and the pandemic was fully underway. How did you help Code for America’s Brigades and its Community Fellowship program maintain its participation and volunteer support?

First, I think it’s fair to say that Code for America has been preparing for this moment since it began, preparing for people to recognize the need for digital delivery in a human-centered way. This past year we had the chance to put it all together – partnering with many governments and organizations across the country. We all looked in the mirror and said, “What more can we do?” We were eager and ready to help in any way we could.

What I love about this organization is that it has a ton of heart. It just does. And my role is to simply foster it in a way that gives people the ability to do what was/is needed, especially during a crisis. And so, I didn’t do anything new or different. I just tried to bring out what already existed – whether you’re talking about our volunteer brigade networks jumping in to help or programs reaching more people who needed them. Essentially, asking how I could help [the team and networks] do what they do best – while making sure we were taking care of each other in these unusual times. 

This inaugural year also had a lot of dimensions for me. Clearly, I recognize that there aren’t a lot of women and women of color in leadership positions in tech. And, there were a number of moments throughout the last year that were extremely heavy for us as a team, and me personally as a person of color. Throughout it all, I tried my best to role model what it means to bring your full self to the work, and I am grateful for the kind of empathy and grace our community has for one another. I know those things are hard to see from the outside, but there’s something special about this place. We do weekly celebrations for all the wins, big and small, while also sitting quietly (even on zoom) just to be together, see each other, in those tougher moments too. 

Q6. How do you see Code for America’s new solutions growing and contributing to Code for America’s longevity and success?

When Jen first envisioned Code for America, she was trying to get tech talent into government – a handful of fellows at a time. Now, we can do more, have higher expectations for change.

In the beginning, the government viewed tech as “making sure the computers worked”. But now, IT is embedded in every piece and aspect of government from policy and program design to delivering direct services to creating equitable metrics. There’s a huge opportunity for tech to improve and change government systems to work for real people and particularly, in low-income, marginalized communities. We are just barely scratching the surface when you think about 13 million people living in poverty who are not receiving their benefits right now, or that our systems leave out entire communities because they require a desktop computer or going into a physical office. Our government is capable of doing so much more, and there are millions of public servants leaning into this moment of change.

While government is evolving, so has the civic tech industry. In the early years, civic tech folks thought that a couple of years of helping to design, develop and deploy a handful of solutions would be enough to make significant, lasting impacts in government. It certainly has helped, but we now know that we have to invest for the long haul to achieve a digital transformation that can be sustained. If we hope to change government systems for a generation, you can’t do that in just two years or simply change landing pages. We need to be at the table throughout the entire process for goal setting, policy design, process changes, and measuring outcomes. To achieve a human-centered government requires being there, partnering every step of the way. And, to do that fully, we need a matured and growing ecosystem. This is the exciting evolution in civic tech and at Code for America. There is a collective power in the broader civic tech ecosystem to make systems change together. That collective power with a longer term mindset wasn’t ready 10 years ago. But, it is today. 

Q7. At the summit, measurement, and especially performance measurement, was a big focus. Looking at Code for America, at the end of the day, what metrics does Code for America look at to tell whether or not it’s successful?

Success is less a number, though we did help more than 6 million people last year! It really is a mindset shift. The goal is for folks to understand—at the highest levels—what human-centered design is, what it means to center our systems on people, not just in words, but in the way our systems actually work. Code for America realizes this vision by creating tangible experiences in human-centered design that have real impact on people’s lives. 

We’ve shown what is possible in cities and in a number of states as well. But now we are taking that to scale. We’re asking ourselves, how are we truly transforming the safety net? How are we truly transforming the tax-benefit system? How are we improving our criminal legal system? That type of systems change is the calling of our time. I think about this more and more, especially when I see our next generation expect more from technology and the services they use. If we can create this new mindset shift, that will be transformative in shaping how the world is growing up today and ensuring it truly serves all communities. 

Q8: Looking to the horizon, where do you hope Code for America is in the next year or two?

I hope we are viewed as a force for good and for change.

Our country is, really has been, at a major tipping point. We are finally recognizing communities that have been left out, and what I hope, is that when we look back, we can say that this was the year, this was the time, when we set systems in place in a new direction that helped people out of poverty and advanced equity at the same time. Both are possible! 

I believe we can create a government that feels and looks different. A year or two from now, I want people to be proud of the government created out of the pandemic’s challenges. I hope Code for America is seen as a part of that upgrade. I know it can seem idealistic, right now.  But, for us, it’s all about creating a government that “can work for the people, by the people, in the digital age” – that is our true calling, and there’s no more important time to answer that call.

