State economic development web sites dana calcaterra october 2002
Sponsored Links
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
1 / 13

State Economic Development Web Sites Dana Calcaterra October 2002 PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

State Economic Development Web Sites Dana Calcaterra October 2002. Results of Web Sites Comparison FY 2002. State Web Sites Reviewed. Alabama Alaska Arizona

Download Presentation

State Economic Development Web Sites Dana Calcaterra October 2002

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript

State Economic Development Web SitesDana CalcaterraOctober 2002

Results of Web Sites ComparisonFY 2002

State Web Sites Reviewed

  • Alabama

  • Alaska

  • Arizona

  • Arkansas

  • California

  • Colorado

  • Connecticut

  • Delaware

  • Florida

  • Georgia

  • Hawaii

  • Idaho

  • Illinois

  • Indiana

  • Iowa

  • Kansas

  • Kentucky

  • Louisiana

  • Maine

  • Maryland

  • Massachusetts

  • Michigan

  • Minnesota

  • Mississippi

  • Missouri

  • Montana

  • Nebraska

  • Nevada

  • New Hampshire

  • New Jersey

  • New Mexico

State Web Sites Reviewed(continued)

  • New York OR

  • North Carolina

  • North Dakota

  • Ohio

  • Oklahoma

  • Oregon

  • Pennsylvania

  • Rhode Island

  • South Carolina

  • South Dakota

  • Tennessee

  • Texas

  • Utah

  • Vermont

  • Virginia

  • Washington

  • West Virginia

  • Wisconsin

  • Wyoming






North Carolina





2002 Result HighlightsTop 5 Rated Web Sites Overall

Results were determined based on overall performance using the criteria listed in this report.

Web Site Review Criteria

  • Navigation

  • Design

  • Property Search Engine

  • Site Information

  • Building Information

  • Community Information

The criteria below was reviewed withequal importance and given a grade of

one of the following:

E = Excellent G = Good

A = Average P = Poor


Y = Yes N = No





The following pages provide a graphical representation of the State Web Sites Review findings

Navigation rating was determined by the ease of locating informationincluding the “3-click” rule. Design was rated upon the appeal of the

web site “look and feel”.





Below is a graphical representation of the reviewed State Web Sites



Of the Web Sites with Property Search Engines, 27% used some type of image map to aid in searching capabilities.

Findings were determined by whether a site had a property search engine as well

as how useful the search engine/s were. Decisions were made based upon the

listed search criteria; if visitor information was required prior to searching, if an

image map was used, if both Sites and Buildings had searching capability, and in

what form the results were provided.









Below is a graphical representation of the reviewed State Web Sites

Web Sites Providing Site Information

Of those who provided Site Information the ratings are as follows:

Excellent = 12%

Good = 30%

Average = 31%

Poor = 27%

Web Sites Providing Building Information

Of those who provided Building Information the ratings are as follows:

Excellent = 13%

Good = 33%

Average = 29%

Poor = 25%

Findings were determined by how useful the Site and/or Building Information was; if detailed information was given along with contact information as well as maps or images. Also critiqued was whether the information given was printable and looked pleasing to the eye.



The following pages provide a graphical representation of the State Web Sites Review findings

Web Site Providing Community Information

Of those who provided Community Information the ratings are as follows:

Excellent = 51%

Good = 19%

Average = 6%

Poor = 24%

  • The following were also taken into consideration when rating the state Economic Development web sites:

  • Building/Site Submission Ability

  • Multi-Language Site

  • “Printer Friendly” web pages

  • Screen scrolling


According to a recent study given by Development Counselors International (DCI), more and more executives indicate a strong likelihood that they would use an economic development organization’s web site in their next site location search. When asked what features of Economic Development Web Sites were the most valuable, the top three responses were as follows:

  • Information on Incentives

  • Demographic Information

  • Directory of available sites & buildings

    It is important to design a web site with informative content, effective structure and navigation (3-Click rule), visual design which is aesthetically pleasing, functionality and interactivity which will give the user a good overall experience and give you repeat visits. Mark James, CED of ED Solutions, Inc. includes this criteria in the four critical elements he looks for in an economic development web site which include: design, functionality, performance, and marketing.

    Our goal for EDIS (Economic Development Information System) is this. We strive to have the most current and up-to-date information for our prospective clients to navigate with ease. We not only make this information available for our clients but to also assist our community development organizations to utilize on their individual web sites.

Web Site Examples

Positive Aspects










    Negative Aspects








(% of respondents who selected each feature)

(2002 Survey)

Feature 2002

Information on available incentives 78%

Demographic information 75%

Directory of available buildings & sites61%

Current comparisons to competitor locations45%

List of leading local employers 44%

Information on the community’s target industries30%

Information on quality of life 28%

Information on local schools 25%

Photos/maps of the community 21%

News sections that describes current developments17%

Testimonials from local companies 16%

Website sitemap 9%

These questions were not asked in previous surveys, therefore comparative data is not



Schmeiser, David A. (1988). The Native Offender and the Law. Ottawa: Law Reform Commission of Canada.

Turk, A.T. (1996) "Law, Conflict and Order: From Theorizing Toward Theories". Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology 23(3) 282-294.

Citing Internet Sources:

Development Counselors International (DCI), ”A View from Corporate America: Winning Strategies in the Economic Development Marketing Game 2002, <>

Mark J. James, CEDEd Solutions, Inc.<>

The criteria set for this report was obtained from the listed references above.

  • Login