The results are in!

Since 2015, hundreds of American cities and towns have adopted new or redesigned flags to represent their communities.  It is heartening to see this interest in flags.

In late 2022, NAVA asked its members and the public to rate the designs of 312 known flags (there are likely many more).  From September 1 to November 30, 2,852 people participated in the online survey: 308 NAVA members and 2,544 public participants.

They rated the design of each flag using a low-to-high scale of 0–10.  The numerical ratings for each flag were averaged and the average rating was converted to a letter grade, with grades ranging from F (lowest) to A+ (highest).


For full information on the survey results CLICK HERE.
NACFS_Logo_.png


25 Highest-Rated New City Flags (A Grade)
[46 flags received A grades]

Tulsa_OK_.png

Tulsa, Oklahoma

Reno_NV.png

Reno, Nevada

Salem_OR_.png

Salem, Oregon

Norman_OK.png

Norman, Oklahoma

Salt_Lake_City_UT_.png

Salt Lake City, Utah

Ballwin_MO.png

West Plains, Missouri

Wheeling, West Virginia

Ballwin_MO.png

Lincoln, Nebraska

Kingman, Kansas

Ballwin_MO.png

Springfield, Missouri

Duluth_MN.png

Pocatello, Idaho

Duluth_MN.png

Duluth, Minnesota

Duluth_MN.png

Sunnyvale, Texas

Yorba_Linda_CA_.png

Yorba Linda, California

South_Bend_IN_.png

South Bend, Indiana

Madison_WI_.png

Madison, Wisconsin

Topeka_KS_.png

Topeka, Kansas

Sioux_Falls_SD.png

Sioux Falls, South Dakota

St._George_UT.png

St. George, Utah

Port_Clinton_OH_.png

Port Clinton, Ohio

Newton_KS.png

Newton, Kansas

Cedar_Rapids_IA.png

Cedar Rapids, Iowa

Crystal_MN_.png

Crystal, Minnesota

Kennebunkport_ME.png

Kennebunkport, Maine

Riverside_CA.png

Riverside, California


25 Lowest-Rated New City Flags (F Grade)
[143 flags received F grades]

Franklin_WI_.png

Franklin, Wisconsin

Gardner_KS_.png

Gardner, Kansas

Coal_Valley_Township_IL_.png

Coal Valley Township, Illinois

Westfield_MA_.png

Westfield, Massachusetts

Covington_WA_.png

Covington, Washington

Spring_Hill_KS.png

Spring Hill, Kansas

Republic_MO.png

Republic, Missouri

Miami_Township_Clermont_OH.png

Miami Township (Clermont Co.), Ohio

Azle_TX_.png

Azle, Texas

Odessa_TX_.png

Odessa, Texas

Holly_Springs_MS_.png

Holly Springs, Mississippi

Richmond_Heights_MO_.png

Richmond Heights, Missouri

Richfield_MN.png

Richfield, Minnesota

Woodland_MS.png

Woodland, Mississippi

Oolitic_IN_.png

Oolitic, Indiana

Ballwin_MO.png

Ballwin, Missouri

Balch_Springs_TX_.png

Balch Springs, Texas

Springfield_Township_IL_.png

Springfield Township, Illinois

Caldwell_ID_.png

Caldwell, Idaho

Pontotoc_MS_.png

Pontotoc, Mississippi

Belle_Glade_FL.png

Belle Glade, Florida

Nitro_WV.gif

Nitro, West Virginia

Overland_Park_KS_.png

Overland Park, Kansas

Westhampton_MA.png

Westhampton, Massachusetts

Ranger_TX_.png

Ranger, Texas


The overall average grade for the 312 flags included in the survey was a D+ (a rating of 3.65). 

Distribution by grade:
A: 46 flags  (15% of total)
B: 50 flags  (16% of total)
C: 24 flags  (8% of total)
D: 49 flags  (15% of total)
F: 143 flags  (46% of total)

Ratings by the public closely paralleled those by NAVA members, showing that both amateurs and experts alike can learn how to recognize a successful flag design.  The results are not a scientific analysis, but rather the cumulative judgment of a large group of people familiar with many flags and their uses.  Exact ratings are less important that the general grades.  

See a map of all cities showing the grades of their flags, plus full listings of the results (by city, by state, and by rating) HERE. 


NAVA itself does not judge flags; the opinions of its members and the public are reflected in the survey results.  NAVA supports flag design through its publications, such as "Good" Flag, "Bad" Flag, its members' own activities, and case studies and surveys.

A well-designed city flag can foster civic pride and community cohesion.  It can support the city's branding and promotion.  And a simpler flag usually costs the city and its residents less, leading to its broader use.

Designing a flag reflects “Form Follows Function”.
A flag’s usual purpose is to:
• represent a place, organization, or person,
• generally on a rectangular piece of cloth,
• to be seen at a distance, often moving, from both sides,
• and reproduced in quantity, and in many sizes.

This drives the basic principles of flag design:  simplicity, meaningful symbolism, few colors, no lettering or seals, and distinctiveness.

In most cases, a city flag should represent the entire city, not just the government.  Thus city-wide symbolism is preferred over a city seal or a city logo (government symbols).
GFBF_Cover.jpg

nava.org/good-flag-bad-flag

These flags have been designed by professionals, by amateurs, by young and old, often with remarkable success.  Sometimes they have been commissioned by the city; often they are the result of a public competition.  NAVA applauds all efforts to advance and improve civic symbolism in the form of flags, and welcomes all interested in flags to join.
Roman_Mars.png

Roman Mars

A large number of these new flags were likely inspired by municipal officials and their constituents watching the 2015 TED Talk by Roman Mars:  Why city flags may be the worst-designed thing you never noticed.  The talk, with 7 million views,  explains effective flag design, shows examples of city flags, and calls listeners to action.

This follows NAVA's previous survey of 150 American city flags in 2004.  Many low-rated flags in that survey have since been updated and rated in the current survey.  In fact, the city that scored last in 2004 (Pocatello, Idaho) changed its flag in 2017 and got an A grade this time around.

RESOURCES

For full information on the survey results CLICK HERE.

Also...
Download the reports (pdfs):
2022 New American City Flags Survey by City
2022 New American City Flags Survey by State
2022 New American City Flags Survey by Rating
Download all flag images as one batch (zip files):

300-pixel height

300-pixel height with black frame (general-use default)
600-pixel height
600 pixel-height with black frame


For media inquiries, please contact media@nava.org.

We're happy to share the raw survey data with academics/researchers.  Please relay requests to NAVA's secretary.
Please send any research or analysis based on the survey results to us so that we may share it with the vexillological world.