Complete the workflow

1. 01

   Start with the client decision

   Name the project question, client user, and decision that needs additional evidence.

   Proof before moving on: Decision and evidence-gap statement.

2. 02

   Select the method

   Compare the approved options by relevance, required data, skill level, time, uncertainty, and usefulness to the team product.

   Proof before moving on: Method-selection matrix and instructor confirmation.

3. 03

   Define a fair comparison

   Choose comparable places, sites, segments, sectors, users, or scenarios and use one consistent framework.

   Proof before moving on: Study boundary and comparison criteria.

4. 04

   Gather traceable evidence

   Record sources, dates, observations, coverage, assumptions, and limitations. Do not fill missing client information with invented facts.

   Proof before moving on: Source and assumptions ledger.

5. 05

   Analyze alternatives

   Compare patterns, dependencies, tradeoffs, barriers, and at least one plausible alternative explanation or response.

   Proof before moving on: Comparison matrix and interpretation.

6. 06

   Recommend a next step

   Name the responsible party, first action, needed input, early measure, and condition that could change the recommendation.

   Proof before moving on: Recommendation evidence trail and implementation note.

Minimum evidence

• Client decision and evidence gap
• Approved method and scope
• Comparable units and common criteria
• Traceable sources and observations
• Alternative or counterexplanation
• Proportional recommendation
• Responsible party, first action, and limitation

Submission package

• Accessible memo, PDF, or slide deck
• Editable comparison table or tool
• Context map or visual
• Source and assumptions ledger
• Recommendation evidence trail
• Signed honor statement

What strong work looks like

Original assignment requirements

1. Select one option with a clear connection to the partner scope.
2. Use a consistent comparison framework.
3. Keep sources, observations, inference, and unknowns distinct.
4. Make one proportionate recommendation and identify the next verification or action.

Provided in this course

• Six complete choice modules
• Editable comparison templates
• Source and testing guidance
• Option-specific rubric

Before you submit

• Why is this method useful to the client?
• Are the comparison items genuinely comparable?
• What limitation most affects the recommendation?

Choose one approved option

• Downtown Vacancy and Opportunity Analysis

  Look closely at a manageable group of downtown properties, explain the pattern you find, and identify a responsible first move.

  Open the complete option

• Community Health and Access Analysis

  Study how people reach an essential service or opportunity without making medical claims the evidence cannot support.

  Open the complete option

• Industry and Workforce Analysis

  Connect employers, workforce, training, sites, infrastructure, and community conditions to a real economic-development decision.

  Open the complete option

• Multimodal Mobility Analysis

  Compare how two places support walking, biking, transit, safety, and access to destinations.

  Open the complete option

• Street Master Plan Comparative Analysis

  Compare two streets or corridors and decide where a limited package of improvements would matter most.

  Open the complete option

• Coded or Community-Use Tool

  Build a modest tool that helps one real user complete one recurring community task.

  Open the complete option