Ontario Data Centre Prioritization
Decision-Support Framework & Dashboard
A two-stage framework helping Ontario evaluate data centre proposals while balancing electricity capacity, workforce needs, and long-term community impact.
01 / THE CHALLENGE
Growth was accelerating. Electricity wasn’t unlimited.
Ontario’s growing data centre industry was putting new pressure on the electricity grid. With more projects seeking connections, decision-makers faced a difficult question: which proposals should move forward?
The challenge wasn’t simply accommodating growth. It was determining how to prioritize projects when electricity capacity was limited.
02 / THE CONTEXT
This wasn’t only an energy problem.
Data centre development also affects jobs, infrastructure, and local communities.
Our research explored how proposed developments could support employment, workforce training, and long-term economic opportunities in communities such as Brantford, Haldimand County, Norfolk County, and the County of Brant.
The question guiding our work:
How might we prioritize data centre proposals fairly while balancing energy constraints, workforce opportunities, and community needs?
03 / THE FRAMEWORK
One decision became two.
Rather than ranking every proposal at once, we developed a two-stage framework to make evaluations more consistent and transparent.
First, proposals must meet baseline requirements. Those that qualify are then evaluated based on their potential economic, workforce, and energy impacts.
Stage 01 — Eligibility Screening
Does the proposal meet the requirements?
Before being considered for ranking, each proposal must satisfy Ontario’s baseline eligibility criteria.
Only qualifying proposals move to the next stage.
Stage 02 — Ranking & Prioritization
Which proposals offer the greatest value?
Eligible proposals are evaluated using criteria such as:
Energy: Responsible electricity use and energy efficiency.
Workforce: Job quality, long-term employment, training, and inclusion.
Economic Impact: Local investment and long-term community value.
Data: Canadian data storage considerations.
The results help decision-makers compare proposals and assign priority levels based on their evaluation.
High Priority · Medium Priority · Low Priority
04 / MAKING THE FRAMEWORK USABLE
Turning complex decisions into a clearer process.
We translated the framework into a dashboard concept that guides decision-makers from eligibility screening to proposal comparison and reporting.
The interface brings six key actions together:
View Proposals · Screen Eligibility · Score & Evaluate · Compare Proposals · View Priorities · Generate Reports
05 / FROM FRAMEWORK TO INTERFACE
Before designing the dashboard, I designed the decision.
I mapped out how proposals would move from initial screening to scoring and final prioritization.
By separating eligibility from ranking, I created a clearer process that could guide both the dashboard’s structure and how decision-makers compare proposals.
06 / REFLECTION
Transparency was part of the solution.
This project taught me that designing for complex decisions isn’t about presenting more information. It’s about making the reasoning behind those decisions easier to understand.
Working on the framework pushed me to think beyond the interface and consider how design can bring structure to complicated problems. I learned that a good decision-support tool shouldn’t just show the results, but help people understand how they got there.
