Review of the Broward Alliance, Inc., d/b/a the Greater Fort Lauderdale Alliance

March 28, 2011 Report No. 11-05

Office of the County Auditor Evan A. Lukic, CPA

County Auditor

Table of Contents

Topic Page

Executive Summary .......................................................................................................1

Purpose and Scope........................................................................................................2

Background ....................................................................................................................3

Finding 1 ........................................................................................................................8

Recommendation .......................................................................................................10

Finding 2 ......................................................................................................................10

Recommendation .......................................................................................................12

Finding 3 ......................................................................................................................12

Recommendation .......................................................................................................14

Appendix A...................................................................................................................15

Appendix B...................................................................................................................17

Executive Summary This report presents the results of our review of the Broward Alliance, Inc., d/b/a the Greater Fort Lauderdale Alliance (Alliance).

The purpose of this review is to (1) ascertain whether the Alliance has sufficient supporting documentation to validate data reported to the Board of County Commissioners, (2) determine whether the Alliance has adequate internal controls in place to ensure it reports reliable data, and (3) assess whether the Alliance has conducted adequate benchmarking and comparative analysis of peer agencies to identify best practices and modify operations to improve results.

Sufficiency of supporting documentation

To determine the reliability of data reported to the Board of County Commissioners, we conducted limited testing of FY 2009 and FY 2010 reported data for three important measures: $ Direct Capital Investment ROI, number of new value-added jobs, and number of retained jobs.

We found sufficient internal reporting consistency and adequate supporting documentation for most data reported to the Board. However, relatively weak supporting documentation for some reported data and some discrepancies between Alliance-reported jobs created data and data reported in the City of Sunrise website raise some data reliability questions.

Adequacy of internal controls

We found internal controls weaknesses that need to be addressed.

Specifically, we found the Alliance has:

Established good performance measure definitions for most data reported to the

Board but is missing definitions for activities such as what constitutes direct

capital investment and corporate visitations, and how ROI is calculated,

Not implemented routine and systematic independent supervisory review, which

is essential to ensure data reliability, and

No evidence of establishing security measures governing electronic databases or

conducting quarterly sample testing of data

Quality of benchmarking efforts

We found the Alliance has conducted ample benchmarking to identify best practices from high-performing organizations. Beginning in 2007, the Alliance contracted with economic development and business consulting firms to perform benchmarking analyses.

However, the Alliance should continue efforts begun in March 2011 to obtain pertinent performance data from peer agencies to enable a meaningful comparative evaluation of its relative efficiency and effectiveness.

1

Recommendations

To correct these deficiencies, we recommend the Board of County Commissioners direct the Alliance to:

1. Obtain better supporting documentation for performance data reported to the

Board, as appropriate, and reconcile discrepancies in job creation data reported

by Sunrise

2. Develop and implement written internal control policy and procedures that, at a

minimum, include complete measure definitions, require routine and systematic

independent supervisory review, and correct security and sample testing

deficiencies

3. Gather appropriate information from peer agencies necessary to facilitate a

comparative evaluation of important measures, including ROI and job

creation/retention

Purpose and Scope This report presents the results of our review of the Broward Alliance, Inc., d/b/a the Greater Fort Lauderdale Alliance (Alliance).

The purpose of this review is to (1) ascertain whether the Alliance has sufficient supporting documentation to validate data reported to the Board of County Commissioners, (2) determine whether the Alliance has sufficient internal controls in place to ensure it reports reliable data, and (3) assess whether the Alliance has conducted adequate benchmarking and comparative analysis of peer agencies to identify best practices and modify operations to improve results.

To accomplish our objectives, we:

Reviewed pertinent performance measurement, general management, and

economic development literature;

Reviewed applicable Florida Statutes, Administrative Code, and Broward County

ordinances pertaining to economic development;

Reviewed websites of peer economic development agencies;

Analyzed available performance data for Alliance operations;

Analyzed information provided by Alliance managers and staff relative to specific

management processes and controls;

Reviewed applicable Alliance records and documents, including relevant policies

and procedures; and

Interviewed Alliance managers and staff

2

Background The Broward Alliance, Inc., d/b/a the Greater Fort Lauderdale Alliance (Alliance), is Broward County’s official public/private partnership for economic development. The Alliance began operating as the Broward Economic Development Board in 1963, when it was created by the State of Florida.

