Summary: The Costs and Benefits of Investing in Mental Health Services In Michigan

Community Mental Health Service Programs provide mental health services for Michigan residents across the state. Many persons with mental illness use the public system since many private insurance plans do not adequately cover mental health services and many residents cannot afford these services on their own. In recent years, a reduction in funding from the state government’s General Fund has resulted in fewer Michigan residents receiving mental health care services. There are people who would benefit from services but are currently not receiving them. Specifically, those on waiting lists for services, those who have a long-standing un-met need, and residents who have historically received mental health care services but are no longer receiving them due to budget cuts. The Michigan Association of Community Health Boards retained Anderson Economic Group (AEG) to conduct an independent analysis of the costs and benefits of providing mental health services to all Michigan residents who need them.

Effectiveness of Michigan’s Key Business Tax Incentives, May 2009


Effective business tax incentive programs are imperative when a state is in economic decline, when its business tax burdens are considered uncompetitive for many industries, or when state budgets are strained. Michigan suffers from all three of these conditions. It can afford to pursue only the most effective tax incentive programs.

Unfortunately, there exists no comprehensive assessment of the effectiveness of Michigan’s tax incentive programs. The purpose of this report is to fill much of that gap, first by creating a systematic inventory of Michigan’s tax abatement programs, and second by evaluating the available evidence of their effectiveness in attracting and retaining businesses.

The Michigan Education Association and National Education Association commissioned this report to improve the quality of the debate on business tax incentives. The report was completed by the independent consulting firm of Anderson Economic Group, LLC, which has considerable expertise in business tax policy, tax incentives, and state tax burden comparisons.

Phase II of this report will be available on Thursday, March 4, 2010 at 1:30pm. 


Review of Existing Renaissance Zones/Federal Renewal Community Application: City of Detroit, Michigan

 The City of Detroit, founded in 1701, is one of the nation's largest cities, and the center of one of the nation's largest metropolitan areas. The City of Detroit sought the review of its existing Renaissance Zones, which were originally designated by the state in 1996 and then expanded with the assistance of our firm in 2000. The city again retained Anderson Economic Group to aid in the review, revise the criteria, examine opportunities and costs, and recommend action by the city. A review committee including our project team, the city's planning and development department, the Detroit Economic Growth Corporation, and the city assessor's office recommended that the city not extend their existing zones at the time, given the results of our cost/benefit analysis and statutory review.

The city requested our review of a new federal law establishing a “Renewal Community” economic incentive program. Our analysis revealed the city would be a candidate for such a designation, and we recommended that the city file an application with HUD.

Anderson Economic Group advised the City of Detroit Planning and Development Department during the Renewal Community application process, outlining an appropriate process, identifying specific tax benefits to employers and investors, preparing documents and graphics summarizing economic conditions, working with State economic development and housing officials to confirm a course of action, and analyzing census statistics to define the best qualified application area. Our project team, with the City of Detroit, produced and delivered to HUD the entire application packet within 15 business days.

HUD’s review process followed a competitive procedure outlined in the Code of Federal Regulations, under a federal law that limited designations to the 40 most qualified. The designation was awarded to the city on January 18, 2002, making it eligible for $17 billion in development and tax incentives.

Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB) Economic Impact Michigan State University, U.S. Department of Energy

On December 11, 2008 the U.S. Department of Energy (DoE) announced that Michigan State University was awarded a $55 million grant to build a Facility for Rare Isotope Beams (FRIB). MSU’s most notable competition for the facility was the Argonne National Laboratory, located near Chicago, Illinois.

Pocketbook Predictions of Presidential Elections: Pocketbook variables are almost always good indicators of electoral outcomes

Patrick L. Anderson and Ilhan K. Geckil

A predictive model of voter behavior based on economic conditions.

The State Economic Handbook, 2009

Edited by Scott Watkins and Patrick L. Anderson

The State Economic Handbook is an annual reference book profiling the economy, demography, political environment, and business climates for each of the 50 states.

Michigan's University Research Corridor: Second Annual Economic Impact Report

The University Research Corridor (URC) is an alliance of Michigan’s three largest academic institutions: Michigan State University, the University of Michigan, and Wayne State University. In 2007 the URC universities asked Anderson Economic Group to undertake the first comprehensive study that benchmarks the economic impact of the URC’s activities on Michigan’s economy. This 2008 report is the second in a series of annual reports. While many benchmarks will likely not show large changes from year to year, over time these reports will reveal trends.





The URC had 135,816 students enrolled in the fall of 2007. This is an increase of 5.8% from the fall of 2001, and 1.9% higher than 2006. The students at the URC universities are drawn from throughout Michigan and around the world. Students from Michigan accounted for 77% of total enrollment in the fall of 2007, while 14% came from elsewhere in the U.S. and the remaining 9% came from other countries or territories. The URC has students from every county in Michigan, every state, and more than 150 countries.

2007 State Business Tax Burden Rankings

To understand the burden taxes place on businesses in each state, it is important to look beyond the amount of tax revenue governments collect and instead analyze how taxes paid by businesses compare to income available to pay the tax. The best measure of tax burden is taxes paid as share of profits, as this measure directly compares taxes paid to business income available to pay the tax.

Preliminary Report: Alternative Energy Research and Development in the URC

A preliminary report released in May by Anderson Economic Group found that Michigan’s University Research Corridor (URC), an alliance of Michigan State University, the University of Michigan, and Wayne State University, makes significant contributions to the state’s economy.


In its report, AEG found that the URC spent $6.5 billion on operations in fiscal year 2006. This figure—$6.5 billion–is about 2% of all economic activity in Michigan, as measured by Michigan’s gross state product. Most operational spending went towards teaching, research, and University of Michigan’s Hospital.


Furthermore, AEG estimated that currently over 617,000 alumni of a URC institution live in Michigan. There is at least one URC alumni living in every Michigan county. URC alumni living in Michigan earned an estimated $24.3 billion in 2006, making up 13% of all wage and salary income in Michigan.


The AEG report also compared how research and tech transfer activities at Michigan’s URC compare with other well-known university clusters in Massachusetts, North Carolina, and Pennsylvania. Peer university clusters include Harvard, MIT, and Tufts in Massachusetts; Duke, University of North Carolina, and North Carolina State in North Carolina; and Penn State, Carnegie Mellon, and University of Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania.

Tax Burden and Distribution of “Stimulus” Payments

Tax Burden and Stimulus Payments