PERFORMANCE METRICS & TRACKING

Version: 2.0.1 | Last Updated: October 12, 2025

Dave Biggers Administration – Measuring Success from Day 1

Candidate: Dave Biggers
Website: rundaverun.org
Purpose: Define metrics, establish baselines, track progress, ensure accountability

—

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

“What gets measured gets managed.” This framework establishes how the Biggers administration will measure success, track progress, and maintain accountability throughout the 4-year transformation.

Core Principles:

• Transparency: All data public
• Consistency: Same metrics over time
• Honesty: Report good and bad
• Action: Data drives decisions
• Accountability: Regular public reporting

Three Types of Metrics:
1. Output Metrics – What we built/did
2. Outcome Metrics – What changed/improved
3. Impact Metrics – How Louisville benefits

—

BASELINE MEASUREMENTS (2025)

Before We Can Measure Progress, We Need Starting Points:

Public Safety Baselines (2025):

• Total crime rate: [Current Louisville rate]
• Violent crime rate: [Current rate]
• Property crime rate: [Current rate]
• Average police response time: 15-20 minutes citywide
• 911 call volume: [Current daily average]
• Mental health crisis calls: [Current monthly average]
• Arrests for mental health crisis: [Current rate]

Community Health Baselines (2025):

• ER visits for mental health crisis: [Current monthly]
• ER visits for substance abuse: [Current monthly]
• Overdose deaths: [Current annual rate]
• Homeless population: [Current estimate]
• Uninsured rate: [Current %]

Community Satisfaction Baselines (2025):

• Trust in police: [Current survey %]
• Feel safe in neighborhood: [Current %]
• Satisfaction with city services: [Current %]
• Community cohesion index: [Baseline measure]

Economic Baselines (2025):

• Property values: [Current average]
• Business climate index: [Current score]
• Employment rate: [Current %]
• Violent crime cost to economy: [Current estimate]

First Week of Administration:

• Commission comprehensive baseline study
• Partner with University of Louisville for data collection
• Establish methodology for ongoing measurement
• Publish baseline report within 60 days

—

CATEGORY 1: INFRASTRUCTURE METRICS (Output)

What We’re Building and Deploying

Mini Police Substations:

Track:

• Number of substations completed
• Number operational (24/7 coverage)
• Total square footage built
• Construction timeline adherence
• Budget adherence per station

Targets:

• Year 1: 3 operational, 9 under construction
• Year 2: 18 operational
• Year 3: 40 operational
• Year 4: 46 operational (100%)

Monthly Report Includes:

• Current count (operational vs. under construction)
• Photos of progress
• Community input received
• Timeline status (on/ahead/behind schedule)
• Budget status (on/over/under budget)

Public Dashboard:

• Interactive map showing all 46 planned locations
• Status of each (planned/design/construction/operational)
• Community input opportunities
• Photos and updates

—

Wellness Centers:

Track:

• Number of centers operational
• Services offered at each
• Hours of operation
• Staffing levels
• Partnership agreements

Targets:

• Year 1: 1 operational, 2 under construction
• Year 2: 6 operational
• Year 3: 18 operational (100%)
• Year 4: Optimization and expansion

Monthly Report Includes:

• Current operational count
• Construction progress
• Partnership development
• Service expansion
• Budget status

Public Dashboard:

• Map of 18 planned locations
• Status of each center
• Services available
• Hours and contact info

—

Co-Responder Teams:

Track:

• Number of teams deployed
• Coverage areas
• Team composition (officers + professionals)
• Training completed
• Equipment/vehicle status

Targets:

• Year 1: 6 teams citywide
• Year 2: 10 teams
• Year 3-4: Full citywide coverage

Monthly Report Includes:

• Number of active teams
• Coverage map
• Training completion rates
• Response capability

—

Participatory Budgeting:

Track:

• Dollar amount allocated
• Number of participants
• Projects proposed
• Projects voted on
• Projects completed

Targets:

