National Academies Press: OpenBook

Virtual Public Involvement: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic (2022)

Chapter: Appendix A: Literature Review / Practice Scan on Virtual Public Involvement During COVID-19

« Previous: Chapter 3: Summary of Findings from Phase 1
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Literature Review / Practice Scan on Virtual Public Involvement During COVID-19." National Research Council. 2022. Virtual Public Involvement: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26827.
×
Page 37
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Literature Review / Practice Scan on Virtual Public Involvement During COVID-19." National Research Council. 2022. Virtual Public Involvement: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26827.
×
Page 38
Page 39
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Literature Review / Practice Scan on Virtual Public Involvement During COVID-19." National Research Council. 2022. Virtual Public Involvement: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26827.
×
Page 39
Page 40
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Literature Review / Practice Scan on Virtual Public Involvement During COVID-19." National Research Council. 2022. Virtual Public Involvement: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26827.
×
Page 40
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Literature Review / Practice Scan on Virtual Public Involvement During COVID-19." National Research Council. 2022. Virtual Public Involvement: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26827.
×
Page 41
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Literature Review / Practice Scan on Virtual Public Involvement During COVID-19." National Research Council. 2022. Virtual Public Involvement: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26827.
×
Page 42
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Literature Review / Practice Scan on Virtual Public Involvement During COVID-19." National Research Council. 2022. Virtual Public Involvement: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26827.
×
Page 43
Page 44
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Literature Review / Practice Scan on Virtual Public Involvement During COVID-19." National Research Council. 2022. Virtual Public Involvement: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26827.
×
Page 44
Page 45
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Literature Review / Practice Scan on Virtual Public Involvement During COVID-19." National Research Council. 2022. Virtual Public Involvement: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26827.
×
Page 45
Page 46
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A: Literature Review / Practice Scan on Virtual Public Involvement During COVID-19." National Research Council. 2022. Virtual Public Involvement: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/26827.
×
Page 46

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

A-1 APPENDIX A: LITERATURE REVIEW / PRACTICE SCAN ON VIRTUAL PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT DURING COVID-19 1.0 INTRODUCTION Phase 1 of NCHRP 08-142 focuses on capturing the experience of transportation agencies with Virtual Public Involvement (VPI) during the pandemic. Phase 1 includes a literature review/practice scan covering the guidelines agencies and practitioners developed for VPI during the pandemic and documented examples of practice from this period. Since the body of experience with VPI during the pandemic is so recent, the review relied on internet resources rather than peer-reviewed publications. At the outset of the pandemic, practitioners from numerous agencies and private organizations raced to develop procedures and share advice as they switched from in- person to virtual methods. Extensive dialogue took place within the industry on best practices for using VPI, including strategies for equitable, inclusive engagement during a period of social distancing. The resulting webinars, conferences, and written materials form a rich source of information. While these materials are largely informal (and sometimes provide contradictory advice), they provide a vital picture of emerging patterns of VPI practice. The research team compiled and reviewed over 30 guidance resources in the form of reports, articles, blogs, webinars, websites, and briefing papers from transportation agencies, professional associations, private firms, advocacy groups, and the media. These materials are described in an annotated bibliography presented in tabular form in an appendix to this memorandum. Section 2.0 highlights overarching themes and findings from the review. Section 3.0 describes selected resources that the team found most relevant for Phase 1. The scan also identified initial examples of VPI practice during the pandemic, as described in section 4.0. 2.0 SUMMARY OF KEY THEMES AND FINDINGS The literature review has revealed several overarching themes and initial findings on VPI during the pandemic that will be explored further as Phase 1 continues. It has also provided a wealth of detailed tips and suggestions from practitioners for implementing various VPI tools. The following are some of the “big picture” conclusions of the review. 1 Live virtual meetings were central in transportation agencies’ initial response to the pandemic, perhaps because they came the closest to replicating the in- person meetings agencies had already planned. For this reason, much of the early pandemic guidance material on VPI emphasized recommendations for conducting live virtual meetings effectively and methods for ensuring that persons with limited internet service, limited English proficiency, or disabilities could participate. Agencies often saw attendance at virtual meetings increase—sometimes dramatically--compared to previous in-person meetings. Many agencies expect to continue offering live virtual meetings after the pandemic, and demand continues for how-to guidance on running these meetings effectively and making them more inclusive. 2 As the pandemic progressed, agencies experimented with a greater variety of VPI tools. Some offered on-demand web-based open houses, with information in multiple formats and feedback options. Several states developed virtual reality meeting room simulations that sought to mimic the experience of attending a project open house. Others used telephone town halls to address broadband limitations. Short project videos and surveys stand out as two of the most popular tools, with some practitioners finding videos to be the single most effective tool during the pandemic. Videos that described a project and how to provide feedback were distributed via social media and project websites and streamed on local cable TV stations, for example. Agencies found mixed results with textmessaging as an engagement method, with some describing it favorably and others finding it ineffective. Practitioners stress that just as with in-person methods, there is no one- sized fits all VPI tool; tool selection and implementation should be tailored to the needs of the community and the purpose of the engagement, and multiple engagement options should be offered. 3 Some practitioners have argued that most people are not well served by public meetings, whether in-person or virtual, claiming that other strategies are needed to engage all but the most interested members of a community. This echos a long-standing critique of reliance on public meetings as the principal strategy for public involvement. Besides recorded videos and surveys, suggested alternatives include web-based materials, small group conversations (virtual if necessary), and one-on-one phone calls. More research is needed on the use of virtual methods for small group meetings, community advisory committees, and stakeholder workshops such as charrettes. A variety of innovative tools are available for collaborative workshops, such as whiteboards and virtual sticky notes, but the scan found few examples of their use in transportation public involvement. 4 During the pandemic, agencies continued to express interest in finding better ways to reach and engage traditionally underrepresented groups, including people of color, older adults, and those with low incomes, limited English proficiency, and individuals with disabilities. Some view the advent of VPI as a solution, facilitating convenient participation and requiring less time than attending an in-person meeting. Others see VPI as favoring advantaged groups and potentially excluding marginalized voices due to the need for reliable internet service and digital skills. Still others hold that the choice of VPI versus in-person tools is less important than an agency’s commitment to proactively engage community residents by working with local organizations and actively including them in the outreach process, whatever tools are employed. This is an ongoing area of dialogue within the practitioner community. 5 The review identified a variety of approaches and tools that practitioners recommend for engaging underserved groups in VPI. For live virtual meetings, common recommendations include providing a call-in option, choosing user-friendly platforms with minimal download or registration requirements, offering meetings at different times to provide flexibility, and posting meeting recordings for later reference. For those with limited English proficiency, practitioners’ suggestions include simulcasting, captioning, or holding back-to-back meetings in different languages. To accomodate persons with hearing limitations, suggestions include real-time captioning or the use of a spotlighted American Sign Language (ASL) interpreter. (Captioning also assists those who may be participating in a noisy environment.) Another idea mentioned was using a staffed telephone number for questions and comments prior to, during, and after a virtual meeting. 6 A clear best practice for reaching a broader public for VPI engagement is to include “offline” methods in the promotional campaign. These can include “old- school” methods such as mailers, doorhangers, flyers, and posters, and temporary signs (including digital displays, variable message signs, and billboards). Also important is media outreach, including the use of ethnic radio, TV, and newspapers. Social media is also an important promotional tool for reaching persons of diverse races, incomes, and educational levels, as well as rural residents. 7 The review shows that the role of internet access in enabling or limiting VPI participation is more complex than some in the industry realize. Many have cited statistics on the high level of internet access and smartphone use, both in the overall population and among minority and low-income populations, as a reason to dismiss concerns about the digital divide. However, research points to a continued divide when it comes to availability of broadband service and limitations in digital literacy, particularly among older age groups. During the pandemic, additional issues came to light, as multiple members of a household often competed for available computers, bandwidth, and private work space for remote school, work, and other activities. Practitioners have suggested various workarounds for these issues, including the use of telephone town halls, on-demand engagement that can be done at any time, and the use of mailed surveys, hotlines, and telephone calls to gather feedback or assist individuals in completing online activities. Social service providers have suggested that some members of vulnerable populations need or would benefit from individual in-person assistance from staff or caregivers as they attempt to participate in virtual engagement activities. A general recommendation for all audiences is to ensure that VPI tools are mobile friendly.

