Clackamas County, Oregon

Recovery Plan 

State and Local Fiscal Recovery Funds

August 31, 2021 Performance Report

and Interim Recovery Plan
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 1

America Rescue Plan Act 

Vision:

Clackamas Strong – Recover and Thrive

Purpose Statement:

Clackamas County has adopted a Recovery Framework with a focus on 

Resiliency and Recovery for the $81.1 Million the county will receive. We are 

committed to supporting those Clackamas County residents, first responders, 

businesses, non-profits and other community partners who have been most 

impacted by COVID-19. In addition, Clackamas County continues to remain 

committed to communities and businesses of color. It is with this lens that 

Clackamas County will allocate these dollars to increase our ability to recover 

and be resilient to the next disaster so that overall impacts to residents, 

businesses and community partners are minimized to the extent possible.

Clackamas County, Oregon
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 2

August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan

Table of Contents

General Overview......................................................................................................................3

Executive Summary.................................................................................................................3

Uses of Funds .........................................................................................................................4

Promoting Equitable Outcomes ...............................................................................................4

Community Engagement .........................................................................................................5

Labor Practices .......................................................................................................................5

Use of Evidence ......................................................................................................................6

Table of Expenses by Expenditure Category...........................................................................6

Project Inventory.......................................................................................................................8

Public Health and EOC Response ..........................................................................................8

Business Recovery Centers ....................................................................................................9

Attachment A ..........................................................................................................................10

Attachment B ..........................................................................................................................18
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 3

GENERAL OVERVIEW

Executive Summary 

Clackamas County identified an internal staff workgroup to consider a spending plan for the 

American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) in May 2021. The team consists of the following:

 County Operations Officer (Co-Chair)

 Finance Officer (Co-Chair)

 Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Officer

 Transportation and Development 

 Public and Government Affairs

 Business and Community Services

 Health, Housing and Human Services

 Technology Services

 Water Environment Services

 Law Enforcement

 Treasurer

 Emergency Communications

Immediately the team began working to be transparent to the public on potential uses for the 

grant dollars. 

The workgroup process is to collect and determine what projects may recommended to the 

Clackamas Board of County Commissioners (BCC) for final approval. At the time of this report 

few projects have been approved due to the absence of the final guidance from the United 

States Treasury Department and the need for careful selection of how the total of approximately 

$81,000,000 allocated to Clackamas County.

To date the BCC has approved the following:

 Public Health response to the COVID-19 pandemic - $3,000,000. This includes costs for 

the EOC, vaccine clinics, respite sheltering, staff time and other needs.

 Small business support for recovery - $4,150,000. 

 Non-profit capacity building - $4,000,000. Funding to provide non-profits and community 

based organizations to assist those populations most impacted by COVID-19 including 

BIPOC, underserved and lower economic communities.

 Essential needs - $2,000,000. Funding that will be provided to the non-profit 

organizations to support the most basic needs such as hygiene products, diapers, food, 

etc.

 Premium pay - $3,000,000. Dollars to provide pay for county employees that responded 

during the COVID-19 event. Staff will include those that fit the guidance definition.

 Broadband expansion in underserved areas - $10,100,000. 

BCC continues to review and consider Revenue replacement. Loss revenue is expected to be 

$15,000,000 or more. This item has not been approved by the BCC but continues to be a topic 

covered with expectation of some of the revenue loss being covered through ARPA.
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 4

Uses of Funds

Current use of funds or funds assigned are described for each category below:

Expenditure Category Funds Assigned

Public Health (EC 1) Currently a total of $3,000,000 has been approved by 

the Board of County Commissioners (BCC) a total of 

$3,571 has been expended and $10,818 committed.

The total dollar amount is expected to increase as the 

pandemic continues to unfold. 

Negative Economic Impacts (EC 2) $4,150,000 is approved by the BCC to assist 

businesses – $150,000 expended to assist 

businesses through Business Recovery Centers

(BRCs). Remainder of the dollars to be distributed 

are under consideration so an equity lens can be 

applied.

Services to Disproportionately 

Impacted Communities (EC 3)

$6,000,000 has been approved by the BCC for 

capacity building among non-profits and purchase of 

essential items for those hardest hit by the pandemic. 