The core business of the Alliance is to attract, retain and grow jobs and businesses as the marketing and business development partner of Broward County. The Alliance works to promote and develop Broward County’s market both domestically and internationally through promotion, brand development and business reputation building, as well as developing and implementing, with Broward County, strategies aimed at maximizing the survival, retention and expansion of existing businesses.

The mission of the Alliance is to lead Broward County in building a stronger and more diverse economy by:

Promoting increased public/private sector collaboration,

Delivering business development initiatives focused on new investment and job growth,

Enhancing the competitiveness of Broward’s business climate, and

Driving regional initiatives that support economic development

The Alliance’s Business Plan, approved by the Board of County Commissioners, establishes the Alliance’s objectives. According to the FY 2011 Business Plan, the “overall business targets” are:

Value Added Job Growth 700

Job Retention & Expansion 400

Capital Investment, Domestic $34 million

Capital Investment, Foreign $5 million

Private Sector Investment $1,389,500

Corporate Business Visitations 100

Appendix A, on page 15, outlines FY 2011 objectives by major work plan categories: Executive Office, Business Attraction, Business Development, Education-Workforce Development, Membership Development, and Marketing & Communications.

Alliance Services

Some of the services offered by the Alliance include:

Assisting with business relocation or expansion and site selection,

Determining a company’s eligibility for state and local business incentive programs,

Providing general research information such as demographic and trend data and more client-specific research information such as business cluster data analysis, workforce assessment, commercial real estate trends, and business cost analysis,

Conducting market research/business intelligence through its GIS Planning Greater Fort

3

Lauderdale ZoomProspector website,

Assisting small-, minority-, and women-owned businesses obtain financing, training and other human resources tools, and procurement opportunities , and

Serving as liaison for workforce development between WorkForce One, educational institutions and the business community

Alliance Organization

The Alliance serves as the primary point of contact and advocate for business clients seeking to do business in Broward County.

To perform its services, the Alliance works directly with numerous entities:

The Alliance works with the Broward County Office of Economic and Small Business Development to “leverage collective economic development unique strengths to sustain and enhance the economic growth, vitality, and global competitiveness of Broward County” and to identify potential “county incentives or other services, such as industrial revenue bonds or permitting assistance.”

The Alliance also serves as the primary point of contact with Enterprise Florida, the State of Florida’s official public/private economic development organization. This occurs as companies who have an interest in locating in Broward County are referred by Enterprise Florida to the Alliance, or if companies the Alliance is working with wish to apply for State of Florida incentives. See Appendix B on page 17 for a listing of Qualified Targeted Industries (QTI) for incentives.

The Alliance works with representatives of Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, Port Everglades, and the Greater Fort Lauderdale Convention and Visitors Bureau to enhance the economic strength of Broward County and promote Broward County as a first-class business destination.

In addition, the Alliance works with many other local, regional, state and national business and government support organizations to enhance its ability to provide services to its clients and for outreach to local companies. Examples of local and regional business organizations include: the U.S. Small Business Administration, Enterprise Development Corporation, Florida Regional Minority Business Council, Metro Broward, National Association of Industrial and Office Properties (NAIOP), Small Business Development Center, South Florida Regional Planning Council, and the U.S. Department of Commerce/Export Assistance Center.

Alliance Structure

The Alliance’s office is located in downtown Ft Lauderdale at 110 East Broward Boulevard.

For FY 2011, the Alliance operated with a staff of 11, including a CEO/President, three vice presidents, a managing director, a director of workforce development and five administrative support staff.

4

A Board of Directors provides policy direction, long-term strategic guidance, and directs the business and affairs of the Alliance. For FY 2011, the Board of Directors consisted of 65 voting and 8 non-voting members, including representatives from state and local government agencies, nonprofit agencies, educational institutions, and a wide range of private sector interests. A 16-member Executive Committee provides tactical guidance regarding the Alliance’s strategic business plan adopted by the Board of Directors. It also reviews the Alliance’s financial statements on a monthly basis and looks for immediate trends in expense and revenue deviations.