Advocates push to fight algorithm bias in state contracts

by

They are used in virtually every sector, helping decision-makers mete out punishment, choose a medical treatment, price on a product or hire a new team member, for example. Algorithms, also called automated decision systems (ADS), are both ubiquitous and powerful, but to most invisible. And critics say because of the way they are created they can be biased, and serve to perpetuate racial discrimination, economic disenfranchisement, and loss of opportunity.

Civil rights groups, academic researchers and now state lawmakers increasingly are shining a light on algorithmic bias and calling for reforms, citing the harms and potential for bias to undermine trust in the public sector. 

State Assemblymember Ed Chau in December 2020 introduced the Systems Accountability Act of 2021. As amended in March 2021, AB 13 would create the first statewide algorithmic accountability framework for high-risk public sector algorithms. Certain bids for goods or services that use an automated decision system (ADS) would require an impact assessment that includes tests of the system for risks posed to privacy, security or personal information and risks that may result in inaccurate, unfair, biased, or discriminatory decisions. 

The bill also would also require the California Department of Technology to establish and make public ADS guidelines by January 2023 and state agencies would be required to submit to the department a high-risk ADS accountability report. These reports would include a description of any disparate impacts from use of the system and a detailed mitigation plan within 10 days of awarding such a contract. AB 13 is now before the Assembly Appropriations Committee.

“If thoughtfully designed and implemented, algorithm-driven decision systems can assist government by improving operations and in the delivery of services,” said Assemblymember Ed Chau. “However, government also has the responsibility to ensure these systems do not harm the legal rights, health and well-being of individuals. It is therefore necessary to establish criteria for the procurement of high-risk algorithms to minimize the risk of discriminatory impacts resulting from their design and application.”

AB 13 is sponsored by the Oakland-based Greenlining Institute, which in February released a 36-page report explaining algorithms and how they are used across various sectors, both public and private and why they can perpetuate discriminatory practices.  The bill is opposed by a coalition of the technology industry and business groups that argue it would slow down the government procurement process and force companies to expose proprietary business information. 

A computer algorithm is a set of rules or instructions that use statistical patterns and data analytics that can be employed to make a prediction or solve a problem. According to the Greenline Institute, they are increasingly used by employers to sort resumes, decide social services eligibility, determine who sees ads for jobs, housing, and loans, choose which employees to hire, fire or promote, determine access to housing, credit, and health insurance, predict crime and recidivism risk and decide on health care treatment plans.

The problem is that when poorly designed – i.e. the input data or predictor variables favor one group over another – ADS can create unfair, biased, or inaccurate results and cause disproportionate harm to low-income families and communities of color. For example, an ADS may take certain characteristics of a person like their age, gender or income and predict their likelihood of defaulting on a loan – information used to approve or deny that loan.

At a California Fair Employment and Housing Council hearing in April on potential anti-bias regulations for algorithms, Maeve Elise Brown, executive director at Housing and Economic Rights Advocates, explained the potential harm in this scenario.

In a Council press release, Brown was quoted as saying that the lending criteria built into the algorithmic decision-making may actually be “proxies for race and gender that appear facially neutral but may result in targeting of particular lending decisions based on personal characteristics and directed towards legally protected groups.” 

In government programs, poorly designed algorithms can unfairly deny people services they are entitled to receive. In Arkansas, for example, hundreds of people saw their Medicaid benefits cut because of the algorithm developer’s coding errors and miscalculations.  

The Greenlining Institute recommends laws to ensure algorithm transparency and accountability to ensure that algorithms comply with applicable laws and to build public trust and confidence. AB 13 aims to do that by requiring the Department of Technology to publish the ADS impact assessment submitted by the contractor and the state’s accountability report on the internet.

Aspen Institute: Three ways California could improve tech project oversight

by

As part of a presentation by Aspen Institute’s Tech Policy Hub and the Tech Talent Project held on May 11, three teams presented concepts on how to improve California’s Project Approval Lifecycle (PAL), the state’s oversight process for large-scale technology projects. The recommendations are part of the California Department of Technology’s Vision 2023 initiative to improve the way state government uses technology to serve Californians.

The teams of technology experts spent a few weeks analyzing the complexities of PAL before proposing a solution that could improve the overall process.

