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
Interviewed Organizations

• 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

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 organizations 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 SUMMARY Methods 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 cant
• 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 Projects 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 projects 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

29
(No Transcript)
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?