A-2 8 Many of the guidance materials prepared during the pandemic stressed that core principles of in-person engagement apply equally to VPI. These include carefully identifying the stakeholders likely to be affected by a project, customizing the public involvement program to the types of decisions being made, understanding the community and any history about the project or previous dealings with the agency, building community relationships, working with local organizations, ensuring adequate promotion of engagement opportunities, and circling back to let participants know how their input was used. Another core principle, providing clear communications, is even more important for VPI, particularly when individuals will be using a tool on their own without any live assistance to answer questions. Ensuring content is developed in plain English at a suitable reading level for the public is important not only for participants, but for effective language translation or interpretation. 9 Most in the field agree that VPI tools should not replace in-person public involvement. Going forward, both will have an important place in any comprehensive public involvement program. As public activity returns to normal there is an expectation that virtual involvement will be continued through hybrid approaches. Guidance will be needed on conducting hybrid meetings and on other methods for integrating VPI and in-person tools for plans and projects of different types. 3.0 GUIDANCE MATERIALS The following materials from the literature review were considered most relevant for use in Phase 1. Each item contains a description and highlights key points made by the authors or webinar presenters. Every Day Counts (EDC) Initiative - Virtual Public Involvement (VPI), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Office of Planning, Environment, and Realty. July 2020 FHWA’s Every Day Counts (EDC) initiative is a “state-based model that identifies and rapidly deploys proven, yet underutilized innovations that make our transportation system adaptable, sustainable, equitable and safer for all.” FHWA’s Office of Planning launched the EDC VPI initiative in EDC Round 5 prior to the pandemic, and further developed it in Round 6, with several activities occurring during the start of the pandemic. The program includes case study videos, fact sheets, peer exchanges, and webinars intended to promote the featured tools. During the pandemic, two webinars of note included "Engaging Traditionally Underserved Communities Using VPI," presented by Carolyn Nelson of FHWA (May 4, 2021), and "Using VPI when Engaging Traditionally Underserved Communities" (August 17, 2020) with co-presenters Jane Grover with the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning and Jamille Robbins with North Carolina DOT. Additional video case studies include the VPI Conversation Videos, which feature short conversations with professionals involved in virtual public involvement efforts at their respective agencies. Some of the topics include bilingual resources, low-cost VPI strategies, and using VPI to engage with diverse communities. Key Points: • The VPI toolbox is extensive. FHWA’s EDC VPI initiative features eight tools: mobile applications, project visualizations, do-it-yourself videos, crowdsourcing tools, virtual town halls, mapping tools, all-in-one tools, and digital tools to enhance in-person events. • The use of VPI can increase participation, convenience, transparency, and access while reducing costs, staff time, and project delays. VPI is not intended to replace in-person public involvement but engage the public more effectively by supplementing face-to-face information sharing with technology. • For engaging traditionally underserved communities, it is important to begin by understanding the community involved. Developing a Community Profile provides a good foundation for an outreach plan. In addition to a community’s demographic, economic, physical, and cultural characteristics, the Community Profile should consider the history of the agency’s prior involvement with the community, including past transportation projects and their impacts on the community. • Planning for a VPI effort in a traditionally underserved community should begin with the expectation that there may be a strong sense of suspicion and distrust of government. This should be taken into account and is a reason for working closely with local leaders. • Of the eight VPI tools being promoted through the EDC VPI initiative, three that can be especially effective for underserved communities are mobile applications, project visualizations, and virtual town halls. Mobile applications take advantage of the prevalence of smartphones and can be used for project and meeting notices, surveys, and comments. A related option is the use of mobile kiosks in public places. For example, the Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning placed 20 mobile kiosks throughout the region to gather feedback on priorities for their long-range plan. • Early in the pandemic, to provide a virtual form of engagement for their Transportation Improvement Program, the Corvallis Area MPO created a bilingual online open house with an interactive project map and comment form. The virtual format helped engage more people throughout the region than in-person open houses had in the past. Source: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/public_involvement/vpi/peer_exchanges/ Guide to Virtual Engagement, Michigan DOT. Spring 2021 This guide provides an overview of VPI tools to encourage meaningful public participation during a transportation infrastructure or regional planning project. The content includes questions to ask before choosing VPI strategies, practical steps for using tools that increase reach and awareness and/or share information and gather feedback, how to collect and use the comments that are received during virtual engagement, examples of which VPI tools and strategies to use for different types of transportation projects, and best practices for conducting online meetings. As well as providing a comparison matrix of the VPI tools that are available, the guide provides information about implementing VPI accessibly and programs with built-in tools to provide accessibility and reaching underserved communities and people with limited English proficiency. The guide discusses many of the topics that are likely to be addressed in the NCHRP 08-142 VPI manual. Key Points: • As the public expect to receive information quickly and from a wide variety of sources, traditional public involvement techniques can no longer be the only approach to obtaining meaningful and well-rounded public feedback. • When considering VPI methods, some situations may need only one-way communication; however, two-way communication should always be a goal and a priority to help establish a dialogue or exchange of information. • As VPI tools can provide a sense of anonymity, which could empower some participants to act inappropriately, project teams should be prepared to react to comments that may “cross the line” of acceptable interaction. On social media, be prepared to hide vulgar comments, but leave in place negative comments with instructions for submitting a formal comment. • Traditionally, public involvement hearings and meetings are in-person events; however, adding a virtual, broadcast or dial-in meeting gives the public more opportunities to engage with your project, encouraging more participation and generating more diverse feedback. The virtual meeting process should include steps for planning the meeting type and processes, preparing for platform use and meeting logistics, testing the platform functionality, and following-up by posting recorded materials and evaluating the results. • Effective engagement is inclusive of all segments of the population. VPI provides many benefits for a broader reach; however, when not looking for the gaps, people can be left out. Methods used should be in compliance with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA) and underserved communities and persons with limited English proficiency need to be kept in mind. Source: https://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/Guide_to_Virtual_Public_Involvement_726962_7.pdf