The first speaker, Kleiner Perkins entrepreneur Tejash Unadkat, tackled the issue of adapting PAL to the size and scope of projects. Specifically, larger projects total over $25 million in funding and have a greater chance of sinking.

“We dug further and found that the larger the project, the higher the probability that would increase the budget and potentially fail,” Unadkat said.

Ultimately, Unadkat and his colleague Colin Jenkel proposed that all projects be capped at $25 million with a length of four years, requiring numerous validation and proof of concept checkpoints in the very early stages of project planning.

“This will encourage smaller, more iterative projects to move forward,” Jenkel said.

The second proposal focused on the state’s COVID reporting system as a “success story,” establishing a basis to create the California Technology Fellowship program.

“The California Department of Technology, and the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) decided to band together with their two bodies of knowledge to successfully partner and acquire a new COVID-19 reporting software,” innovation ecosystem builder Erika Cheung said. “That really begs the question of how is it the case of this COVID-19 reporting software was acquired in two weeks?”

Cheung and her colleague, software engineer  Rohit Chandra, found that one of the keys to a quick and efficient digital procurement was cross-departmental collaboration, as was exhibited by the two departments.  Executing such collaboration across agencies will require public workers to develop new technology skills, Cheung said.

“What we suggested is creating a 12-month program, where you embed 12 Senior professionals that work across 10 different state departments to come into the CDT office and work on procuring some subset of innovative technology products.”

Such a program would need championing from state higher-ups, such as Gov. Newsom and CDT officials, but could pay off in the way of quicker delivery times and projects running under budget.

The third team presented a tool called the “PALPro Planner” to align project planning with the state budget process.  “The tool allows project owners to easily schedule deliverables around key budget cycle dates, and improve the PAL workflow to keep teams on track. Implementing this tool will ultimately enable faster project approval under the PAL process,” says the proposal.

The PAL process, which includes four stages, (business analysis, alternative analysis, solution development, and project readiness and approval) was introduced during the Brown Administration as an alternative to feasibility study reports (FSR) that were used in the past to take technology projects from concept to production.

Watch the hour-long presentation here: https://youtu.be/kqRKHVGVldE

 

Nonprofit creates open-source digital infrastructure for agriculture industry

by

A nonprofit organization is aiming to help modernize the global agriculture industry by launching an open-source technology project to serve as a platform and tool suite to help feed the world and reduce agricultural waste.

The Linux Foundation this month announced the launch of the AgStack Foundation to improve global agriculture efficiency through creating, maintaining, and enhancing free, reusable and specialized digital infrastructure for data and applications.

Leaders from the agriculture and technology industries spanning across multiple sectors founded and contributed to the project’s launch.

“The global Agriculture ecosystem desperately needs a digital makeover. There is too much loss of productivity and innovation due to the absence of re-usable tools and data. I am excited to lead this community of leaders, contributors and members—from across sectors and countries—to help build this common and re-useable resource that, AgStack, that will help every stakeholder in global agriculture with free and open digital tools and data,” said Sumer Johal, Executive Director of Agstack.

Statistics from the Linux Foundation show that while nine percent of the global population are hungry or malnourished, a whopping 33 percent of all food produced is wasted. That’s right: the amount of wasted produce can feed the starving population more than three times. These are societal drivers that are compounded with inefficient and slow legacy technology systems that do not keep up with the ever-growing and intricate agricultural supply chain.

AgStack’s goal is for innovation on new applications, efficiencies and scale through collaboration and open-source software. AgStack also comprises an open repository with free and easy access to public data and toolboxes for creating and publishing models. It will leverage public data and open-source projects.

How Governments Can Bridge Service Gaps with Data

by

Code for America uncovers techniques to increase the reach of services through equitable data use.


There’s nothing more vexatious than wasted efforts. Every year, local governments invest the time, political capital, and troves of dollars for services many never use. It’s defeating and can be a crushing blow for morale, especially when it’s discovered those who might benefit most from such services are unintentionally excluded.

 

As part of its annual summit, the civic tech group Code for America (CfA) offered a few data-driven tips to increase the service reach of the government. Insights came from “Data for Equity and Justice,” a workshop built around lessons learned from the group’s digital transformation efforts in social safety net programs like Medicaid and food assistance. Eric Giannella, CfA’s data science director, and Eleanor Davis, a CfA senior program manager, led the workshop that taught how equitable data use could improve services.