The Alliance has also established task-oriented, industry-driven Councils to provide the knowledge, expertise and leadership necessary for effective strategic planning. Each Council is composed of industry representatives. For FY 2011, the Alliance had the following six operating Councils: CEO; Governor; Leadership; Corporate; Entrepreneur; and Partner.

Alliance Business Clients

In the past five years (between 2006 and 2010), the Alliance reports providing assistance to more than 650 companies, which have created 5,625 direct jobs, retained 7,046 existing jobs, and added $390 million in new capital investment to Broward County.

These companies include small, medium and large businesses in targeted industries1

such as:

Headquarters;

Manufacturing;

Aviation and aerospace;

Financial and insurance services;

Information technology and telecommunications;

Professional, scientific and technical services; and

Marine industries and logistics

Alliance Resources

The Alliance receives funding through the Board of County Commissioners. Pursuant to chapters 125 and 205, Florida Statutes, and Article II, Chapter 20, Broward County Code of Ordinances, the County levies and collects an additional occupational license tax to fund the Alliance’s operations.

1 Although the Alliance also provides assistance to companies outside targeted industries such as retail

and hospitality establishments, they are not included in these statistics.

5

For FY 2010, $774,650 (37.8%) of the Alliance’s total revenues of $2,048,500 came from the Board of County Commissioners (see Exhibit 1 below).

Exhibit 1 County funding made up 38% of the Alliance’s FY 2010 revenues2

$774,650

$1,212,441

$61,409

FY 2010 Revenue Sources

Broward County

Dues

Other

Source: Prepared by Office of County Auditor staff using Alliance data

“Dues” include investor, chamber, CEO investor, and in-kind dues; “other” includes interest earned and private non-dues contributions

6

2

Exhibit 2 below shows the funding amounts provided to the Alliance from the Board of County Commissioners in the past ten years.

Exhibit 2 County funding of the Alliance declined by 22.8% in FY 2010

County Funding Amount by Fiscal Year

$1,300,000

$1,100,000

$900,000

$774,650 $700,000

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

$1,082,701 $1,078,377

$1,092,133 $1,142,535

$1,127,555

$1,201,100

$1,236,000

$1,003,080

$1,003,080

Source: Prepared by Office of County Auditor staff using Alliance Data

Exhibit 3 below shows the Alliance’s expenditures for the past five years.

Exhibit 3 Alliance expenses declined by 19% in FY 2010

Alliance Expenditures by Fiscal Year

$2,100,000

$2,000,000

$1,900,000

$1,800,000

$1,700,000

$1,600,000 $1,631,200

$1,500,000

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

$1,694,692

$1,523,511

$1,932,054

$2,014,954

Source: Prepared by Office of County Auditor staff using Alliance Data

7

Findings and Recommendations

Finding 1

Preliminary analysis of selected measures reveals adequate documentation but some discrepancies in reported data raises reliability concerns

In quarterly reports to the Board of County Commissioners, the Alliance reports performance data for various “market measures.” In FY 2010, for instance, the Alliance reported data for 13 measures, including outputs such as number of “domestic and international project leads” and “number of new value-added jobs;” efficiency measures such as “average monthly projects in pipeline;” and outcomes such as “$ Direct Capital Investment ROI.”

To determine the reliability of data reported to the Board of County Commissioners, we reviewed FY 2009 and FY 2010 reported data for three important measures3 as shown in Exhibit 4 below:

$ Direct Capital Investment ROI (Return-on-Investment)

Number of New Value-Added Jobs

Number of Retained Jobs

Exhibit 4 Data reported to the Board in the past two years for three important measures

Performance Measure FY 2009 FY 2010

$ Direct Capital Investment ROI Not reported $3.49

Number of New Value-Added Jobs 1,220 832

Number of Retained Jobs 782 943

Source: Prepared by Office of County Auditor staff using Alliance Data

We conducted limited testing of this data; specifically, consisting of the following methodologies:

Internal reporting consistency. A typical test to determine data reliability involves

comparing data reported in different documents. We compared data reported to

the Board to data contained in various internal Alliance reports. Data reliability

questions may arise if data from different sources do not match exactly. For

example, the number of jobs created in FY 2010 should be the same figure

regardless of where it is reported.