A-3 Digital Environmental Engagement: Continuing the Conversation Webinar, California Natural Resources Agency. January 2021 The California Natural Resources Agency and the California Environmental Protection Agency developed a resource catalog of online sessions on community engagement and equity. This resource catalog comes from the “Online Environmental Engagement: Building Our Skills Together” conference held on June 2-4, 2020, with 49 panelists and approximately 1,500 registrants from California and across the nation gathered online to discuss their successes, challenges, and practical tips for online environmental engagement. Several sessions focused specifically on equity in virtual public engagement, with practical tips and ways to embed best practices. Key Points: • Lead with empathy – everyone’s experiences are different and engagement spaces should be created so that no one feels ashamed to ask for the accommodations that they need. • Utilize text-messaging tools to reach those who may not have access to internet for public meetings. • For translation needs: partner with the community to identify language needs and assets, use trusted community navigators, leverage bilingual/bicultural staff appropriately, partner with ethnic media, be mindful that bilingual individuals may not have the skills or training to speak or write equally well in both languages, and plan the time it takes for simultaneous translations (speak slowly, pause as needed). Identify language needs early, consult with community advocates, social services agencies, local schools, and elected officials, check demographic information, and use mapping tools in order to identify needed language translations. • Write in plain language so information is understood the first time an audience reads or hears it. Top 10 principles for plain language: (1) write for the audience and not yourself, (2) use pronouns, (3) state major points first before giving details, (4) stick to the topic, (5) limit each paragraph to one idea, (6) write in active voice, (7) use short sentences as much as possible, (8) use everyday words or explain technical words on first reference, (9) omit unneeded words, and (10) use headings, lists, and tables to make reading easier. • When engaging with indigenous communities, recommendations include using interpreters with skill in the relevant dialects of a language and providing cultural competence training to staff. Source: https://resources.ca.gov/Outreach/Digital-Environmental-Engagement-Resource-Catalogue Public Involvement Peer Exchange, AASHTO. September 2021 The AASHTO Center for Environmental Excellence conducted a virtual Public Involvement Peer Exchange in 2020 to foster peer learning among selected state Departments of Transportation (DOTs). Three half-day virtual workshops included presentations, open discussions, polls, and breakout groups. A summary document describes each workshop and the key themes and lessons learned from the peer exchange overall. The workshops covered the current status of DOT public involvement programs, including changes brought about by the pandemic; planning and project development frameworks that shape public involvement; project development case studies, including those with a focus on the engagement of underrepresented communities; federal perspectives on public outreach, public hearings and environmental justice; the role of data in planning and evaluating public involvement, and emerging methods and approaches in public involvement. Several common themes and issues emerged from the workshops that include best practices in using VPI tools and techniques, as well as opportunities for further development of VPI strategies among DOTs. Key Points: • Participants were asked what changes their DOTs had made in public involvement since the beginning of the pandemic. In addition to switching to online meetings, changes included using telephone town halls, increased use of project websites and social media to convey project information and request public comment, and increased reliance on telephone conversations with community representatives and stakeholders. • States reported large increases in participation via virtual meetings, and several have been able to attract younger people who had avoided public meetings in the past. Some of the increase was attributed to people sharing information about upcoming virtual meetings on social media. Other benefits reported included cost savings with the reduced travel required to attend in-person meetings for corridor studies. • States differed widely in the amount of prior experience they had had with virtual meetings and other VPI tools. Some were already using either live virtual meetings or on-demand web-based open houses prior to the pandemic, while others faced a steep learning curve. • There is a need for more guidance on appropriate use of VPI tools including hybrid approaches once in-person methods resume, especially when considering the challenges of equitable inclusion in VPI and the lack of broadband availability in rural areas. • Best-practice examples for inclusive engagement during periods of social distancing included telephone hotlines, distribution of flyers at stores or food banks, digital message boards, printed mailers, social media, and working with community leaders and community-based organizations to gather direct feedback or help with reaching community members. • Several DOTs used large-scale print mailings to reach residents without reliable broadband. Mailings were used in various ways: to explain how to call into a virtual meeting from a landline or request print materials, or to provide information on how to reach a hotline or a staff member with questions and comments. • DOT participants shared specific tips for effective virtual meetings. These included advertising early to accommodate any special needs (including requests for mailings of printed material), practicing multiple times with the platform and the same equipment that will be used in the meeting, and having talking points ready to avoid “dead air” in case there are few questions or comments from the audience. Source: https://environment.transportation.org/past-event/public-involvement-peer-exchange-september-2020/ Assessing Virtual Engagement Best Practices for Vulnerable Populations, North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority (NJTPA). September 2020 The Rutgers Public Outreach and Engagement Team (RU-POET) conducted a series of 19 interviews with staff at social service agencies and community organizations in the spring of 2020 to better understand how virtual and other remote methods helped them continue to engage with vulnerable groups during the pandemic and challenges experienced with implementing VPI. The purpose of the research was to help the NJTPA prepare for future engagement. Interviews targeted organizations that serve individuals with disabilities, older adults, individuals with low incomes, at-risk youth, those who experienced domestic violence, veterans, and immigrants or those with limited English proficiency. Findings were summarized for each group. Key Points: • For women and those who experienced domestic abuse, engagement opportunities should be flexible and the ability to participate privately/discreetly is important (i.e., participating in an online discussion forum rather than a focus group). Phone calls, email blasts, Zoom, and Facebook and Facebook Live can all be effective, as are articles in local newspapers. Internet access and a lack of privacy can be an issue for virtual participation for some in this group. • For older adults, outreach should seek to establish a personal connection; phone calls are a good way to add a personal touch. Older adults vary in their willingness and ability to use virtual platforms, and some may prefer to call in or not display their video. Choosing a platform such as Zoom that is simple to use and already familiar to a wide range of people is helpful, as is providing assistance in using the technology. Since some older adults will not or cannot use virtual methods, other low-tech methods should be included in an engagement effort, such a phone outreach. • For adults with intellectual and developmental disabilities, online engagement could provide extensive opportunities for socializing with others. Activities should be fun, stimulating, highly interactive, and personalized to reflect different interests and preferences. Consider partnering with caregivers or staff who know participants well to facilitate activities and increase their comfort level. Some individuals may be unable to use virtual platforms, so include “low-tech” activities such as an activity packet with a link to an online video with directions for completing the packet.