 

“We really wanted to start talking about this idea of equity and how data can be a really powerful tool in understanding disparities and in creating services and systems that serve people equitably,” Davis said. “At Code for America, one of our deep focuses is to ensure our products and services are equitable. The intentional use of data is a big part of how we do that.”

 

Generally speaking, Davis and Gianella said data equity in government means the data departments collect is representational of the communities they serve. The argument is if data is representational government decision-making and service delivery will be also.

 

“When we say inclusion, we’re really talking about bringing folks who are most impacted by whatever it is we’re looking at into the processes, activities, the decision, and policymaking in a way that intentionally shares power,” Davis said. “Equity is thinking about bringing in an element of fairness or justice.”

 

Outside ethics “data equity” and inclusion also have administrative and budgetary benefits for governments as well. Davis and Gianella said there is a business case to made for equitable data use. Data equity translates to efficiency. Similar to the eCommerce giant Amazon—who is constantly collecting user data—representational data leads to the creation of targeted programs, hi-demand services, and ultimately measurable performance outcomes. Here, data equity isn’t just about doing good, it’s good business.

 

The barrier of inaction

Despite benefits, the three-hour long workshop also surfaced common challenges in data equity efforts. The biggest challenge identified had surprisingly little to do with the technical aspects of analyzing and interpreting data and everything to do with taking action.

 

Attendees, many of whom worked in the public sector, said government had a difficult time starting data equity work due to fears of public reprimand. If data analysis, for example, showed service delivery discrimination some governments worry well-intentioned efforts to improve services would be met with a community backlash. These trust issues, one attendee said, can halt work even before it begins.

 

Another attendee who worked in education said the typical and one of the most detrimental obstacles he encountered was officials’ inability to follow through with effective data equity measures.

 

“We’ll set up a commission, committee [an issue] to death, then feel like we achieved something with no actionable results,” he said.

 

Another workshop participant said the lack of follow-through was equally pernicious in his organization. Governments, he said, often forget to ask themselves if they truly intend to change their organization’s behaviors if presented with new, representative data. Often, overly optimistic expectations are created with studies and data work when it isn’t accompanied by leadership support.

 

“You need to understand what changes you’re willing to make,” he said. “If we discover that there is an inequitable situation, are we willing then to invest? Or if you’re in a government agency, are you now compelled to do something about it?”

 

Tips to get started

As an entry point to data equity, Gianella and Davis offered three tips to help governments get started. The takeaways centered on pragmatic approaches and tactics that could be applied in almost any jurisdiction:

 

1. Don’t let data push you around

Gianella said you don’t have to be intimated or overwhelmed by data. State and local departments can start small, and work with the information they have, and ask questions when data isn’t clear.

 

“Just start by using the data you already have—people’s age, gender, race, ethnicity, and language preference—and see if, based on the experience you have with survey feedback or program approval if you see any differences across those groups?” Gianella said.

 

He added organizations shouldn’t worry if initial numbers seem to indicate adverse outcomes or trends. That should be an entry point into a more extensive investigation designed to benefit everyone – governments and the community.

 

“I think that should kind of be the expectation, Gianella said. “That it’s not adversarial in any way, then it becomes a conversation to get an understanding.”

 

2. Don’t let data be someone else’s job

The second point the two made underscored the need for data literacy across an organization. Too often, Davis said, those who work with data and those who make decisions about it are two different groups. This can create a gap in what leadership understands about an organization’s operations and the people it serves.

 

“In so many organizational cultures, there’s a pretty deep divide between folks who work with data and folks who don’t work with data,” Davis said. “What this means is there are only a few people in the organization who deeply understand what data you have and what can be done with it.”

 

Davis said that ideally, everyone has a basic understanding of data, including what types of data exist in the organization, how data is stored, managed, and how to collaborate with data science folks. This enables thoughtful data questions and responsive action.

 

“We would really love to advocate and see a culture shift where all staff feel connected to data, and they understand why it’s critical to their work,” Davis said.

 

3. Lead with curiosity and ask questions

The final piece of advice focused on asking questions that mattered, where staff connects the issues they care about with the data that influence those issues.

 

“When it comes to working with data, it’s really all about leading with curiosity and asking questions,” Davis said. “So really, at the end of the day, the purpose of the data that we collect and use is for us to get smarter about the work we’re doing, the impact we’re having, and all the ways we can improve.”

Tech leader Tim O’Reilly says this key IT ingredient will make or break social policies in 2021

by

O’Reilly said if the Biden Administration and local progressive policymakers fail to apply this one IT industry principle, it could mean the end for some social equity initiatives.

