  This research presents a methodology to comprehensively define Distressed
Communities. We further identify if there is a significant difference in public
investment between Distressed communities and Wealthy communities. One of the
key tools in sustainability planning is the use of sustainability indicators
(Sis). A considerable amount of scholarship has contributed to define and
develop SI programs for local level application (Elgert and Krueger, 2012).
Much of the focus of SI research is on developing the ideal indicator based on
defined criteria for each indicator (Hart, 1999; Innes and Booher 2000; Holman,
2009). Here we suggest a methodology beyond defining the ideal indicators to
demonstrating how indicators can be used for more in-depth analysis of complex
urban problems. In this analysis we reduce 34 development metrics to a smaller
number of factors that represent how the data can be classified into groups
based on similarities among 88 communities. Using the factor (group) that
contained measures identifying Distressed Communities, the communities were
alloted an index score and ranked. The top 10 communities were then compared to
the bottom 10 communities according to 14 place based variables related to
opportunities for local government led improvement.