A-4 • Youth often have different communication preferences from those of older family members, and may prefer communicating on Instagram Live or Zoom rather than email or Facebook. At-risk youth may migrate toward using the chat on a virtual meeting platform. The chat feature can be used as a key part of the agenda. Include video clips or other material that will hold participants’ attention. Youth may be more comfortable receiving a survey or meeting invitation by text than by email. • For immigrants, information about engagement opportunities should be provided in native languages and engagement should be supported by traditional methods such as phone calls, email, and printed materials. Virtual methods can include internet-based radio programs and text messaging as well as virtual meetings. Engagement on virtual platforms is most effective when a person from the community is part of the support system. Some non-English speaking immigrants do not trust online platforms or technology and are reluctant to share any personal information this way. • Low-income persons’ readiness and willingness to engage virtually varies among age groups and is generally greater among younger people. • Organizations serving each of these groups can be helpful outreach partners due to their established and trusted communications networks. Source: https://www.njtpa.org/NJTPA/media/Documents/Get-Involved/Public-Involvement/Public-Engagement-Toolkit/Resources/Final-Report-COVID-19- Engagement-Interviews-7-21-21.pdf Virtual Meetings: Accessibility Checklist & Best Practices, American Bar Association. July 2021 This article presents considerations for understanding accessibility needs when planning a virtual event, including for those who are deaf or hard of hearing, blind or have low vision, or have intellectual, developmental, or mobility disabilities. It includes links to the accessibility information and features offered by some of the more popular platforms, a checklist to help ensure that events are accessible, and some best practices to implement. Key Points: • On Zoom, screen readers read aloud the comments in chat, distracting screen reader users from hearing the conversation effectively. For this reason, the chat feature should be used sparingly, or a person can be designated to receive everyone’s messages privately, with that person reading the chats aloud and keeping a record of information posted in the chat and providing it to users after the meeting. • Sharing one’s screen is not accessible for those who are blind or have low vision, so send or post materials electronically on a web page in advance of the event. Provide all materials and PowerPoint slides in an electronic format, share via email or the chat function, post on a website before the event, and create a short URL. Announce at the start of the event how to access copies of materials and share the link on the presentation’s first page and in the chat/Q&A function, and read it aloud. • Describe all images and videos for those who are blind or have low vision, as well as for those joining by phone. Examples of videos with descriptive audio can be found on YouTube or youdescribe.org. • Ensure that the environment behind presenters is not distracting. If it is, use a virtual background, but note that some can wash out faces. For people who read lips, ensure that presenters have their camera on and are well lit. • Eliminate background noise by muting everyone except for the person speaking. At the start of the meeting, instruct attendees how to mute and unmute themselves. Allow only one person to speak at a time. This will also help the captioner(s) and ASL interpreter(s) more accurately interpret. Have each person say their name each time they speak so that attendees, captioners, and interpreters know who is speaking. Source: https://www.americanbar.org/groups/diversity/disabilityrights/resources/covid-resources/virtual-meetings-checklist/ Opening Doors and Minds: Planning and Running Virtual Open Houses Oregon APA, April 2021 This webinar compared two styles of virtual open houses, a live “town hall” or question and answer session, and an “on-demand” open house webpage that participants can visit at any time during a defined period. Panelists presented their start-to-finish process to design, prepare, and run virtual open houses, including behind-the- scenes moderation and best practices for managing audience participation during live virtual events. They discussed collaborative options for use in virtual meetings such as whiteboarding, virtual sticky walls, interactive mapping, and workshop exercises (such as having groups design a multimodal roadway configuration by fitting lanes into a cross-section graphic). Other topics included tools for presenting information, including video and story maps, and building a basic website. Key Points: • The chief difference between an on-demand open house and a live online event, such as a virtual town hall, is that the former is generally static, offering pre- defined ways of interacting with the material and little or no interaction among participants. A live town hall offers greater interaction and can help to “humanize” the agency. However, on-demand open houses allow people to participate at any time, provide anonymity, and present fewer barriers to those who may be reluctant to attend a live event. • For live virtual events, presenters recommend avoiding platforms that require advance registration or signing in, which can intimidate or discourage participation by those new to virtual engagement. They also stress the need to “storyboard out your event” and develop a detailed run of show to help manage the many moving parts of a virtual meeting, along with planning extra prep time. Building in redundancy is also useful, with alternate hosts and facilitators ready to step in in case someone loses their connection. Where appropriate, virtual meetings can be enlivened with interactive activities such as whiteboarding, virtual sticky walls, or interactive mapping. • For on-demand open houses, presenters recommend using a free reading-level checking tool to ensure materials are presented at an appropriate level for the public. Other suggestions include tracking where people spend time on the site, closing the open house when appropriate and archiving the information, and circling back to tell people how feedback was used. Beyond basic information such as text, images, and survey questions, enhancements can include video, interactive maps, comment and collaboration tools such as an idea wall, and games. Accessibility and inclusion should be considered as content is developed. This includes usability by people with disabilities, provision of language alternatives, content that is scalable to small screens (phones), simple feedback options, and the use of plain language. Prior to launch, online open house websites should be tested on people unfamiliar with the material. • A combined approach with both a web-based engagement opportunity and live event(s) can be valuable in reaching more people and providing more choice for participants. Source: https://www.eventbrite.com/e/planning-and-running-virtual-open-houses-webinar-recorded-tickets-156015987017 Equitable Inclusion in Virtual Community Engagement National Charrette Institute / Form-Based Code Institute, June 2020 This roundtable discussion covered how panelists define equitable inclusion and steps taken to achieve it during the pandemic. Speakers included Ebony Walden of Ebony Walden Consulting, Calvin Gladney, President & CEO of Smart Growth America, and Ashley Cash, City of Memphis. The discussion included overall approaches to virtual engagement from an equity perspective, some of the limitations of virtual public meetings, and specific tools and tips to consider. Key Points: • Presenters stressed that many people are not well served by virtual public meetings. Apart from any internet access issues, these meetings require a level of interest and a time commitment that many are unwilling to make. Suggested alternatives include web-based materials, pre-recorded videos, small group conversations, and one-on-one phone calls. • Virtual “small group” conversations rather than larger public meetings can make participants feel more comfortable. One way to recruit for these is to mail postcards to residents of a project study area and invite them to sign up for a small group or a one-on-one phone call. • Asynchronous/on-demand methods (such as materials on a website) allow the public to participate at their convenience. This can accommodate small business owners and people with different work shifts. (A counter-argument was the importance for different groups in a community to hear each other, which can be difficult to achieve by commenting on a website or taking a survey.)