It’s not good enough to just have good ideas—execution matters.

That was the tenet shared by Tim O’Reilly, the tech thought leader and founder of O’Reilly Media, as he spoke to an audience of technologists and government innovators on April 29. O’Reilly took part in a Q&A-styled discussion hosted by the civic tech group Code for America, where he serves as a board member. His focus targeted social equity reform.

O’Reilly said that when it comes to social policies and programs, the litmus test for effective government is the capacity for implementation. Even in our skeptical and partisan world, O’Reilly said efficient implementation has an uncanny and indisputable power to build faith in new ideas and change beliefs.

“I will say that change happens when people believe that things can be different. And changing the way people feel and think and believe about an issue is, in fact, almost the fundamental human act,” O’Reilly said.

In tech, excellence in implementation is an ideology that has enabled the industry to take once obscure products and business models and transform them into billion-dollar companies. The tech industry’s flourish of public support, O’Reilly said, is fueled by its ability to prove its ideas via intuitive design, accessibility, quick response, and the quality and consistent user experiences we now expect.

For social equity, he called on all levels of government to adopt delivery-driven policy-making, a Code for America term for creating policies and programs that are engineered for citizen-consumers. Simply put, this means governments map out the logistical “how” of service delivery before jumping to create new programs, policies, or regulations. Data and testing are critical elements in this framework.

When asked what this means for the Biden Administration, especially after its first 100 days, O’Reilly was straightforward. Finding ideas for social good won’t be the problem, he said; the president’s biggest challenge will be taking the forward-thinking concepts and embodying them within tangible, hand-to-mouth programs.

“The thing that’s so important about this moment is we now have this meeting of policy ideas that are progressive, but the real worry is that if they’re not implemented well, everybody will say, ‘oh, that didn’t work,'” O’Reilly said.

President Biden’s current list of high priorities includes a $2.3 trillion infrastructure jobs plan, funding dedicated to improvements like rebuilding roads, maintaining bridges, and increasing broadband. He has a $1.8 trillion family plan, a bill that would expand preschool and college opportunities, provide family and medical leave, and distribute childcare subsidies.

These two bills accompany initiatives in climate change, immigration, bankruptcy reform, racial equity, and housing.

O’Reilly said delivery is an equally crucial determinant for success at the state, county, and city levels, adding the work demands an interplay of insightful policy and artful technology applications. He advised governments to support IT departments as a safeguard for managing services and making informed decisions. O’Reilly also discouraged the idea that governments only need to be brokers of digital services supplied by the private sector.

“I would say the first thing that we really need to get across is that technological capability should not be outsourced,” O’Reilly said. “We’ve been in the grip of a theory of government that says, ‘this tech stuff is just something you should buy from the outside,’—and while I think it’s really true that the government shouldn’t necessarily be building up this huge capacity and competing with the private sector—government should have the capability to understand and engage.”

The Obama Administration’s first attempts to roll out the Affordable Care Act via Healthcare.gov, the nation’s healthcare insurance exchange, exemplifies the concept. The controversial insurance exchange failed in its initial attempts due to a lack of digital expertise in the federal government. Its eventual launch and successful deployment came only after the White House brought in Silicon Valley talent and institutionalized modern IT management through in-house digital services groups like 18F and the U.S. Digital Service.

“Now at the federal level you have the U.S. Digital Service, you have 18F, you have the Defense Digital Service, where these groups are bringing the capability to come in, meet with a project manager, and say this contract just doesn’t make sense, but here’s how we can go about solving this problem.”

O’Reilly spotlighted the groups as examples local government can emulate. Cities and counties might not have the budget to replicate the groups, but O’Reilly said local jurisdictions could empower their IT staff or IT departments with added authority, resources, and internal support from leadership. Ultimately, he said that this backing translates into a better, data-driven government that produces results.

“We have all these arguments in our country that a [government] program should be this way or that way, and we haven’t interrogated enough if we did what we intended to do,” O’Reilly said.

Code for America, which has assisted dozens of cities and local agencies with digital transformation projects since 2009, will hold its annual summit from June 12-13. Check back here for news coverage of its summit focused on digital solutions for social equity.

New report calls for government innovation to solve digital inequities

by

The COVID-19 pandemic has unironically highlighted the digital divide, especially considering how many Americans attend school and work meetings—or even shop—from the comfort of their homes. But, there’s no surprise that many Californians do not have broadband connectivity in their homes.