3 In discussions with Alliance managers, we selected to test these measures because they are (1) most closely associated with the Alliance’s mission, and (2) essential to the Alliance’s success.

8

Supporting documentation. Another common reliability test is to review evidence

provided by the reporting entity that supports or validates the reported data.

Thus, we requested that Alliance managers give us source documentation for the

reported data. Because Alliance managers stated that all supporting documents

are maintained electronically, we reviewed electronic records for all 24 projects

completed in fiscal years 2009 and 2010. Each project represents a business

that expanded or relocated to Broward County at least partly due to Alliance

efforts. Our review consisted of assessing the quality of evidence for 44 figures

reported by the Alliance relative to ROI and number of jobs created and retained

during our review period.

Third-party corroboration. Finally, another commonly used test consists of

obtaining corroborating evidence from sources external to the reporting entity.

Consequently, we reviewed websites for the 10 cities where the 24 businesses

are located. Our review revealed only two cities (Sunrise and Hollywood)

reported number of jobs created and/or retained on their websites for our review

period (fiscal years 2009 and 2010) for four businesses.

Our preliminary analysis shows sufficient internal reporting consistency and adequate supporting documentation for most data reported to the Board. However, relatively weak supporting documentation for some reported data and discrepancies between what the Alliance reported for number of jobs created and the figures reported by a city where two businesses are located raise some data reliability questions. Specifically, we found:

Few internal reporting discrepancies. Most of the internal documents we

reviewed reported consistent figures, with one relatively minor exception. In the

internal document entitled “Announced Economic Development Projects,” the

reported number of jobs created in FY 2007 was 1,242, which is 7 more than

what was reported to the Board. However, all other job creation/retention figures

for fiscal years 2006 through 2010 were the same in this document, and for other

internal reports, as reported to the Board.

Good supporting documentation for most data. Our review of electronic

records identified three basic levels of supporting documentation, listed in

descending order of adequacy: (1) “official” documents, such as a form or

application seeking incentive funding from a State of Florida agency; (2)

correspondence, including emails from the company indicating capital investment

and number of jobs; and (3) a “note to the file,” which includes estimates made

by Alliance staff, verbal conversations between company representatives and

Alliance staff, or on-site observations made by Alliance staff. Of the 44 figures

we reviewed, we found 24 (54.5%) had official documentation, 2 (4.5%) had

9

correspondence, and the remaining 18 (41%) had a note in the file as supporting

documentation. During our fieldwork, Alliance managers acknowledged that

much of the “note to the file” documentation could be strengthened by obtaining

written confirmation from company representatives.

Some discrepancies with reported city data. We found documentation for

jobs created and/or retained for 4 of the 24 businesses on the websites of the

cities of Sunrise and Hollywood. The number of jobs created and/or retained for

two businesses matched the Alliance-reported figures. However, there were

discrepancies in reported jobs created numbers for the other two businesses.

The Sunrise website listed those two businesses as generating 300 and 130 new

jobs, which is less than the Alliance-reported figures of 500 (40% fewer) and 150

(13% fewer), respectively; thus raising some question about the Alliance reported

data.

Recommendation

To address the documentation and discrepancy issues described in this finding, we recommend the Board of County Commissioners direct the Alliance to:

1. Obtain better supporting documentation from businesses for performance data reported to the Board, as appropriate, and reconcile discrepancies in job creation data reported by the City of Sunrise.

Finding 2

Better internal controls are necessary to ensure data reliability

According to the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), performance data should be reasonably timely, complete and accurate to be useful for budget allocation and policymaking purposes. To ensure reliable performance data, government agencies should implement internal controls, including:

establishing clear and unambiguous performance measure definitions,

having front line and middle managers independently review performance data,

implementing security procedures governing electronic recordkeeping, and

testing a sample of performance data at least quarterly

As part of our review, we requested that Alliance managers provide us with a written description of internal controls that are in place to ensure performance data reliability. We also asked them to submit supporting documentation for existing internal controls such as written procedures, guidelines, memoranda, etc.

