State Economic Development Web Sites Dana Calcaterra October 2002

1. State Economic Development Web SitesDana CalcaterraOctober 2002 Results of Web Sites ComparisonFY 2002

2. State Web Sites Reviewed • Alabama http://www.ado.state.al.us/ • Alaska http://www.dced.state.ak.us/cbd/ • Arizona http://www.az.gov/webapp/portal/ • Arkansas http://www.aedc.state.ar.us/ • California http://wwwedd.cahwnet.gov/ • Colorado http://www.state.co.us/oed/index.cfm • Connecticut http://www.state.ct.us/ecd/ • Delaware http://www.delaware.gov/yahoo/Business • Florida http://www.eflorida.com/ • Georgia http://www.state.ga.us/index/topic_pages.cgi?topic_id=1 • Hawaii http://www.hawaii.gov/dbedt • Idaho http://www.idoc.state.id.us/ • Illinois http://www.commerce.state.il.us/ • Indiana http://www.state.in.us/doc/ • Iowa http://www.state.ia.us/ided/index.html • Kansas http://www.accesskansas.org/ • Kentucky http://www.thinkkentucky.com • Louisiana http://www.lded.state.la.us/ • Maine http://www.econdevmaine.com/ • Maryland http://www.mdbusiness.state.md.us/ • Massachusetts http://www.state.ma.us/econ/ • Michigan http://medc.michigan.org • Minnesota http://www.dted.state.mn.us/ • Mississippi http://www.decd.state.ms.us • Missouri http://www.ded.state.mo.us/ • Montana http://commerce.state.mt.us/ • Nebraska http://www.neded.org/ • Nevada http://www.expand2nevada.com/newsite/index.html • New Hampshire http://www.nheconomy.com/ • New Jersey http://www.state.nj.us/commerce/index.htm • New Mexico http://www.edd.state.nm.us/

3. State Web Sites Reviewed(continued) • New York http://www.empire.state.ny.us/ OR http://www.nysedc.org • North Carolina http://www.commerce.state.nc.us/categories/business.htm • North Dakota http://www.growingnd.com/ • Ohio http://www.odod.state.oh.us/EconomicDevelopment.htm • Oklahoma http://www.odoc.state.ok.us/index.html • Oregon http://www.econ.state.or.us/ • Pennsylvania http://www.inventpa.com/ • Rhode Island http://www.riedc.com/ • South Carolina http://www.callsouthcarolina.com/ • South Dakota http://www.sdgreatprofits.com/ • Tennessee http://www.state.tn.us/ecd/ • Texas http://www.tded.state.tx.us/ • Utah http://dced.utah.gov/DBED/welcome.htm • Vermont http://www.thinkvermont.com/ • Virginia http://www.commerce.state.va.us/bizServices/econDev.cfm • Washington http://www.oted.wa.gov/index.htm • West Virginia http://www.wvdo.org/ • Wisconsin http://www.commerce.state.wi.us/ • Wyoming http://www.state.wy.us/business.asp

4. 1 Maryland 2 Kentucky 3 North Carolina 4 Alabama 5 Mississippi 2002 Result HighlightsTop 5 Rated Web Sites Overall Results were determined based on overall performance using the criteria listed in this report.

5. 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 and/or Y = Yes N = No

6. Excellent Good Average Poor 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”.

7. Excellent Good Average Poor Below is a graphical representation of the reviewed State Web Sites Yes No 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.

8. Yes No Yes 46% 43% 54% 57% No 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.

9. Yes No 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

10. Summary 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.

11. Web Site Examples Positive Aspects • www.gradd.com • www.awnc.org • www.swidc.org • www.ucky.com • www.hendersonedc.com • www.northernkentuckyusa.com • http://www.tvida.com/ • http://www.lgeenergy.com/ • http://www.kuenergy.com/ Negative Aspects • www.amarillo-tx.com • www.copperascove-edu.com • www.garlandtx.com • www.shelbycountyindustrialfoundation.com • www.carrollcountyky.com

12. MOST USEFUL FEATURES OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ORGANIZATION’S WEBSITE (% of respondents who selected each feature) (2002 Survey) Feature 2002 Information on available incentives 78% Demographic information 75% Directory of available buildings & sites 61% Current comparisons to competitor locations 45% List of leading local employers 44% Information on the community’s target industries 30% Information on quality of life 28% Information on local schools 25% Photos/maps of the community 21% News sections that describes current developments 17% Testimonials from local companies 16% Website sitemap 9% These questions were not asked in previous surveys, therefore comparative data is not available.

13. References 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, <http://aboutdci.com/WinningStrategies.cfm.> Mark J. James, CEDEd Solutions, Inc.<http://www.solutionsed.com/index.htm> The criteria set for this report was obtained from the listed references above.