A new report from the National Urban League shows that both low-income and communities of color are often not entitled to the same luxuries. Only 54 percent of households bringing in $50,000 or less have internet access at home in contrast to the 84% of households with incomes of more than $75,000 annually. To break it down even further, here are the percentages of households who have broadband access by race: 80 percent of Asians, 72 percent of Whites, 66 percent of Latinos, 62 percent of Blacks, and 60 percent of Native Americans.

To make matters worse, the government has an incredibly antiquated approach to providing broadband services. Federal agencies have ancient technology, limited budgets, and almost no competition from private sector companies “to stay on the cutting edge of digital services and to prioritize citizen-centric experiences,” claims the National Urban League.

The report made a series of recommendations focused on government innovation, improving government service delivery, and investing in more modern technology to remedy this. The recommendations include establishing a Chief Innovation Officer at the Whitehouse, increasing the size of the Presidential Innovation Fellows Program, enabling federal employees to easily propose new ideas around better digital delivery of services, and redesigning federal websites and apps.

Incorporating more modern and innovative technology is critical to improving public services, especially for Californians with no time to navigate through possible solutions to their modern broadband crises. It’s essential to establish easily accessible and efficient government services for communities that have taken the hardest hit from the COVID-19 pandemic and need assistance.

Cradle to Career Data System Moves Closer to Reality

by

The architects of the first phase of the California Cradle-to-Career Data System have submitted the second of three reports outlining plans to connect data across various segments of education to benefit students and to inform educators and legislators in their policy and decision-making.

While California’s education system includes early education, K-12, community colleges and universities, data collected on students are not currently linked. The 2019 California Cradle-to-Career Data System Act set out requirements for the development of the statewide data infrastructure to address disparities and improve student outcomes by leveraging educational, workforce, financial aid and social service data.

Part of the 2019-2020 budget package, the system is supported with $10 million in one-time funds for workgroup planning and initial system development, which is being facilitated by WestEd, a nonprofit in San Francisco.

In December of last year, the workgroup assembled by WestEd recommended three projects: an integrated data system linking records from various state agencies, expansion of CaliforniaColleges.edu to school districts throughout the state, and an upgrade to eTranscript California to include specific skills students acquired through nontraditional learning.

Kathy Booth, WestEd’s project director for educational data and policy, said the pandemic’s devastating effects on the educational system and on students make development and implementation of an integrated system even more critical as educators try to track student outcomes and their need for social supports. She said the planning team, consisting of public and private entities, has put hundreds of hours of work into the project.

“We had more than 200 people in this process working through the minutia,” she said. “All the data is there; it just needs to be linked and made public. All of our partners have been in total agreement. The model is all ready to go. We just need the legislature to say yes.”

With existing data systems currently, students may encounter confusing college application and financial application processes, as well as delays in admissions or unexpected rejections because of inaccurate or inconsistent data. In addition, education leaders and lawmakers cannot easily access student outcome information or other data that could guide policy and close equity gaps.

The plan envisions a system with one-stop shopping for students to select and apply to California public colleges and apply for financial aid, streamlined admissions processing and placement. Students also will be able to opt in to see if they are eligible for state food and medical care services, as well as share documentation on skills or certifications they have acquired, along with their course records.

Educators will be able to track the status of their students’ college and financial aid applications so they can support them during the process. Lawmakers, researchers and advocates will have access to information on the long-term outcomes of students so they can figure out how to spend state funds to address inequities through education, workforce training and social services.

In its March 26 report, the Legislative Analyst’s Office agreed with the administration that an integrated data system is needed and made several recommendations it says are necessary to ensure its success. They include a requirement to use the state Department of Technology’s Project Approval Lifecycle (PAL) process to plan, verify and validate the system. PAL was developed to reduce the likelihood of massive tech failures, which have plagued many of the state’s data systems over the past several years.

Booth said that the Department of Technology has been very involved in the planning efforts and will recommend the appropriate procurement process once the system is under way. She also emphasized that the planning team has recommended a proof-of-concept pilot project – a teacher retention dashboard to help state policymakers better understand and address teacher shortages, which have been exacerbated by the pandemic. In addition to the pilot, a five-year implementation process is estimated to cost between $15 million and $20 million annually.

WestEd’s final report is expected June 30.

Subscribe

Subscribe

Subscribe to our email newsletter focused on climate change, energy, infrastructure, and technology. 

You have Successfully Subscribed!