Premium Pay (EC 4) $3,000,000 approved by the BCC for essential county 

employee pay. 

Water, Sewer, and Broadband 

Infrastructure (EC 5)

$10,100,000 approved by the BCC for broadband 

expansion.

Revenue Replacement (EC 6) This item has not been approved by the BCC but 

continues to be a topic covered with expectation of 

some of the revenue loss being covered through 

ARPA.

In addition to the ARPA dollars Clackamas County continues to utilize rental assistance funding 

to help recovery of those experiencing greatest impact from COVID-19. A more detailed picture 

of the funding and how it is being used will be included in the next report. 

Promoting Equitable Outcomes 

The Clackamas County ARPA workgroup is mindful of the importance of promoting equitable 

outcomes. The Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Officer is an active member of the team and 

provides guidance in this area. 

Clackamas County is currently working on a plan on how the equity lens will be applied to all 

projects. The plan will be fully discussed and provided in the next report and it is expected to 

include goals related to historically underserved communities and those that are adversely 

affected by COVID-19, access review of application requirements and outreach to those that are 

eligible.
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 5

The following questions will help guide Clackamas County on the plan and how the equity lens 

will be applied to projects and decision making.

 What data sets are being utilized to understand disparities? How are we collecting data 

on the hardest hit for each category? How does the understanding of disparities 

influence decision making?

 How can provision of outreach, community engagement and education funding be 

prioritized based on the disparate impact of COVID-19 on specific communities, as well 

as by equity metrics pre-pandemic?

 How can we source COVID recovery related materials from local/BIPOC owned 

businesses? How can we use recovery resources to support local/BIPOC businesses 

becoming COBID certified? 

 How can ARPA funds be used to increase the capacity of culturally specific Community 

Based Organizations and non-profits to plan and lead community-specific response and 

recovery efforts?

 How can funds support multicultural/community space for use by multiple non-profits?

 How can funds support BIPOC County staff who currently informally serve as liaisons to 

their communities (Community Connectors) - supporting their engagement and 

leadership in the planning for response and recovery?

Community Engagement 

In May 2021, Clackamas County staff worked with key departments and officials to create a 

survey to gather resident feedback regarding the prioritization of investment for the ARPA funds. 

The survey was unscientific. The survey went out through social media outlets and Community 

Based Organizations for wide distribution. The survey was provided in Spanish and Russian as 

well as English. The survey was open to the Spanish and Russian speaking communities 

longer than the English version due to translation turnaround time. 

The survey received the largest response to date for the County. The survey results can be 

seen in Attachment A. 

The ARPA workgroup is developing a website to publicly communicate the ARPA expenditures 

so all residents can view and provide feedback. A communications plan is also being 

developed and will be available for the next report. 

Labor Practices 

Not applicable at this time. 
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 6

Use of Evidence 

Projects for this reporting period are not evidence-based interventions. 

Table of Expenses by Expenditure Category

Category Cumulative

expenditures to 

date ($)

Amount spent 

since last

Recovery Plan

1 Expenditure Category: Public Health

1.1 COVID-19 Vaccination

1.2 COVID-19 Testing

1.3 COVID-19 Contact Tracing

1.4 Prevention in Congregate Settings (Nursing 

Homes, Prisons/Jails, Dense Work Sites, 

Schools, etc.)

1.5 Personal Protective Equipment

1.6 Medical Expenses (including Alternative Care 

Facilities)

1.7 Capital Investments or Physical Plant Changes 

to Public Facilities that respond to the COVID19 public health emergency

1.8 Other COVID-19 Public Health Expenses 

(including Communications, Enforcement, 

Isolation/Quarantine)

1.9 Payroll Costs for Public Health, Safety, and 

Other Public Sector Staff Responding to 

COVID-19

3,571.00 3,571.00

1.10 Mental Health Services

1.11 Substance Use Services

1.12 Other Public Health Services

2 Expenditure Category: Negative Economic 

Impacts

2.1 Household Assistance: Food Programs 

2.2 Household Assistance: Rent, Mortgage, and 

Utility Aid 

2.3 Household Assistance: Cash Transfers 

2.4 Household Assistance: Internet Access 

Programs

2.5 Household Assistance: Eviction Prevention

2.6 Unemployment Benefits or Cash Assistance to 

Unemployed Workers

2.7 Job Training Assistance (e.g., Sectoral jobtraining, Subsidized Employment, Employment 

Supports or Incentives)