A-5 • Where virtual meetings are used, suggestions include choosing virtual platforms that a community is already familiar with, such as Facebook Live, Instagram, or Zoom; finding ways to engage people who may not be comfortable speaking out or writing in the chat, such as non-verbal “cognitive mapping” methods, and pre-recording some of the meeting presentations for people to watch ahead of time can allow more time for discussion. • Virtual methods can lower the cost of some strategies for inclusion. For example, without the need for travel, it can be more cost-effective to use interpreters (such as American Sign Language) at a virtual meeting than an in-person meeting, expanding participation. • In terms of benchmarks for success, one presenter suggested that expectations for virtual involvement should be higher than for in-person, since VPI tools can reach a larger geographic radius and have fewer time restrictions. • Many of the principles of in-person engagement apply equally to VPI, including building community relationships and circling back to let participants know how their input was used. Source: https://www.canr.msu.edu/resources/equitable-inclusion-in-virtual-community-engagement-webinar Community Engagement During COVID-19: Planning Ahead for 2021 MetroQuest, APA and National Coalition for Dialogue and Deliberation (NCDD), December 2020 This roundtable discussion focused on successful alternatives to in-person public meetings during the pandemic. Panelists described what approaches have worked best since the pandemic began, what they consider to be the essential tools, skills and resources needed to succeed, and general advice for other organizations. Speakers included Jamille Robbins of North Carolina DOT (NCDOT) and Darrel Cole and Lisa Hummel of WSP. Essential tools for NCDOT include access to online engagement software and virtual meeting software; the ability to create videos (including simple DIY phone videos); a social media presence with the ability to geofence and geotarget, including use of Nextdoor to target neighborhoods; and finally, project visualizations, from simple sketches and renderings to animations. They developed three alternatives for project managers to use for virtual engagement: 1) a newsletter or postcard advertising an online engagement platform or website where people could get information and provide feedback; 2) pre-recorded informational videos of 3-5 minutes with information similar to the overview that would have been provided at a normal public meeting, and 3) live virtual meetings using GoToWebinar, GoToMeeting or WebEx. Recorded videos were found to be the most effective of these options. For WSP, essential tools have included the use of interactive real-time polling in virtual meetings, especially the plug-in tools PollEverywhere and Mentimeter which provide capabilities such as priority ranking and brainstorming/word clouds, and provide ways to participate for those who may not be comfortable speaking up or using the chat in a virtual meeting. They described considerations for choosing virtual meeting platforms and suggested offering meetings at different times of day, limiting meeting length, providing recorded videos that participants can watch on their own time, and increased use of surveys. As with any engagement campaign, choosing tools begins with the project context and goals for engagement, and it is useful to begin with a strategic communications plan. Other essential tools include telephone town halls, especially for reaching people in areas with limited broadband. Suggestions include arranging for a familiar local voice to introduce the telephone town hall on behalf of the agency (“Here’s a project we think you may be interested in…”) and including touch-tone phone polls. Key Points: • A key tool to facilitating VPI efforts during the pandemic has been the use of pre-recorded videos with project information, which can reach more people than virtual meetings. • Direct mail, such as postcards, are effective in promoting awareness of a project and opportunities for virtual engagement. Supplemental “offline” tools for inclusive outreach have included mailers, doorhangers, radio call-in hours, and partnering with a local cable access channel to broadcast an online meeting. • Geotargeted social media ads (the practice of delivering content or advertisements to social media users based on their geographic location) and Nextdoor (a hyperlocal social media networking platform for neighborhoods) are both useful to target specific neighborhoods. • Another key strategy to facilitate engagement during the pandemic is working with community groups who have the ability to contact their members/constituents by email, social media or other methods. Local planners are also an important resource for VPI engagement. • The Zoom platform has been important due to its ease of use, the availability of dual-language simulcasts, and video placement that some participants who are deaf or hard of hearing have indicated is optimal for lip-reading. General advice included assigning a lead staff person for each VPI platform and establishing an etiquette for virtual meetings, including whether comments will be allowed only through chat, or participants will be able to unmute and speak. Also key is preparing a “run-of-show” meeting plan that maps out by the minute who is going to be speaking, what type of visual is going to be shown, and a “Plan B” in case there is a connection failure. Source: https://metroquest.com/webinars/community-engagement-trends-during-covid-19/ How is Public Engagement Changing? PublicInput.com. June 2020 This one-hour webinar shares the results of a nationwide listening effort that asked MPOs and DOTs how they are reaching and engaging the public as states begin to re-open during the ongoing pandemic, and discusses moving forward into the “next normal.” It covers topics on ensuring equity and due process with virtual meetings, the effectiveness of common outreach tactics, and considers the future of public meetings and virtual tactics. Key Points: • When selecting a virtual public meeting tool, a choice must often be made between event security versus ease of access, with platforms that require passwords offering increased security but less convenient access. • Website updates and social media usage were the first to increase at the beginning of COVID, as they were quick and simple ways to provide information to the public. • Text messaging is an effective way to reach the public but is not commonly used. Most texts are received and read within three minutes of being sent. • Complying with state and federal mandates was one of the highest concerns at the beginning of COVID, followed by concerns of reaching equity goals. State and local governments had amended mandates for compliance but did not provide guidance. “Everyone is hesitant to rely on online meetings because of a fear they will be scrutinized and deemed insufficient.” • Presenters recommend using multiple ways to inform and engage with the public. Sometimes termed “mixed-mode engagement,” examples include using e- blasts, printed mailers, social media and newspaper ads to promote engagement opportunities, or offering an online survey, printed surveys, and interactive display boards at a meeting to collect feedback in different formats. The mixed-mode approach helps increase participation among rural residents and better engages populations over the age of 50. Source: https://blog.publicinput.com/webinar-how-is-public-engagement-changing 7 Emerging Tips for Equitable Digital Engagement APA Planning Magazine, June 2020 This brief online article reviews some of the strategies planners and local leaders are ensuring engagement efforts are inclusive while social distancing. The seven tips include: (1) make sure you are mobile compatible, (2) manage expectations, (3) overcome the in-person bias, (4) crowdsource solutions, (5) take advantage of new opportunities, (6) when in doubt, go old-school, and (7) evolve together.