10

Our review of the information provided to us revealed some internal control weaknesses that should be addressed, including:

Measure definitions could be refined. Alliance managers provided us with

evidence of guidelines going back to July 2004. These guidelines offer helpful

instructions to staff and volunteers in terms of outreach and business assistance

activities. In addition, managers provided us with documents showing good

written performance measure definitions for most measures reported to the

Board. For example, they clearly define (1) what constitutes a small, mid-market

and large company, (2) variations in types of projects staff are engaged in, and

(3) conditions that should be met to deem when a job is “created” and “retained.”

However, the most current document dated January 2, 2010, is missing

definitions for what constitutes a “corporate visitation,” what comprises a “direct

capital investment,” and how Return-on-Investment (ROI) is calculated. Adding

these definitions to the current document is important to ensure consistency in

collecting data from year to year, which is essential to ensuring data reliability.

Independent review is not routine or systematic. An objective review of

performance data by someone other than the person responsible for collecting it

is crucial to identify data entry or calculation errors thus ensuring accurate data is

reported to the Board. Our review of electronic databases and interviews with

Alliance managers indicates top management conducted some independent

review of some data reported to the Board. It is more difficult, but not impractical,

for an entity with relatively few staff like the Alliance to meet this best practice.

During our fieldwork, Alliance managers acknowledged some deficiencies in this

regard and said they would implement more routine and systematic independent

supervisory review of critical performance data.

No evidence of security procedures. Our review of Alliance-submitted

information revealed a lack of written procedures, guidelines or memoranda to

ensure data is securely maintained in electronic databases. Alliance managers

did not provide us with sufficient supporting documentation to demonstrate

adequate database security measures are in place.

No evidence of sample testing. Our review of Alliance-submitted information

revealed a lack of written procedures, guidelines or memoranda demonstrating

evidence of quarterly testing of data reported to the Board. Alliance managers

did not provide us with sufficient supporting documentation to demonstrate any

sample testing had ever been done.

11

Recommendation

To address the internal control deficiencies described in this finding, we recommend that the Board of County Commissioners direct the Alliance to:

2. Develop and implement written internal control policy and procedures that, at a

minimum, include complete measure definitions, require routine and systematic

independent supervisory review, and correct security and sample testing

deficiencies.

Finding 3

The Alliance has done considerable benchmarking; continuing to gather more performance data from peers will facilitate meaningful comparative analyses

The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) recommends benchmarking as a method of obtaining information that can be used to identify inefficient practices and develop strategies to achieve better results. Benchmarking refers to “performance comparisons of organizational business processes against an internal or external standard of recognized leaders.” To ensure optimal performance in its operations, managers should systematically and routinely compare its performance against those of peer agencies that provide similar services.

To assess the quality of the Alliance’s benchmarking efforts, we requested that Alliance managers provide us with benchmarking and any other comparative analyses of its performance against comparable agencies conducted either internally or by outside consultants in the past several years. We asked them to submit a written description of (1) specific criteria they used to identify their peer economic development agencies, (2) which economic development agencies they consider to be leading or high-performing and specific factors making them so, and (3) how they used benchmarking results to improve the Alliance’s operations and impact, especially related to creating and retaining jobs.

Based on our review of the submitted information and interviews with Alliance managers, we conclude that:

Since 2007, the Alliance has contracted for a substantial amount of

benchmarking and comparative analyses especially relating to identifying best

practices in similar, high-performing organizations; and

In March 2011, the Alliance initiated efforts that will facilitate a meaningful

comparative evaluation of its performance against peer agencies

12

Prior benchmarking activities

The Alliance provided evidence of having conducted ample benchmarking and comparative analyses in recent years. Beginning in 2007,4 the Alliance contracted with firms specializing in economic development and business consulting to perform benchmarking and comparative analyses. The following highlights some of what we believe are the more pertinent studies:5

2007 KMK Consulting study. The primary objective of this “leadership and

process assessment” of the Alliance was to review the Alliance’s “current

programs, scope of work, leadership, governance, funding, and overall

performance.” This assessment identified best practices and “best-of-class”

organizations and provided the Alliance with specific guidance relative to

company attraction/retention, accreditation, private sector leadership,

organizational planning and strategic issue analysis.6 Alliance managers told us

this study “laid the foundation” for establishing the Alliance’s current structure,

including among other things being the impetus for creating the CEO Council.