2.8 Contributions to UI Trust Funds*
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 7

Category Cumulative

expenditures to 

date ($)

Amount spent 

since last

Recovery Plan

2.9 Small Business Economic Assistance (General) 150,000.00 150,000.00

2.10 Aid to nonprofit organizations

2.11 Aid to Tourism, Travel, or Hospitality

2.12 Aid to Other Impacted Industries

2.13 Other Economic Support 

2.14 Rehiring Public Sector Staff

3 Expenditure Category: Services to 

Disproportionately Impacted Communities

3.1 Education Assistance: Early Learning 

3.2 Education Assistance: Aid to High-Poverty 

Districts

3.3 Education Assistance: Academic Services 

3.4 Education Assistance: Social, Emotional, and 

Mental Health Services 

3.5 Education Assistance: Other 

3.6 Healthy Childhood Environments: Child Care 

3.7 Healthy Childhood Environments: Home Visiting 

3.8 Healthy Childhood Environments: Services to 

Foster Youth or Families Involved in Child 

Welfare System 

3.9. Healthy Childhood Environments: Other 

3.10 Housing Support: Affordable Housing 

3.11 Housing Support: Services for Unhoused 

persons 

3.12 Housing Support: Other Housing Assistance 

3.13 Social Determinants of Health: Other 

3.14 Social Determinants of Health: Community 

Health Workers or Benefits Navigators 

3.15 Social Determinants of Health: Lead 

Remediation

3.16 Social Determinants of Health: Community 

Violence Interventions 

4 Expenditure Category: Premium Pay

4.1 Public Sector Employees

4.2 Private Sector: Grants to other employers 

5 Expenditure Category: Infrastructure

5.1 Clean Water: Centralized wastewater treatment

5.2 Clean Water: Centralized wastewater collection 

and conveyance

5.3 Clean Water: Decentralized wastewater

5.4 Clean Water: Combined sewer overflows

5.5 Clean Water: Other sewer infrastructure
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 8

Category Cumulative

expenditures to 

date ($)

Amount spent 

since last

Recovery Plan

5.6 Clean Water: Stormwater

5.7 Clean Water: Energy conservation

5.8 Clean Water: Water conservation

5.9 Clean Water: Nonpoint source 

5.10 Drinking water: Treatment

5.11 Drinking water: Transmission & distribution

5.12 Drinking water: Transmission & distribution: 

lead remediation

5.13 Drinking water: Source

5.14 Drinking water: Storage 

5.15 Drinking water: Other water infrastructure

5.16 Broadband: “Last Mile” projects

5.17 Broadband: Other projects

6 Expenditure Category: Revenue Replacement

6.1 Provision of Government Services

7 Administrative and Other

7.1 Administrative Expenses 

7.2 Evaluation and data analysis 

7.3 Transfers to Other Units of Government

7.4 Transfers to Nonentitlement Units 

(States and Territories only)

Project Inventory 

Public Health and EOC Response

Funding amount: $3,571 Expended during this report period

Project Expenditure Category: 1.9 Payroll Costs for Public Health, Safety, and Other Public 

Sector Staff Responding to COVID-19

Project overview

 Dollars for two staff members: Logistics and Communications staff. 

 In general this project supports the COVID-19 emergency through EOC work, which 

includes Public Health response.

Use of Evidence

Not Applicable for this project.

Performance Report

The Public Health and EOC response dollars supported staff regarding communications and 

logistics for vaccine clinics. 

 Vaccine Clinic Data

 June vaccine clinics: 42
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 9

 June vaccinations provide: 8,000+

 July vaccine clinics: 40

 July vaccines given 962

 Social Media (July only for this report)

 See Attachment B

Business Recovery Centers

Funding amount: $150,000

Project Expenditure Category: 2.9 Small Business Economic Assistance (General)

Project overview

Clackamas County has six Business Recovery Centers (BRCs) that provide assistance and 

resources needed to recover from the economic downturn due to the pandemic. 