A-6 Key Points: • As 81 percent of Americans currently own a smartphone, all digital outreach efforts must be mobile app compatible. Make mobile hotspots available to residents to supplement mobile phone internet services. • Standardizing public engagement practices helps stakeholders know what to expect and to feel more comfortable about participating. • ‘Old-school’ or low-tech outreach options to consider during the pandemic include phone interviews, mail surveys with postage-paid return envelopes, and neighborhood kiosks where people can leave written feedback. • There can be bias that feedback from digital communications should be taken less seriously, due to the lack of face-to-face contact. These prejudices against digital participation should be addressed to allow for expanded use of digital engagement, especially as a means to engage with people living with disabilities who may find digital platforms easier to use. Source: https://www.planning.org/planning/2020/jun/tools-engagement/ Inclusive and Accessible Virtual Engagement: Lessons from the Field Greater Portland Council of Governments, September 2020 This report provides an overview of best practices for using virtual engagement in a way that is accessible, inclusive, and equitable. It shares tips and resources for GPCOG members and other stakeholders on how to virtually engage the public using various online tools and platforms. The best practices described include defining engagement goals and objectives, knowing the communities being served and what engagement barriers they face, meeting people where they are, designing inclusive virtual engagement plans, working with partner organizations in the field, and training staff, meeting moderators, and facilitators. The report also covers best practices for addressing community-specific virtual engagement needs including older adult populations, low vision or blind populations, deaf or hard of hearing populations, immigrants and refugees, youth populations, and low-income populations. A list of digital tool types is also included, as well as consideration for tool selection processes, non-digital tool examples, and spotlights on national leaders in the field of equitable virtual engagement. Key Points: • In designing a virtual public engagement plan specific to your community, consider the following: (1) What barriers to access does your community face? (e.g., Lack of access to a broadband internet connection? Language or cultural barriers? Need for assistive technologies?) (2) Does your audience know how to navigate through the virtual platform? (i.e., do they have the skills to properly use the software platform/digital tools?) (3) What social and organizational networks exist in the community that can potentially be leveraged for outreach? (4) What strategies have been used in the past and what were the outcomes? • Building long-term relationships with local community organizations develops trust and establishes a communication line between your agency and vulnerable populations that are unlikely to participate in the mainstream public engagement process. By connecting and partnering with other organizations that serve your community, a network can be created that will eliminate gaps or reduce redundancies that can stifle meaningful public engagement. • Appropriate tools should be selected by assessing key criteria based on your engagement goals. In selecting virtual tools that best meet your engagement goals, consider: (1) What capacity does the tool have to accommodate to people with disabilities and language access? (2) Does the tool provide options for participation without a smartphone, computer, or reliable internet access? (3) How will you overcome barriers to participation from people who are new to or intimidated by virtual meetings? (4) Does the tool encourage active participation and inclusivity? (5) How strong are security features for the tool or platform? Source: https://www.gpcog.org/DocumentCenter/View/1375/GPCOG_Virtual-Engagement-White-Paper_Final_91620 Public Engagement Practices During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Other Disruptive Events Minnesota DOT, June 2021 This research report investigates best practices for MnDOT’s consideration as it seeks to engage with the public through virtual meeting platforms and other means during the pandemic. The research included a survey of practice, literature search, and consultations with selected experts to inform efforts to communicate and engage effectively during the current pandemic and prepare for the next disruptive event. Research results described in the report were based on 39 survey responses from state, regional, and local agencies within Minnesota and selected DOTs, MPOs, Canadian transportation agencies and private organizations. They touch on the choice of virtual meeting platforms, changes in agencies’ use of social media during the pandemic, meeting National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requirements, and methods for addressing current challenges. Key Points: • Social media, virtual meetings, and electronic communication were the primary tools agencies used to engage the public during the pandemic or other disruptive events. Other tools mentioned included project websites, online surveys, online open houses, videos and pre-recorded presentations, StoryMaps, e- blasts and e-newsletters. • Almost all respondents use more than one method or practice to notify the public when a virtual meeting is scheduled, and they are most likely to post a notice on a project or agency website or on social media, or notify people via email or an agency e-newsletter. Interactive approaches used during virtual meetings include breakout rooms, interactive mapping and polling. • Almost half of respondents reported changes in their agency’s use of social media during the COVID-19 pandemic or other disruptive events. Most of these respondents reported greater use of social media. Less than one-quarter of respondents reported a change in their agency’s use of U.S. mail for public engagement during the pandemic, with most of those reporting greater use. • Respondents described a variety of non-virtual practices that had proven effective in reaching members of the public with limited access to technology. In addition to direct mail, these included various forms of print media, phone calls, and partnering with community-based organizations and other groups. • The methods most often used to encourage diverse participation and inclusion of underrepresented groups were engaging community leaders and their networks and the use of interpreters, language services, and translated materials. Almost half of respondents have attempted to survey meeting participants to understand the demographics of participants. Source: https://rosap.ntl.bts.gov/view/dot/57135 What Happens Now? Virtual Public Engagement During and Beyond COVID-19 New Jersey DOT, October 2021 This 1.5-hour webinar convened by the New Jersey DOT (NJDOT) Bureau of Research and moderated by Rutgers study team members Trish Sanchez and Andrea Lubin focused on sharing promising VPI practices as experienced during the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Speakers included FHWA’s Rickie Clark, Alison Hastings from the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, and NJDOT’s Vanessa Holman and Megan Fackler. Jamille Robbins from North Carolina DOT spoke specifically on strategies to engage vulnerable populations with VPI. Key Points: • Presenters shared that many of their VPI efforts are resulting in increased public participation and comments. • There is no “one-sized fits all” VPI tool or strategy that will work to engage all populations and thus, project sponsors need to provide alternative options for those with limited and/or no internet access or literacy to help ensure full and meaningful participation. • Regarding efforts to specifically engage vulnerable populations with VPI, the value of harnessing social media as an advertising tool is especially important. Pew research has demonstrated that a significant percentage of persons of diverse races, as well as low-income, rural residents, and those who are less educated utilize social media. The importance of using low-tech and more traditional engagement tools such as newsletters, postcards, door hangers, and traditional media (e.g., radio, television) advertising was also emphasized. • Exploring the demographics of a given project area at the onset can be extremely helpful in selecting VPI approaches to pursue and in identifying community stakeholders who may be of assistance in securing public participation.