2008 Moran, Stahl and Boyer study. This study included a benchmarking

analysis that compared Fort Lauderdale/Broward County to three “sender” cities

(Chicago, New York City and Hartford, CT) and 9 “headquarter” cities within the

Southern region including Miami, Orlando and Tampa. It provided “direct”

comparative information on factors related to headquarters relocation such as

types and compositions of headquarters, why headquarters are relocated, risks

associated with relocation and relocation costs vs. benefits. Alliance managers

told us this study enabled them to develop a framework and strategies to attract

and retain corporate and regional headquarters, which is a major Alliance goal.

2010 Biggins, Lacy, Shapiro & Company study. The purpose of this study is

to “conduct an independent evaluation of the area’s economic development

incentive programs and strategies, and how they compare with competing and

market-leading approaches being employed by other jurisdictions both within and

outside the State of Florida.” Included in this study’s scope are identifying and

reviewing incentive strategies and alternative economic development programs.

This study analyzed “national and state market-leading approaches and

alternative methodologies for measuring return-on-investment and economic

impact.”

4 Prior to 2007 the Alliance had not internally conducted or externally contracted for benchmarking and/or

comparative analyses since 1999. 5

Alliance managers gave us evidence showing these studies were paid for using only private funds. 6

Among the peer agencies reviewed were economic development organizations within Florida (Collier, Hillsborough, Miami-Dade, Orange and Palm Beach counties) and outside Florida (Baltimore, MD; Charlotte, NC; Cincinnati, OH; and Honolulu, HI)

13

Current internal benchmarking efforts

In March 2011, the Alliance began compiling comparative information about its two primary peer agencies: Miami-Dade Beacon Council and Business Development Board of Palm Beach County. Alliance staff obtained data for several important indicators (e.g., jobs created, jobs retained, capital investment and announced projects) for the past five fiscal years (i.e., fiscal years 2006 through 2010). This effort augments a May 2008 internal effort that identified the level of private and public sector support for the Alliance compared to three peer agencies: Miami-Dade Beacon Council, Business Development Board of Palm Beach, and Metro Orlando Economic Development Council.

While these efforts are reasonable and appropriate, they alone provide insufficient information to enable a comparative analysis of the Alliance’s performance to these peer agencies. For example, reporting a peer agency’s job creation/retention numbers without taking into account their level of input in terms of resources lacks appropriate context thus invalidating any comparative analysis.

To effectively assess the Alliance’s relative efficiency and effectiveness necessitates obtaining additional information. For example, to calculate Return-on-Investment (ROI) the Alliance will need annual expenditure data for each of their peer agencies. ROI is calculated by dividing total capital investment by total agency expenditures. Similarly, knowing the peer agencies’ staffing levels would facilitate a productivity analysis of per employee performance relative to number of projects worked on as well as number of jobs created and retained.

Recommendation

To obtain sufficient information to conduct a meaningful comparative assessment of the Alliance’s relative efficiency and effectiveness, we recommend that the Board of County Commissioners direct the Alliance to:

3. Gather appropriate information from peer agencies necessary to facilitate a

comparative evaluation of important measures, including ROI and job

creation/retention.

14

Appendix A

FY 2011 Business Plan Objectives

Category Objective

Executive Office --Complete implementation of business attraction marketing programs to establish a world class brand.

Business Attraction

--Market and promote Greater Fort Lauderdale’s new brand as a premier location for corporate headquarters and international regional headquarters on a national and international basis.

--Monitor Greater Fort Lauderdale’s national external rankings/perceptions compared to its primary competitors to ensure continued favorability as a business location.

Business

Development

--Ensure our economic growth through our nationally recognized BRAVO (Business Retention and Visitation Outreach) program. The BRAVO program will encourage our Municipal & Chamber partners to implement additional localized municipal programs.

--Develop a three phase plan for implementation of a Greater Fort Lauderdale / Broward County Innovation Zone (iZone).

--Empower the Partner Council with designing & implementing a county-wide program to enhance the reputation of Greater Fort Lauderdale as a business friendly community.

--Generate targeted industry & emerging technology client project leads through continued Business Development Team participation in targeted industry trade associations and business organizations at the local level.