Clackamas County’s Department of Business and Community Services, Economic

Development Division #ClackamasStrong program, along with seven area chambers of 

commerce, established business recovery centers that provide recovery assistance and 

resources for businesses of all sizes and types. Services are offered in multiple languages 

and, depending on client needs, may include:

 Answers to business questions

 Assistance with connecting to educational, financial and technical resources

 Referrals to organizations and resources

 Access to interpreters and translation services.

Performance Report

The funds have been advanced for on-going business recovery efforts through September 

30, 2021. The performance report for the BRCs will be available and included in the next 

reporting period.
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 10

ATTACHMENT A

FINAL Survey Analysis: Investing Federal Funds

June 7, 2021

In May 2021, PGA worked with Disaster Management and key county officials/department 

heads to create a survey gathering resident feedback about prioritization of investment for 

spending federal American Rescue Plan Act funds. This report relays the findings of this 

unscientific survey.

Creation/promotion

PGA constructed the survey via Survey Monkey. It was promoted in several ways, including:

 Multiple dedicated emails to various email subscription lists the county holds

 Official county social media channels

 #ClackCo Monthly lead story

 A media release

 Dedicated webpage, linked from the front page of www.clackamas.us

The survey was open from May 3 through May 31. Spanish-language and Russian-language 

versions were also deployed (both opened slightly later than the English version, due to 

translation turnaround time). Those results are available at the end of this report. 

Responses

A total of 3,621 people took the English survey. When eliminating those who indicated they 

lived outside #ClackCo or skipped such questions, respondents totaled 3,280. Results are based 

on this figure. 

Similarly, 45 people took the Spanish-language version, and 11 people took the Russianlanguage version. Eliminating individuals as detailed above, those numbers decreased to 32 and 

9, respectively. These numbers are obviously quite low, so please keep this in mind when 

reviewing results. 

No individual could take the survey twice on the same browser from the same link. It is possible 

for the same person to take the survey multiple times, but availability to do so was limited. 
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 11

Lastly, please note that the percentage detailed for each answer/finding below are based on 

the total number of people who answered that specific question, not the total amount of 

survey respondents.

Issues/Errors

Question #1 sought to measure residents’ opinions about the general direction of the county, 

similar to a question from PGA’s biennial community survey. However, in transferring this 

question to an online version – rather than being posed over the phone – the answer choices 

did not match the previous surveys, which caused a fatal flaw in the collected data. The Survey 

Master does not consider that data to be reliable in any way, nor should it be used for 

comparing to previous years’ answers. Hence, results of that question do not appear below.
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 12

Key findings – English-Language Survey

 Question #4 provided respondents with “a list of investments the county is considering 

related to economic recovery,” asking them to indicate whether each choice was “very 

valuable, somewhat valuable, not too valuable, or not at all valuable” to our community. 

Responses are below, listed from highest-to-lowest when combining the “very valuable” 

and “somewhat valuable” responses:

o Supporting county-based businesses that are under 20 employees, 88.55%

o Supporting county-based farms (both agriculture and livestock), 85.34%

o Supporting county-based restaurants, 84.59%

o Supporting nonprofits that work to assist those in need, 83.07%

o Expanding job training programs, 80.76%

o Addressing gaps in child care, 75.18%

o Supporting county-based businesses, regardless of type, service, or size, 74.98%

o Supporting county-based businesses that are minority-owned, 69.55%

o Enhancing affordable high-speed broadband for businesses and employers, 

60.86%

o Enhancing programs that restore tourism throughout the county, 54.92%

 Question #5 provided respondents with “a list of investments the county is considering 

related to future disaster preparedness,” with the same answer choices (in terms of 

value) listed above. 