• $6 million annually ($1M per district)
• 15,000+ participants Year 1
• 25,000+ participants Year 2
• 100+ community projects funded over 4 years

Annual Report Includes:

• Participation rates by district
• Projects selected
• Projects completed
• Impact stories
• Year-over-year growth

—

CATEGORY 2: OPERATIONAL METRICS (Output)

How the System is Functioning

Response Times:

Track:

• Average response time (citywide)
• Average response time (by district)
• Average response time (by call type)
• Response time trends over time
• Benchmark against national standards

Targets:

• Year 1: Reduce average from 15-20 min to 12 min
• Year 2: Reduce to 8 minutes
• Year 3: Reduce to 5 minutes
• Year 4: Sustain <5 minutes

Monthly Report:

• Citywide average
• District breakdowns
• Call type analysis
• Month-over-month trends
• Areas needing improvement

Dashboard:

• Real-time response time tracker
• Heat map of response times by area
• Historical trends
• Comparison to baseline

—

Call Volume and Distribution:

Track:

• Total 911 calls
• Calls by type (crime/mental health/medical/other)
• Repeat calls (same address within 30 days)
• Call resolution rate
• Calls diverted to co-responders

Targets:

• Reduce repeat calls by 30% by Year 2
• Divert 40% of mental health calls to co-responders by Year 2
• Improve resolution rate to 85%+ by Year 3

Monthly Report:

• Call volume trends
• Type distribution
• Repeat call analysis
• Diversion success rates

—

Staffing and Deployment:

Track:

• Officer count (by assignment)
• Mental health professional count
• Social worker count
• Vacancy rates
• Training completion rates
• Overtime hours
• Sick days/burnout indicators

Targets:

• Maintain full staffing (95%+ filled positions)
• Reduce officer overtime by 20% (better deployment)
• Increase retention by 25%
• Zero layoffs

Quarterly Report:

• Staffing levels
• Recruitment success
• Retention rates
• Training completion
• Morale indicators

—

Wellness Center Operations:

Track:

• Clients served (unduplicated count)
• Visits/interactions
• Services provided (by type)
• Wait times for appointments
• Follow-up adherence rates
• Client satisfaction
• Referral sources
• Outcomes (housing secured, jobs obtained, etc.)

Targets:

• Year 1: 500+ clients/month at first center
• Year 2: 3,000+ clients/month at 6 centers
• Year 3: 7,000+ clients/month at 18 centers
• Year 4: 10,000+ clients/month (optimization)

Monthly Report:

• Client count (total and by center)
• Service breakdowns
• Wait times
• Success stories
• Challenges

Dashboard:

• Live client count
• Services provided
• Wait time tracker
• Satisfaction scores
• Impact stories

—

CATEGORY 3: OUTCOME METRICS (Results)

What’s Actually Changing

Crime Reduction:

Track:

• Total crime rate (per 100,000)
• Violent crime rate
• Property crime rate
• Crime by district
• Crime by type
• Clearance rates (cases solved)
• Trends over time

Targets:

• Year 1: 5-10% reduction in areas with substations
• Year 2: 15-20% reduction citywide
• Year 3: 25-35% reduction citywide
• Year 4: 35-50% reduction (sustained)

Monthly Report:

• Crime statistics (total and by category)
• Year-over-year comparisons
• District analyses
• Hot spot tracking
• Clearance rates

Dashboard:

• Real-time crime map
• Historical trends
• Comparison to baseline
• National comparison
• Substation impact zones

—

Mental Health Crisis Outcomes:

Track:

• Mental health 911 calls
• Arrests for mental health crisis
• Use of force in mental health calls
• ER visits for mental health crisis
• Hospitalization rates
• Successful diversion to treatment
• Repeat crisis calls (same individual)

Targets:

• Year 1: 20% reduction in mental health arrests
• Year 2: 40% reduction
• Year 3: 60% reduction
• Year 4: 70% reduction
• 50% reduction in repeat crisis calls by Year 3