A-7 • The Nextdoor social platform has been a helpful addition to the NCDOT VPI toolkit to assist with connecting residents based on location, as have been brief (5-7 minute) pre-recorded informational videos on projects, tools and processes. • All VPI tools should be designed to be mobile friendly. • Vital VPI considerations include staff preparation and practice prior to outreach, determining platform accessibility and accommodations, communicating participant ground rules, and ensuring security. • To facilitate two-way communications, a multitude of options should be offered to collect feedback/comments (e.g., online, email, phone, paper). Utilization of project visualizations, such as interactive mapping/animation, can also offer a successful means by which to collect feedback and help the public understand projects. • Moving forward, hybrid public engagement will likely become the “new normal” and will require additional staff to facilitate successful implementation. Source: https://www.njdottechtransfer.net/category/tech-talks/ 4.0 EXAMPLES OF PRACTICE The research team has developed an initial database of examples of VPI practice for plans and projects during COVID-19. This section describes selected examples that feature a variety of approaches, tools, and strategies for overcoming barriers to participation. NM 566 Bridge Replacement Project | New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT) National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) Environmental Assessment (EA)/ Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) When the Sovereign Navajo Nation found itself in the grips of the COVID-19 pandemic with one of the highest infection rates in the country, severe restrictions were put into place, including curfews and strict limits on public gatherings. In this tight-knit community many members face accessibility challenges including no home mail delivery, limited electricity and internet access, and a high rate of households without running water or access to fresh food. Faced with the new restrictions on gatherings and the community’s accessibility challenges, in the fall of 2020, NMDOT selected a telephone town hall (TTH) virtual meeting strategy for its follow-up public meeting regarding a project to replace an aging bridge along NM 566. The platform allowed the agency to call stakeholders directly for a phone meeting using contact lists developed from voter registration data primarily targeting landlines on the Nation. The meeting included a brief verbal presentation and an interactive Q&A session where community members were “brought live” (as in a call-in radio program). The meeting was also streamed on the internet for those with access. More than 115 people joined the TTH and input received included questions regarding the design, timeline, funding, current state of the bridge and other inquiries relevant to the project. Notable Elements: • The TTH format reached people at home via their landlines. • The format was interactive and allowed the community to ask questions and provide comments for the project team’s consideration. • Using this unique platform for engagement, the project was able to remain on schedule, moving forward a critical infrastructure need for the region. Source: WSP USA Interstate Bridge Replacement Program | Oregon and Washington Departments of Transportation NEPA Supplemental EIS Oregon DOT and Washington DOT launched a joint planning process to replace a 100-year old bridge with a modern, seismically resilient, multimodal structure. But beyond the concrete, asphalt, and steel is a region with a complex heritage. Acknowledging the difficult past and learning from the troubled history that major projects in the region have had on communities of color, the Interstate Bridge Replacement (IBR) program has committed to paving the way for a more inclusive project that intentionally engages historically marginalized communities in decision-making. According to the project website, ongoing and inclusive community engagement is critical to identify a solution that balances differing regional perspectives and best serves the complex needs of the variety of users. Notable Elements: • The program partnered with 11 community-based organizations to extend outreach to equity priority communities throughout the program corridor: • Activate Inclusion • NW Association for Blind Athletes • Partners in Careers • Washington Advocates of the Deaf and Hard of Hearing • The Street Trust • Next Up! • Coalition of Communities of Color • Somali American Council of Oregon • Unite Oregon • Brown Hope • Slavic Community Center of NW • Outreach materials are translated into eight different languages according to the program demographics. For example, a robust MetroQuest survey was distributed in English, Spanish, and Vietnamese within the survey application, and community organizations distributed surveys in the remaining five languages. There were more than 9,000 survey participants and close to 14,500 comments received during the engagement period. • The IBR program hosted 12 virtual listening sessions between September and December 2021. Sessions were centered around particular topics and communities in order to solicit meaningful feedback: Downtown Vancouver, Active Transportation, Sustainability and Climate, BIPOC, People Living with a Disability, Houseless Individuals and Families, Older Adults and four sessions held in languages other than English. Participants shared their experience traveling through the program area, transportation concerns and input on what would improve their experience. • A total of 81 community members agreed to participate in four Community Working Groups: Active Transportation, Downtown Vancouver, Hayden Island/Marine Drive, and Multimodal Commuter. Each group met twice between September and December 2021, plus one orientation meeting. Participants discussed their experience traveling through the IBR program area, priorities for a replacement solution, and feedback regarding current design options. • The IBR Accountability Dashboard is a transparency tool to demonstrate how the project team is engaging the community and using that feedback to shape the program. Source: https://www.interstatebridge.org/

A-8 Project Connect | Capital Metropolitan Transportation Authority (CapMetro) NEPA EA/EIS Austin’s Capital Area Metropolitan Transit Agency (CapMetro) was in the middle of gathering public input on a $7.1 billon comprehensive transit system expansion when the COVID-19 pandemic hit. The project was 2 years into community outreach efforts that were centered on traditional in-person tactics such as stakeholder meetings and open houses. The agency was committed to obtaining community feedback safely and quickly pivoted, launching a virtual open house, planning and conducting a series of remote virtual community meetings, and hosting additional remote stakeholder meetings through FM radio, Zoom, YouTube and Facebook Live stream. • The virtual open house provided a self-guided virtual experience to walk visitors through the plan in English and Spanish and included comment and survey feedback opportunities. It engaged over 3,500 participants representing 49 unique zip codes. • Nine one-hour virtual community meetings were held during May 2020 and were available live on both Zoom, Facebook Live and through a call-in number. For those unable to attend live, the meetings were archived and made available on CapMetro’s Facebook and YouTube pages. Additionally, comments and questions were answered in writing and made available in both English and Spanish on the project website (ProjectConnect.com). • A citywide virtual meeting was available on Austin’s government television channel and a meeting conducted fully in Spanish was streamed through Univision 62’s Facebook page, reaching a total of 3,363 views as of June 1, 2020. In addition, CapMetro hosted a Facebook Live “Ask Me Anything” session on the project in July 2020, which received 387 views and generated 20 comments. Notable Elements: • Use of both an on-demand open house and live virtual meetings provided multiple options for participation. • Virtual meetings were available on multiple platforms including Zoom, Facebook Live and a Univision Facebook page. Source: Rifeline; Projectconnect.com SR 400 Express Lanes Project | Georgia Department of Transportation Preliminary Design Georgia DOT’s (GDOT) public engagement for the SR 400 Express Lanes project was one of several projects that had to be quickly transitioned to virtual methods in the pandemic. GDOT used two interrelated tools, ESRI ArcGIS Hub and a plug-in virtual room. The virtual room provided an immersive experience with a welcome video and clickable displays, including virtual “handouts” available on a table. It was important to GDOT that all items created in their virtual environment be owned and hosted in-house and could be created by GDOT staff with the assistance of consulting teams. Furthermore, anything opening in the virtual room stayed within the room rather than opening as separate windows on the user’s desktop or taking them out to completely separate webpages. Suggestions were provided on how people could spend their time in the virtual room, for instance if they had 10 minutes or an hour to spend. In addition to the on-demand virtual room, GDOT scheduled a live virtual information meeting. There were over 7500 visitors to the virtual information meeting and virtual room combined. GDOT also held an in-person public hearing in an outdoor setting, using an open house format. GDOT now has an in-house virtual room template that staff can customize for any meeting. They can tell the story and “make the information more digestible to the public.” Notable Elements: • The virtual room included suggestions for best use of participant time in that room, depending on the time each participant had available. • GDOT conducted an outdoor, in-person public hearing during the pandemic. Source: GDOT presentation at AASHTO Public Involvement Peer Exchange, October 27, 2020. https://0001757-gdot.hub.arcgis.com/ Ala Moana Pedestrian Walkway, Oahu, HI | Hawaii Department of Transportation Preliminary Design Ala Moana Park is a free public park on the island of Oahu, Hawaii, located between Waikiki and downtown Honolulu. The Ala Moana pedestrian walkway was proposed to address safety and connectivity but encountered local opposition. Durp8ping the pandemic, an online forum was held to allow residents to view preliminary designs, ask questions, and voice their concerns. To support inclusivity, a toll-free call-in number was publicized. The meeting was promoted online as well as in local newspapers and via postcards to reach a broader range of audiences. The postcard prominently stated that no computer or internet was needed to participate: “No computer or internet? No problem!” Notable Elements: • Postcard promotion for virtual forum prominently states “No computer or internet? No problem!” as a toll-free number was made available and publicized to enable diverse participation Source: WSP USA https://hidot.hawaii.gov/highways/ala-moana-boulevard-elevated-pedestrian-walkway-public-question-and-answer-session-october-15-2020/