Responses are below, listed from highest-to-lowest when combining the “very valuable” 

and “somewhat valuable” responses:

o Ensuring first responders' ability to safely respond to emergencies/disasters in 

Clackamas County, 95.64%

o Supporting continuation/resiliency of 911 services during disasters, 94.11%

o Supporting available emergency services for impacted residents (e.g. shelters, 

food, supplies, and other basic needs), 93.93%

o Improving wildfire mitigation, 93.92%

o Improving emergency communications during disasters, 92.98%

o Investing in disaster-resilient roads and bridges, 92.90%

o Investing in disaster-resilient clean water infrastructure, 92.81%

o Establishing/improving emergency evacuation routes, 87.19%

o Supporting nonprofits that work to assist those in need, 83.14%

o Supporting available emergency shelters for animals/livestock, 77.76%

o Enhancing affordable high-speed broadband for all residents, 71.82%
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 13

 Using the same answer choices (in terms of value), residents were also asked about 

“two potential investments Clackamas County is considering to make sure we are able 

to keep important public services and employees.” 

Responses are below, combining the “very valuable” and “somewhat valuable” 

responses:

o Restoring lost revenue to county services, such as road maintenance, parks and 

recreation, health clinics, and tourism, 83.73%

o Providing “premium pay” (e.g., additional dollars on top of normal income) to 

essential county workers who support the county’s pandemic response, 65.34%

 Respondents were also asked their level of agreement on statements regarding the 

county’s responses to the three recent emergencies being “strong.” Answers below, 

combining the “strongly agree” and “somewhat agree:”

o #ClackCo wildfires response being strong, 83.12%

o #ClackCo COVID-19 response being strong, 71.16%

o #ClackCo ice storm response being strong, 70.98%

 When asked which of the county’s five strategic priorities is most valued when thinking 

about their quality of life, a plurality of residents selected Ensure Safe, Healthy and 

Secure Communities (43.17%). The four other choices ranged from ~12.2-17.6%. 

 Several demographic questions were posed. Nearly 57% of respondents identified as 

living within a city’s limits inside Clackamas County. 
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 14

Key findings – Spanish-Language Survey

 Again, please note that the following results are based on a survey respondent universe 

of only 32 people. 

 For simple comparison’s sake to the results of the English-language responses, below 

please find a table detailing answers to Question #4, which provided respondents with 

“a list of investments the county is considering related to economic recovery,” asking

them to indicate whether each choice was “very valuable, somewhat valuable, not too 

valuable, or not at all valuable” to our community. The figures below represent the 

adding of “very valuable” and “somewhat valuable” together. 

Answer choice Spanish-language 

responses

English-language 

responses

Expanding job training programs 93.75% (tie-1) 80.76% (5)

Addressing gaps in child care 93.75% (tie-1) 75.18% (6)

Supporting county-based businesses that are minority-owned 87.51% (3) 69.55% (8)

Supporting county-based restaurants 84.38% (tie-4) 84.59% (3)

Supporting nonprofits that work to assist those in need 84.38% (tie-4) 83.07% (4) 

Supporting county-based farms (both agriculture and livestock) 83.87% (6) 85.34% (2)

Supporting county-based businesses that are under 20 employees 81.25% (7) 88.55% (1)

Supporting county-based businesses, regardless of type, service, or size 75.01% (8) 74.98% (7) 

Enhancing affordable high-speed broadband for businesses and 

employers

71.88% (9) 60.86% (9)

Enhancing programs that restore tourism throughout the county 68.75% (10) 54.92% (10)

 Below please find a table detailing answers to Question #5, “a list of investments the 

county is considering related to future disaster preparedness,” them to indicate 

whether each choice was “very valuable, somewhat valuable, not too valuable, or not at 

all valuable” to our community. The figures below represent the adding of “very 

valuable” and “somewhat valuable” together. 

Answer choice Spanish-language

responses

English-language 

responses

Supporting available emergency services for impacted residents (e.g. 

shelters, food, supplies, and other basic needs)

100% (tie-1) 93.93% (3)

Improving wildfire mitigation 100% (tie-1) 93.92% (4)

Investing in disaster-resilient clean water infrastructure 100% (tie-1) 92.81% (7)

Ensuring first responders' ability to safely respond to 

emergencies/disasters in Clackamas County

96.88% (tie-4) 95.64% (1)

Improving emergency communications during disasters 96.88% (tie-4) 92.98% (5)

Supporting available emergency shelters for animals/livestock 96.88% (tie-4) 77.76% (10)

Supporting continuation/resiliency of 911 services during disasters 93.76% (tie-7) 94.11% (2)

Investing in disaster-resilient roads and bridges 93.76% (tie-7) 92.90% (6)

Establishing/improving emergency evacuation routes 93.76% (tie-7) 87.19% (8)
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 15

Supporting nonprofits that work to assist those in need 93.76% (tie-7) 83.14% (9)

Enhancing affordable high-speed broadband for all residents 90.63% (11) 71.82% (11)

 Similar to the English-language findings, Ensure Safe, Healthy and Secure Communities

was the most popular choice (51.6%) when respondents were asked which of the 

county’s five strategic priorities was most valued when thinking about their quality of 

life. 