Quarterly Report:

• Mental health call volumes
• Arrest rates
• Diversion success
• ER visit trends
• Repeat call analysis
• Success stories

—

Community Health Improvements:

Track:

• Overdose deaths
• ER visits for substance abuse
• Homelessness rates
• Uninsured rates
• Access to mental health care
• Primary care utilization
• Chronic disease management

Targets:

• Reduce overdose deaths 20% by Year 2
• Reduce ER visits for substance abuse 25% by Year 3
• Increase primary care access in underserved areas 40%
• Reduce homelessness 15% by Year 3

Annual Report:

• Health outcome trends
• Wellness center impact
• Community health indicators
• Disparities analysis
• Success stories

—

Community-Police Relations:

Track:

• Trust in police (survey)
• Satisfaction with police response
• Complaints against officers
• Use of force incidents
• Community policing interactions
• Officer-community events
• Perception of safety

Targets:

• Increase trust in police from [baseline] to 65% by Year 2
• Reduce complaints by 25% by Year 2
• Reduce use of force by 30% by Year 3
• Increase “feel safe” perception from [baseline] to 75% by Year 3

Semi-Annual Survey:

• Trust and satisfaction levels
• Feeling of safety
• Police interaction quality
• Suggestions for improvement
• Demographic breakdowns

Monthly Report:

• Complaint trends
• Use of force incidents
• Community engagement activities
• Officer feedback

—

Officer Wellbeing:

Track:

• Officer satisfaction (survey)
• Retention rates
• Recruitment success
• Training completion
• Burnout indicators
• Sick days
• Workers comp claims
• PTSD support utilization

Targets:

• Increase officer satisfaction 30% by Year 2
• Improve retention by 25% by Year 2
• Reduce burnout indicators 40% by Year 3

Quarterly Report:

• Satisfaction survey results
• Retention and recruitment data
• Health and wellness indicators
• Support program utilization
• Officer testimonials

—

CATEGORY 4: IMPACT METRICS (Broader Effects)

How Louisville Benefits Overall

Economic Impact:

Track:

• Property values (by district)
• Business openings/closings
• Employment rates
• Tourism indicators
• Economic development investment
• Cost savings from crime reduction
• Tax revenue impact

Targets:

• Property values increase 10-15% in substation areas by Year 3
• Business climate index improves 20% by Year 3
• Economic benefit of crime reduction: $50M+ annually by Year 4

Annual Report:

• Economic indicators
• Property value trends
• Business climate
• Cost-benefit analysis
• Return on investment

—

Quality of Life:

Track:

• Resident satisfaction (overall)
• Neighborhood cohesion
• Civic engagement
• Park usage
• Community events participation
• Volunteerism rates
• Migration patterns (people moving in/out)

Targets:

• Overall satisfaction increase 25% by Year 3
• Community cohesion up 30% by Year 3
• Civic engagement doubled by Year 4

Annual Survey:

• Quality of life indicators
• Neighborhood satisfaction
• Community engagement
• Areas for improvement

—

National Recognition:

Track:

• Media coverage (local/national)
• Research publications about Louisville
• Cities adopting Louisville model
• Conference presentations
• Academic partnerships
• Awards and recognition
• Visiting delegations

Targets:

• 20+ cities studying Louisville model by Year 3
• 10+ peer-reviewed publications by Year 4
• National model status achieved by Year 2

Annual Report:

• Media mentions
• Research output
• Replication efforts
• Recognition received
• Knowledge sharing

—

REPORTING STRUCTURE

Daily (Internal Only):

• Response time tracking
• Call volume monitoring
• Staffing levels
• Incident reports
• System alerts

Weekly (Internal + Key Stakeholders):

• Weekly summary report
• Notable incidents
• Progress updates
• Challenges identified
• Action items

Monthly (Public):

• Comprehensive public report
• All key metrics
• Progress on construction
• Budget status
• Community feedback summary
• Success stories
• Challenges and solutions

Published:

• Website (rundaverun.org/progress)
• Email to subscribers
• Social media highlights
• Media release

Quarterly (Public):

• Deep dive analysis
• Trend identification
• Comparative analysis
• Lessons learned
• Strategic adjustments
• Community survey results

Format:

• Written report
• Public presentation/town hall
• Q&A session
• Data visualizations
• Video summary

Annual (Public):

• Comprehensive year in review
• All metrics analyzed
• Independent evaluation
• Financial audit
• Community satisfaction survey
• Research findings
• Next year projections

Format:

• Major report (50-100 pages)
• Executive summary
• Public event
• Media briefing
• Academic publication
• Website dashboard

—

DATA COLLECTION METHODS

Quantitative Data:

Sources:

• LMPD data systems
• 911 call center data
• Wellness center electronic health records
• Financial systems
• Construction project management
• Survey instruments
• Hospital data (partnerships)
• Public records

Tools:

• Data analytics platform
• Automated dashboards
• GIS mapping systems
• Survey tools
• Database management

Quality Assurance:

• Regular audits
• Cross-validation
• Third-party verification
• Academic partnership review
• Transparent methodology

—

Qualitative Data:

Sources:

• Community surveys
• Focus groups
• Officer interviews
• Client testimonials
• Community feedback
• Media analysis
• Social media sentiment
• Case studies

Methods:

• Annual community survey (1,000+ residents)
• Quarterly focus groups (diverse participants)
• Semi-annual officer surveys
• Monthly community meetings feedback
• Ongoing client satisfaction surveys
• Success story collection

Analysis:

• Thematic coding
• Sentiment analysis
• Narrative synthesis
• Pattern identification
• Contextual understanding

—

PUBLIC TRANSPARENCY

Online Dashboard (rundaverun.org/metrics):

Features:

• Real-time data updates
• Interactive maps
• Trend graphs
• Comparative analysis
• Downloadable datasets
• Historical archives
• User-friendly interface
• Mobile optimized

Data Available:

• All public safety metrics
• Construction progress
• Budget expenditures
• Community engagement
• Survey results
• Research findings

Updates:

• Daily: Response times, call volumes
• Weekly: Summary statistics
• Monthly: Full report
• Quarterly: Deep analysis
• Annual: Comprehensive review

—

Community Access:

Public Data Requests:

• Formal request process
• 7-day response time
• Reasonable costs only
• Maximum transparency
• Privacy protections maintained

Community Meetings:

• Monthly data review sessions
• District-specific reports
• Q&A opportunities
• Feedback mechanisms
• Action item tracking

Media Engagement:

• Monthly press briefings
• Data journalism support
• Expert interviews available
• Fact-checking resources
• Proactive transparency

—

ACCOUNTABILITY MECHANISMS

Internal Accountability:

Weekly:

• Senior staff review
• Progress tracking
• Problem identification
• Resource allocation
• Action planning

Monthly:

• Cabinet review
• Metric analysis
• Adjustment decisions
• Budget monitoring
• Strategic planning

Quarterly:

• Comprehensive review
• Independent evaluation
• Community input integration
• Strategic pivots if needed
• Board/commission updates

—

External Accountability:

Metro Council:

• Quarterly briefings
• Annual budget review
• Committee testimonies
• Question periods
• Collaborative oversight

Community:

• Monthly town halls
• Online feedback
• Survey input
• Focus groups
• Advisory councils

Independent Evaluation:

• Annual third-party assessment
• Academic research partnerships
• Financial audits
• Performance evaluation
• Recommendations for improvement

—

CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESS

Data → Insight → Action:

Step 1: Monitor

• Collect data continuously
• Review dashboards regularly
• Identify trends and anomalies
• Flag concerns immediately

Step 2: Analyze

• Deep dive into concerning trends
• Root cause analysis
• Comparative analysis
• Stakeholder input

Step 3: Decide

• Determine if action needed
• Develop solution options
• Assess cost-benefit
• Select best approach

