McKinsey King County and Seattle Homelessness Some Facts

mckinsey-king-county-and-seattle-homelessness-some-facts
arc beats above · slides in the middle · loops below · scroll → 2 LOOPS
SETUP TENSION ANALYSIS EVIDENCE RESOLUTION APPENDIX
HOVER FOR DETAILS · CLICK A SLIDE FOR FULLSCREEN · STEP 1
No image bound to this slide. Wire up imgproxy to display the rendered slide JPEG.

Deck intelligence map

4
coverage by narrative range · generated from this deck JSON

Slide inventory

25
every slide · same image gating as the playbook
01
Slide 1
front_matter
02
McKinsey & Company slide, dated Dec 15, 2017.summarize
03
establish_context
Open slide detailBeat · Situation & Context
04
front_matter
Open slide detailBeat · Situation & Context
05
The slide uses a dual-chart layout to contrast the growth of the homeless population (left) with the general population (right).diagnose
Open slide detailBeat · Problem & ComplicationLoop · Logic Chain
06
The chart uses a Marimekko (mosaic) plot to visualize the intersection of two categorical variables: location of homelessness onset and duration of residency inanalyze_data
Open slide detailBeat · Problem & ComplicationLoop · Logic Chain
07
The slide uses a bar chart for survey data and a check-mark matrix for qualitative risk associations.diagnose
Open slide detailBeat · Problem & ComplicationLoop · Logic Chain
08
The slide uses a stacked bar chart to compare population distributions and a table to show the relative rate difference (homeless vs general).diagnose
Open slide detailBeat · Problem & ComplicationLoop · Logic Chain
09
The chart uses a combination of bar (PIT count) and line (FMR) to illustrate the correlation, with a CAGR callout for the rent increase.diagnose
Open slide detailBeat · Problem & ComplicationLoop · Logic Chain
10
The map uses a color-coded scale to represent affordability levels across different zip codes in Seattle.analyze_data
Open slide detailBeat · Evidence & Proof
11
The map uses color-coding to represent affordability tiers based on AMI percentages.analyze_data
Open slide detailBeat · Evidence & Proof
12
The map uses a choropleth visualization to categorize zip codes by affordability tiers relative to AMI.analyze_data
Open slide detailBeat · Evidence & Proof
13
The chart uses a waterfall structure to bridge current supply to future demand, highlighting the supply gap and homelessness risk.quantify_impact
Open slide detailBeat · Evidence & Proof
14
front_matter
Open slide detailBeat · Evidence & Proof
15
The slide uses a checkmark system to denote 'Implemented' vs 'Partially implemented' status for various strategic recommendations.plan_implementation
Open slide detailBeat · Evidence & Proof
16
The slide highlights systemic inefficiencies due to fragmented authority and redundant responsibilities.diagnose
Open slide detailBeat · Evidence & Proof
17
The table highlights the fragmentation of funding across multiple entities (King County, City of Seattle, HUD CoC), which complicates coordination.diagnose
Open slide detailBeat · Evidence & Proof
18
The chart shows a clear upward trend in housing exits, with specific growth percentages annotated for the periods 2014-2015 and 2016-2017.quantify_impact
Open slide detailBeat · Evidence & Proof
19
The chart uses a stacked bar comparison to illustrate the mismatch between homeless households and available housing supply.frame_problem
Open slide detailBeat · Impact & Next StepsLoop · Cost Of Inaction
20
front_matter
Open slide detailBeat · Impact & Next StepsLoop · Cost Of Inaction
21
The diagram uses concentric circles to represent different layers of the homelessness response system, from core crisis response to broader community ecosystem.present_framework
Open slide detailBeat · Impact & Next StepsLoop · Cost Of Inaction
22
The slide uses a dual-chart layout to contrast demand (households) vs supply (funding).diagnose
Open slide detailBeat · Impact & Next StepsLoop · Cost Of Inaction
23
The slide uses a dual-waterfall structure to illustrate the system flow and the required housing interventions.quantify_impact
Open slide detailBeat · Impact & Next Steps
24
The slide compares Year 1 and Year 5 costs for two scenarios, highlighting the CAGR difference between them.quantify_impact
Open slide detailBeat · Impact & Next Steps
25
establish_context
Open slide detailBeat · Impact & Next Steps