In the world of economic development, communities focus on creating assets such as a portfolio of sites and buildings, infrastructure availability, workforce programs and incentives. Yet many overlook a critical reality: Even the best site can be eliminated if the information being presented is poorly organized, difficult to interpret or impossible to evaluate quickly.

For most site selection projects, site selectors and end users operate under significant time constraints and tight deadlines. Requests for information, or RFIs, frequently require communities to compile large volumes of information and data within a short period — typically a few days or perhaps even a week or two if a community is lucky. The communities that advance are not always those with the most compelling assets. Often, they are the ones that present information in a format that is easy to understand, thorough and comprehensive.

Simply put, information presentation matters. A site that is difficult to evaluate may never receive a serious evaluation at all.

The challenge of information overload

Many communities respond to RFIs by gathering every document available and sending it to prospects as a collection of attachments. Map sets, environmental reports, utility studies, demographic data, incentive information, brochures and marketing materials, and engineering reports are often bundled together with little explanation or prioritization. They also often have file names that do not explain what is in the attachment.

While the intention is good, and it is great that so much information is available, it can be overwhelming in the early stages of a project when evaluators are trying to narrow down a large number of properties.

At this stage of the process, those leading a site selection effort are not looking for the largest volume of information. They are looking for relevant information presented in a way that enables rapid review to determine whether a site is retained or eliminated. If key facts are buried within lengthy studies or scattered across dozens of files, other sites that provide clearer answers and responses may end up rising to the top.

For example, when someone is conducting the initial evaluation and reviewing 30 sites, there is not time to become an expert on every property. The community’s responsibility is to distill the information into an organized, digestible format that answers the most important questions immediately.

Balance technical information with marketing

One of the most common mistakes communities make is leaning too heavily toward either marketing or technical documentation.

Marketing materials alone are rarely sufficient. Attractive photography, community highlights and promotional messaging help establish context, but they do not answer the questions corporate decision-makers are asking. At the end of the day, objective data and verified facts are what prove a site can meet a project’s criteria.

At the same time, technical information presented without context can be equally ineffective. A thousand pages of due diligence may contain valuable information, but few prospects will read it cover to cover when conducting initial evaluations of properties. What matters is translating technical findings into clear conclusions that support decision-making. For example, a due diligence summary could compile all the findings from the various studies that have been completed.

Instead of merely providing a geotechnical report, a site summary might state: “Preliminary geotechnical analysis completed in 2023 with five soil borings across the property indicates suitable soil conditions for large-scale industrial development, with no extraordinary foundation requirements identified.”

Likewise, an environmental report could be summarized as: “Phase I Environmental Site Assessment completed in 2025 identified no recognized environmental conditions.”

The goal is not to replace the technical documentation. The goal is to make its conclusions immediately accessible to allow for a quicker evaluation of a property.

Know what is in the information being submitted

A common scenario occurs when a prospect asks about utilities, environmental risks or site constraints. The information may be conveyed through a questionnaire, online RFP software or even just an attachment. Unfortunately, it is a regular occurrence that the primary point of contact for a property who submitted the information has not actually reviewed it.

For example, in the case of utility information, the utility provider may have provided a timeline for service to be available, but it is longer than the project timeline for operations. In these cases, the point of contact seems surprised when the property is eliminated from consideration because they had not reviewed the materials themselves.

Another area in which information is not always reviewed before being submitted involves due diligence documentation. Many communities invest substantial resources in Phase I Environmental Site Assessments, wetlands delineations, geotechnical investigations, cultural resource studies, endangered species reviews and other predevelopment analyses. These investments can significantly improve a site’s competitiveness. However, the value is lost when community representatives cannot quickly explain what those reports contain because they have simply passed them along without reviewing them.

The importance of consistency

Another factor that can determine whether a site makes the cut is consistency in the information submitted. The more discrepancies there are throughout the information, the harder a property is to evaluate because it requires more research and effort to determine what is accurate.

Communities that present information consistently using standardized formats make evaluation significantly easier. Clearly labeled maps, concise data sheets and organized due diligence summaries all allow prospects to compare locations efficiently.

Turning information into a competitive advantage

Site competitiveness today is about much more than acreage, utilities and incentives. It is also about interpreting the information to ensure a property can meet a project’s criteria.

Prospects need information they can quickly understand, trust and apply. Communities that effectively translate technical data into actionable insights create a smoother evaluation process and increase the likelihood that their sites remain under consideration.

The strongest site submissions do not merely deliver every piece of information ever collected on a site; they deliver what is required for a specific project. They balance marketing with facts, summarize technical findings without oversimplifying them and anticipate the questions prospects are likely to ask.

In the end, site selection is a process of comparison and elimination. Communities only get a limited opportunity to make their case. A well-prepared site may have outstanding fundamentals, but if the information is difficult to navigate, important advantages can be overlooked.

The communities that consistently advance in competitive projects understand a simple but important principle: The way information is presented often determines whether a site gets evaluated seriously in the first place.