A-9 Michigan State Long-Range Transportation Plan Phase II (Michigan Mobility 2045) | Michigan Department of Transportation Long-Range Plan The second phase of Michigan Mobility 2045 (MM 2045) combined all federally required statewide modal plans into a single long-range transportation plan document, fulfilling federal requirements for a multimodal long-range transportation plan, rail plan and freight plan. Due to COVID-19, outreach was conducted remotely using telephone town hall meetings and an interactive online survey through MetroQuest. Throughout both phases of MM2045, targeted consideration and attention were given to vulnerable environmental justice populations, marginalized communities, and tribal governments. Michigan’s tribal governments were contacted individually by phone and email to invite them to participate in the MM2045 process, as were organizations representing persons with disability and minority residents. A statewide Attitudes and Perceptions survey was conducted to get input from a representative sample of Michiganders based on US Census data related to the state’s population breakdown by ethnicity, gender and geographic location. The MetroQuest survey received over 7,500 responses and reached tribal and minority citizens in raw numbers larger than the statistically valid Attitudes and Perceptions survey. Telephone Town halls reached and engaged residents in every county in the state. Notable Elements: • Telephone Town Halls engaged over 6,300 residents from all 83 Michigan counties. • The percentage of MetroQuest survey responses from tribal and minority residents exceeded their percentage of the population. Source: WSP USA http://michiganmobility.org/ California Mobility Action Plan | City of West Sacramento City Transportation Plan The West Sacramento Mobility Action Plan is the city's first multimodal plan, which includes recommendations for developing mobility hubs. The public engagement team conducted a series of virtual design workshops that allowed participants to collectively design a mobility hub prototype to meet the needs of their community. • Each group worked on a shared screen using a drag-and-drop exercise to place icons representing potential features on a blank canvas. The features included transportation, safety, culture and technology amenities, and the setup was developed by the engagement team using Adobe Illustrator. • The team moderated discussion about siting options that aligned with the City’s economic development plan and zoning policies, data analysis on mode access, travel patterns, and sense of belonging in public spaces. • Live polling was used to capture data on how residents currently move through the city, how they would like to move through the city, and the gaps or barriers that prevent regular use of alternative modes. • In addition to the public workshops, the team held virtual design workshops with high school students using a “classroom-takeover” strategy to leverage the virtual environment of the pandemic. From discussion, preferred solutions were captured from the community, including pedestrian head-start crossing lights among residents with ability differences; complete sidewalks and protected bike lanes using plant boxes among women with bike and pedestrian safety concerns; real-time information screens and kiosks to schedule rideshare among low-income residents concerned with access to technology; and staffing community guides instead of police based on symbols of safety and security among people of color. Notable Elements: • Virtual design workshops used a shared screen and low-cost “DIY” exercise which was created in Adobe Illustrator. • Virtual workshops were also held with high school students using “classroom-takeovers” while schools were virtual. • Preferred solutions were identified among residents with ability differences, women with safety concerns, low-income residents, and people of color. Source: WSP USA https://www.cityofwestsacramento.org/government/departments/capital-projects-and-transportation/projects/mobility-action-plan Berkeley SafeTREC Community Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Training Program | California Office of Traffic Safety Safety Program This program, funded by a grant from the California Office of Traffic Safety, works to eliminate pedestrian and bicyclist deaths and serious injuries by empowering residents to plan and advocate for safety improvements. The program relies on partnerships with grassroots organizations to engage residents. Upon pivoting to remote programming in spring 2020, office staff adapted their process. They provided a toll-free phone option for virtual workshops and sent print materials in advance, so participants would not be limited by bandwidth capacity or device capabilities. The team acknowledged that it was difficult to engage youth, older adults, and limited English proficiency populations in remote workshops and found that hybrid workshops with an in-person option bolstered participation by these groups. Notable Elements: • Print materials were sent in advance of virtual workshops along with providing a toll-free phone option to participate. Source: Poster, TRB Conference on Advancing Transportation Equity, September 2021

A-10 Harris County Flood Control District 2018 Bond Program | Harris County, TX Flood Control District Non-Transportation Example (Flood Risk Reduction Projects) The Harris County Flood Control District was implementing an influx of projects from the 2018 $2.5 billion bond program when COVID-19 disrupted traditional in-person engagement efforts. As one of the most diverse counties in the country, the mix of non-English speakers, socioeconomic groups, urban and rural areas makes public outreach efforts challenging. The agency implemented a virtual outreach strategy including virtual public meetings, email outreach, social media and online surveys with map comments. The shift to virtual resulted in high turnout from areas of the county that were traditionally hard to reach. Between June 2020 and March of 2021, the Flood Control District hosted more than 30 Virtual Public Meetings for unique projects. The agency has experienced a three-fold increase in meeting attendance and higher rates of public comments. The PublicInput platform was used both for virtual meetings and to manage contact lists and update participants on how public feedback was incorporated into project plans. Notable Elements: • Use of multiple virtual tools resulted in high turnout from areas of the county that had been hard to reach previously. Source: https://www.hcfcd.org/2018-bond-program

Next: Appendix B: Annotated Bibliography »
Virtual Public Involvement: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

During the COVID-19 pandemic, transportation agencies' most used public-engagement tools were virtual public meetings, social media, dedicated project websites or webpages, email blasts, and electronic surveys. As the pandemic subsides, virtual and hybrid models continue to provide opportunities and challenges.

The TRB National Cooperative Highway Research Program's NCHRP Web-Only Document 349: Virtual Public Involvement: Lessons from the COVID-19 Pandemic discusses gaps that need to be addressed so that transportation agencies can better use virtual tools and techniques to facilitate two-way communication with the public.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!