Public Involvement in Rural Alaska Construction Projects

1. Public Involvement in Rural Alaska Construction Projects ESM 684 – Project Report Presented by: Jeremie Smith and Tania Clucas

2. SPEAKER TRANSITION

3. RESEARCH SUMMARYInterviews and Questionnaire • Section One – Organization Profiles • Section Two – Methods For Recruiting Public Involvement In Rural Alaska • Section Three – Measured Responses Regarding Public Involvement In Rural Alaska

4. Engineering Consulting Firms: PDC Inc Engineers Rockwell Engineering and Construction Services Inc. Government Entities: Fairbanks North Star Borough (FNSB) Planning and Zoning Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (ADEC) Federal Facilities Group US Army Corps of Engineers Alaska District Alaska Department of Transportation (ADOT) Pre-Construction Owner/Owner Representatives: Alyeska Pipeline Service Company University of Alaska Fairbanks - Facilities Services Division of Design and Construction Fairbanks Gold - Fort Knox Denali Commission General Contracting Firms: Great Northwest GHEMM Non-Profit: Aleutians/Pribilofs Association Interviewed Organizations

5. Profile of Organizations • Total annual revenue was approximately $594 million • Ranged from approximately $120 million – $220 million • Averaged $59.4 million • Total average percentage of the annual revenue or budget derived from rural Alaska projects approximately 45% • Ranged from 5-100% of the organization’s total annual revenue or budget

6. Profile of Organizations cont. • 45% have formal guidance or policies • 67% are required to solicit public input • 33.3% have formal public recruitment training programs • 25% have policies regarding recruiting public involvement specific to rural Alaska

7. RESEARCH SUMMARYMethods For Recruiting Public Involvement In Rural Alaska • Several key themes emerged from this section. The concepts, ideas, and comments posited by the interviewed have been summarized and are presented on the following slides.

8. Rural Alaska communities should be educated about the project through out the project life cycle • Stakeholder input and participation needs to be a cradle to grave endeavor • Tailor the input process to the community • Provide incentives, e.g. • Food • Door prizes • Organize the public involvement event in conjunction with a local event that generates a lot of public interest • Provide alternative venues and forums • Continuously evaluate and review PI program

9. Communication Methods: • Project newsletters • Public service announcements • Direct mailings to mailbox holders • Newspaper advertisements • Informational materials (fact sheets) • Surveys • Technology has an increasing important role • Databases for local contacts and for direct mailing lists • Websites and e-mail, where applicable

10. Measured Responses Regarding Public Involvement Mode: 5 Mean: 3.89 • Project survey participants did not feel that recruiting public involvement in rural Alaska was more difficult. • The most common reason it is easier to “get the word out”

11. Mode: 7 Mean: 6.20 • Project survey participants generally felt that it is more expensive to recruit public opinion in rural Alaska. • The most common reason provide for the higher costs was high travel costs.

12. Mode: 10 Mean: 9.20 • A high belief that there is a positive cost benefit for recruiting public involvement in rural Alaska projects. • The most common reason was that obstacles were avoided by involving the public instead of guessing what the public wanted.

13. Mode: 10 Mean: 9.40 • A high belief that public involvement was vital to the overall success of the project. • The most common reason provided was that the public felt ownership by contributing to the project, which made them more supportive of the project

14. Mode: 5 Mean: 3.90 • The average response was low with regard to increasing the percentage of the project budget spent on recruiting public involvement in rural Alaska projects. • The most common reason given was labor and travel costs.

15. Mode: 2 Mean: 4.00 • A low belief that their organization needed to provide more training in recruiting public involvement in rural Alaska. • Policy guidelines regarding how to perform rural public involvement initiatives were considered more important than formal training.

16. A high belief among the project survey participants that their organization is successful in their rural Alaska public outreach endeavors. • The most common response was that there is always room for improvement.

17. CONCLUSION • Defined public involvement • Discussed the construction project life cycle • Discussed the need for public involvement in general • Developed a standardized research questionnaire • Generalized guidelines regarding public involvement initiatives in rural Alaska

18. CONCLUSION • Public Involvement can’t: • Overcome all project opposition • Resolve all differences in opinions and values • Replace planning and regulatory processes that examine the technical aspects of the project • However, a well coordinated initiative can: • Improve the quality of project decision making • Improve project management efficiency • Minimize project costs and delays • Maintain project credibility and legitimacy • Increase management expertise and "team-building” skills • Help build public consensus

19. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR DEVELOPING RURAL ALASKA PUBLIC INFORMATION TRAINING AND POLICY GUIDELINES Develop A Policy Regarding Multicultural Outreach Educate Communities About The Project Throughout The Project’s Life Cycle Commit To Evaluation Of Each Rural Public Involvement Initiative Prepare And Maintain Community Contact Database Maintain Continuity In Community Contacts Enhance Information Feedback At Project Closure

20. Develop A Policy Regarding Multicultural Outreach • Target rural communication medias • Community newspapers and newsletters • Community bulletin boards • Community television and radio • To convey project subject matter in ways that is meaningful to other cultures • To attempt to bridge the cultural and economic differences that reduces rural participation • To use communication techniques that enable people to interact with other participants and to develop partnerships on a small group basis to assure representation

21. Train Project Staff In Plain Language • Train project staff to communicate project information with the broadest possible basis without using technical language • Make general information, including technical and policy background information, readily available • At meetings • Through project information publications like "fact sheets”

22. Rural Alaska communities should be educated about the project throughout the project’s life cycle • Start as early as possible and extend throughout the project, keeping involvement continuous • Informing rural communities of project events and providing project status reports helps to establish a good working relationship • This approach is also very effective in diffusing potentially controversial issues by addressing concerns early • The advantages for early rural public involvement initiatives include breaking down historical cultural barriers and increasing the chances for obtaining consensus

23. Develop A Rural Alaska Public Involvement Initiative Check List • Special attention should be paid to the initial planning of each public involvement initiative • A basis for altering the public involvement initiative • Ensure local cultural etiquettes and norms are understood by the project staff • To make sure that all of the entities that have power/authority in the community are contacted • For evaluating the initiative upon completion • The check list should included: • Prior successful incentive methods used to increase participation

24. Commit To Evaluation Of Each Rural Public Involvement Initiative • The PI needs to be continuously evaluated and documented • The final results of the PI initiative should be reported as part of the final report on the project • The participants in the PI process should have access to the evaluation results • Consideration should be given to interim evaluations during complex or controversial projects

25. Prepare And Maintain A Rural Alaska Community Contact Database • A centralized database which inventories: • Community groups • Community leaders • Community profile • The database should help project staff answer : • Who in the community can help (i.e. stakeholders, tribal leaders, etc.)? • What communication resources does the community have (i.e. churches, radio, schools, etc.)? • How, why, and where do people gather? • How do people find out what is going on? • Who most influences local decisions, local funding, and local investment?

26. Maintain Continuity In Community Contacts • Maintain relationships with rural area community groups and community leaders • Allowing project staff to maintain and collect rural area knowledge • Build long lasting relationships by following up on meetings and by maintaining contacts

27. Enhance Information Feedback At Project Closure • Provide feedback on: • How input was used in making decisions • How the input influenced decision making • What the decisions were • Thanks the participants • Demonstrates: • How the rural PI was vital to the success of the project • Thanking them for participating helps bridge PI involvement barriers • Part of the project closure procedure should include updating the central database with community information

28. Final Products • Sample Brochures • Sample Checklist • Relational Database Field Suggestions

30. Dr. Perkins and the ESM Program • Our Families • Our Employers • All the people that took time out of their busy schedules so we could interview them

31. Questions?