--Develop an economic gardening template to provide specialized support to local Broward “second stage” businesses with 10 to 50 employees. Template will outline strategic business assistance partnerships and identify qualified businesses to implement the Florida Business Assistance and Technical Outreach Program approved by the legislature in January 2009.

Education/Workforce

Development

--Develop projects through The Alliance that promote, support and advocate the importance of education and workforce development partnerships for the business community of Broward County.

--Develop training partnership with Broward County employers to further upgrade the skills of their workforce resulting in job retention and expansion.

--Engage the business and education community along with community resources to ascertain and create initiatives for a green workforce.

Membership

Development

--To raise and collect $1.235 million from the private sector and partners to support Year Two of the Excellerate Broward program.

--To improve member-investor engagement from 20% (1 out of 5 member-investors) to 25% (1 out of 4 investors).

--To build Broward County public and private sector leadership understanding of and for economic development and its business climate issues.

15

Marketing &

Communications

--Develop and disseminate top quality marketing materials and media coverage, utilizing consistent key messages to increase the positive awareness of Greater Fort Lauderdale/Broward County and its 31 municipalities as an ideal business location for companies considering relocation, expansion or consolidation resulting in domestic and international high value job growth, business retention and capital investment.

--Implement Marketing, Communications and Public Relations initiatives that contribute to The Alliance achieving 174 prospects and leads and an investor engagement of 10%.

--Promote business retention and expansion campaign resulting in at least 25 website requests and direct calls for assistance to the Alliance.

--Promote the “Educational Excellence Builds Business” campaign by collaborating with Education and Workforce Development Action Team and local educational partners.

--Survey investor and partner satisfaction in Alliance communications vehicles, tactics and messages in order to implement continuous quality improvement in Alliance communications and marketing.

--Position The Alliance staff and volunteer leadership as economic development “go to” subject matter experts to the media and other external organizations resulting in positive media coverage, external exposure and improved perception and understanding of the Alliance and the work of economic development.

--Market Greater Fort Lauderdale/Broward County as an ideal location for corporate, regional and division headquarters and Broward County’s targeted industries by partnering with organizations such as The Greater Fort Lauderdale Convention and Visitors Bureau, Fort Lauderdale-Hollywood International Airport, Port Everglades, Broward County's municipalities, The Beacon Council, The Business Development Board of Palm Beach County, and Enterprise Florida.

Source: FY 2011 Business Plan

16

Appendix B

State of Florida Qualified Targeted Industries for Incentives

Industry Category Specific Business Type

CLEANTECH

--Biomass & biofuels processing

--Energy equipment manufacturing

--Energy storage technologies

--Photovoltaic

--Environmental consulting

LIFE SCIENCES

--Biotechnology

--Pharmaceuticals

--Medical devices:

Laboratory and surgical instruments

Diagnostic testing

INFOTECH

--Modeling, simulation and training

--Optics and photonics

--Digital media

--Software

--Electronics

--Telecommunications

AVIATION/AEROSPACE

--Aviation:

Aircraft and aircraft parts manufacturing

Maintenance repair and overhaul of aircrafts

Navigation instrument manufacturing

Flight stimulator training

--Aerospace:

Space vehicles and guided missile manufacturing

Satellite communications

Space technologies

Launch operations

HOMELAND

SECURITY/DEFFENSE

--Equipment:

Optimal instruments

Navigation aids

Ammunition

Electronics

--Transportation:

Military vehicles

Shipbuilding and repair

--Technology:

Computer systems design

Simulation and training

17

FINANCIAL/PROFESSIONAL

SERVICES

--Financial services:

Banking

Insurance

Securities and investments

--Professional services:

Corporate headquarters

Engineering

Legal

Accounting

Consulting

EMERGING TECHNOLOGIES

--Global logistics

--Marine sciences

--Materials sciences

--Nanotechnology

OTHER MANUFACTURING

--Food and beverage

--Automotive and marine

--Plastics and rubber

--Machine tooling

CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS

--Corporate headquarters is defined as those facilities that

support international, national or regional (multi-state)

operations for relatively mature companies with

distributed operations and centralized strategic and

management activities. In Florida, Corporate

Headquarters has been designated as a High Impact

Business Sector, eligible for certain incentives.

Source: Enterprise Florida

18