 A greater percentage of Spanish-language respondents (28.1%) cited the wildfires as 

having the most significant impact on them versus the English responses (15.6%).

 More than 65% of respondents identified as living within a city’s limits inside Clackamas 

County, while nearly 19% reported being in an unincorporated area. 
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 16

Key findings – Russian-Language Survey

 Again, please note that the following results are based on a survey respondent universe 

of only 9 people. 

 For simple comparison’s sake to the results of the English-language responses, below 

please find a table detailing answers to Question #4, which provided respondents with 

“a list of investments the county is considering related to economic recovery,” asking

them to indicate whether each choice was “very valuable, somewhat valuable, not too 

valuable, or not at all valuable” to our community. The figures below represent the 

adding of “very valuable” and “somewhat valuable” together. 

Answer choice Russian-language 

responses

English-language 

responses

Supporting county-based businesses that are under 20 employees 100% (tie-1) 88.55% (1)

Supporting county-based farms (both agriculture and livestock) 100% (tie-1) 85.34% (2)

Supporting county-based restaurants 100% (tie-1) 84.59% (3)

Supporting county-based businesses, regardless of type, service, or size 100% (tie-1) 74.98% (7) 

Enhancing affordable high-speed broadband for businesses and 

employers

87.5% (tie-5) 60.86% (9)

Enhancing programs that restore tourism throughout the county 87.5% (tie-5) 54.92% (10)

Expanding job training programs 75% (tie-7) 80.76% (5)

Supporting nonprofits that work to assist those in need 75% (tie-7) 83.07% (4) 

Addressing gaps in child care 62.5% (9) 75.18% (6)

Supporting county-based businesses that are minority-owned 37.5% (10) 69.55% (8)

 Below please find a table detailing answers to Question #5, “a list of investments the 

county is considering related to future disaster preparedness,” them to indicate 

whether each choice was “very valuable, somewhat valuable, not too valuable, or not at 

all valuable” to our community. The figures below represent the adding of “very 

valuable” and “somewhat valuable” together. 

Answer choice Russian-language 

responses

English-language 

responses

Ensuring first responders' ability to safely respond to 

emergencies/disasters in Clackamas County

100% (tie-1) 95.64% (1)

Improving emergency communications during disasters 100% (tie-1) 92.98% (5)

Investing in disaster-resilient roads and bridges 100% (tie-1) 92.90% (6)

Investing in disaster-resilient clean water infrastructure 100% (tie-1) 92.81% (7)
Clackamas County, Oregon August 31, 2021 Performance Report and Interim Recovery Plan 17

Supporting available emergency services for impacted residents (e.g. 

shelters, food, supplies, and other basic needs)

88.88% (5) 93.93% (3)

Supporting continuation/resiliency of 911 services during disasters 87.5% (6) 94.11% (2)

Improving wildfire mitigation 75% (tie-7) 93.92% (4)

Establishing/improving emergency evacuation routes 75% (tie-7) 87.19% (8)

Supporting nonprofits that work to assist those in need 62.5% (tie-9) 83.14% (9)

Supporting available emergency shelters for animals/livestock 62.5% (tie-9) 77.76% (10)

Enhancing affordable high-speed broadband for all residents 62.5% (tie-9) 71.82% (11)

 Ensure Safe, Healthy and Secure Communities was the most popular choice (55.5%) 

when respondents were asked which of the county’s five strategic priorities was most 

valued when thinking about their quality of life. 

 Seventy-five percent (75%) of Russian-language respondents cited COVID as having the 

most significant impact on them.