Step 4: Act

• Implement changes
• Communicate adjustments
• Monitor impact
• Refine as needed

Step 5: Evaluate

• Measure effectiveness
• Document lessons learned
• Share findings
• Institutionalize improvements

—

EXAMPLE METRICS IN ACTION

Scenario 1: Response Times Not Improving in District 3

Data Shows:

• District 3 response times stuck at 18 minutes
• Other districts improving

Analysis:

• Substation not yet operational in District 3
• Traffic patterns causing delays
• Staffing gaps during peak hours

Action:

• Accelerate District 3 substation construction
• Adjust deployment schedules
• Temporary mobile unit deployed
• Traffic pattern study commissioned

Result:

• Response times drop to 12 minutes within 2 months
• Continue monitoring and optimization

—

Scenario 2: Wellness Center Underutilized

Data Shows:

• Wellness Center #2 serving only 200 clients/month (target: 500)
• Long wait times for appointments despite low utilization

Analysis:

• Location not accessible by public transit
• Hours don’t match community work schedules
• Lack of awareness in community

Action:

• Extend evening hours
• Launch community awareness campaign
• Partner with churches for transportation
• Mobile services piloted

Result:

• Client count increases to 450/month within 3 months
• Satisfaction improves
• Appointments fill quickly

—

Scenario 3: Crime Increasing in One Neighborhood

Data Shows:

• Crime up 15% in Phoenix Hill despite citywide decline
• Mostly property crimes

Analysis:

• New business district attracting external criminals
• Lighting inadequate
• Limited police presence at night
• No substation nearby yet

Action:

• Increase patrol frequency
• Improve lighting (participatory budgeting funds)
• Community watch program strengthened
• Prioritize substation in area

Result:

• Crime returns to baseline within 4 months
• Substation breaks ground
• Community engagement strengthens

—

BENCHMARKING

Compare Louisville to:

Peer Cities:

• Similar size cities (500K-1M metro)
• Similar demographics
• Similar challenges
• Current performance vs. Louisville

Model Cities:

• Boston (CAHOOTS-style programs)
• Newark (mini substation approach)
• Eugene, OR (co-responder pioneer)
• Oakland (comprehensive transformation)

National Averages:

• Crime rates
• Response times
• Community satisfaction
• Cost per capita

Ourselves Over Time:

• Year-over-year improvement
• Progress toward targets
• Sustainability of gains
• Emerging challenges

—

SUCCESS CRITERIA

By End of Year 1:

✅ 3 substations operational with <10 min response times
✅ 1 wellness center serving 500+ monthly
✅ Co-responder program citywide
✅ Crime down 5-10% in substation areas
✅ Community satisfaction improving
✅ All data public and transparent

By End of Year 2:

✅ 18 substations operational
✅ 6 wellness centers serving 3,000+ monthly
✅ Crime down 15-20% citywide
✅ Response times <8 minutes average
✅ Trust in police improving significantly
✅ National recognition emerging

By End of Year 3:

✅ 40 substations operational
✅ 18 wellness centers serving 7,000+ monthly
✅ Crime down 25-35% citywide
✅ Response times <5 minutes average
✅ Louisville as national model
✅ Measurable economic benefits

By End of Year 4:

✅ All 63 substations operational
✅ All 18 wellness centers optimized
✅ Crime down 35-50% citywide
✅ Response times sustained <5 minutes
✅ Promises 100% kept
✅ Louisville leading the nation

—

FINAL THOUGHTS

Metrics matter because accountability matters.

This framework ensures:
✅ Transparency – All data public
✅ Honesty – Report good and bad
✅ Action – Data drives decisions
✅ Improvement – Continuous learning
✅ Accountability – Regular reporting

We will measure what matters, track our progress, and show Louisville that evidence-based governance delivers results.

The data will speak for itself. ????

rundaverun.org/metrics

—

Performance Metrics & Tracking | Created October 2025 | For Dave Biggers Mayoral Campaign