 All nine respondents identified as living within a city’s limits inside Clackamas County.
Tag Performance

July 2021

Monitor trends and analyze performance of your tagged messages

Attachment B
Tag Performance | 1 of 8

Included in this Report

@clackamascounty Clackamas County, Oregon

clackamascounty
Tag Performance | 2 of 8

Volume Summary

View the volume for tagged published posts, sent messages, and received messages during the publishing

period.

Published Post Performance Summary

View your key aggregated tag performance metrics from the publishing period.

Tagged Published Posts

13 43.5%

Tagged Sent Messages

— —

Tagged Received Messages

— —

Impressions

55,881 74.8%

Engagements

4,809 78%

Engagement Rate (per Impression)

8.6% 12.8%

Post Link Clicks

169 84.9%
Tag Performance | 3 of 8

Top Posts

View the top tagged published posts from the publishing period.

By Lifetime Engagements

Clackamas Cou...

Sat 7/31/2021 10:26 am...

Total Engagements 2,037

Reactions 142

Comments 155

Shares 25

Post Link Clicks 57

Other Post Clicks 1,658

Clackamas Cou...

Sat 7/31/2021 2:17 pm ...

Total Engagements 1,098

Reactions 118

Comments 55

Shares 8

Post Link Clicks 22

Other Post Clicks 895

Clackamas Cou...

Thu 7/1/2021 4:53 pm PDT

Total Engagements 629

Reactions 74

Comments 56

Shares 17

Post Link Clicks —

Other Post Clicks 482

In response to an increase in C

19 Delta variant cases and

hospitalizations, the CDC and O

En respuesta al aumento de ca

hospitalizaciones de la variante

del COVID-19, el CDC y la Auto

Governor Kate Brown lifted

most of the state’s COVID-19

restrictions and terminated...
Tag Performance | 4 of 8

Published Post & Sent Message Volume

View the volume of your tagged published posts and sent messages based on published date.

1 

JUL

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

0

1

2

3

4

5

Lifetime Published Post Volume, by Day

COVID-19

1 

JUN

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

0

20

40

60

80

100

Lifetime Sent Message Volume, by Day

You have no sent message tag data to display.

To hide this widget, filter your message types

Try a new date range or filter selections

Tag sent messages in the Smart Inbox
Tag Performance | 5 of 8

Received Message Volume

View the volume of tags applied to received messages based on published date.

Received Message Volume, by Tag Totals % Change

Total Volume — —

1 

JUN

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

0

20

40

60

80

100

Lifetime Received Message Volume, by Day

You have no received message tag data to display.

To hide this widget, filter your message types

Try a new date range or filter selections

Tag received messages in the Smart Inbox
Tag Performance | 6 of 8

Published Post Impressions

View the impressions on your tagged posts based on published date.

Published Post Impressions, by Tag Totals % Change

Total Impressions 55,881 74.8%

1 

JUL

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

0

5K

10K

15K

20K

25K

Lifetime Published Post Impressions, by Day

COVID-19
Tag Performance | 7 of 8

Published Post Engagements

View the engagements on your tagged posts based on published date.

Lifetime Published Post Engagements, by Tag Totals % Change

Total Engagements 4,809 78%

1 

JUL

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

Lifetime Published Post Engagements, by Day

COVID-19
Tag Performance | 8 of 8

Published Post Video Views

View the video views on your tagged posts based on published date.

Tag Performance

Review your aggregate tag metrics from the publishing period.

Lifetime Published Post Video Views, by Tag Totals % Change

Total Video Views 0 0%

1 

JUN

2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30

0

20

40

60

80

100

Lifetime Published Post Video Views, by Day

Tags Aggregate

Publishing Period

Jul 1, 2021 – Jul 31, 2021

13

43.5%

N/A

—

N/A

—

55,881

74.8%

5,793.5

53.3%

0

0%

Compare To

Jun 1, 2021 – Jun 30, 2021

23 N/A N/A 221,930 12,410.45 0

COVID-19 13 N/A N/A 55,881 5,793.5 0

Tagged

Published

Posts

Tagged Sent

Messages

Tagged

Received

Messages Impressions Reach

Video

Views

You have no post tag data to display.

To hide this widget, filter your message types

Try a new date range or filter selections

Tag posts in the Post Performance Report