Contact Us   Home | Mn/DOT Policy | Federal Rules and Guidelines | Tools and Resources | Training | Class Registration

Topics of Interest

 

Core Values for Public Participation Programs

 

Spectrum of Participation Levels

 

Mn/DOT’s Public Involvement Approach

 

Developing Your Public Involvement Plan

 

Creating Advisory Committees

 

Public Involvement Plan Template

 

Communications Planning Format

 

Identifying and Involving Stakeholders

 

Communicating with Emotional Stakeholders

 

Choosing Public Involvement Tools and Techniques

 

Conducting a Successful Meeting

 

Meeting Room Checklist

 

Documentation and Evaluation

 

Resources

 

Definitions

Tools & Resources

• Hear Every Voice II: Public Involvement Guidance 2008.pdf
• Planning
• Programming
• Project Development
• Construction
• Maintenance & Operations
• Business Impacts

 

Mn/DOT Goals leading to 21st Century Solutions

"To rebuild public trust and confidence in Mn/DOT and the transportation community as a whole."

 

"To make sure the decisions we make in the future are really being responsive to public values."

 

"To regenerate a spirit of innovation and creativity in the state of Minnesota."

 

Tom Sorel,
Transportation Commissioner

 

Training Participants Quotes

"I am glad to see this course being offered.  In my opinion, it should be a required  course."
Mark Morgan

 

"Well thought out and very organized delivery of material.  Thank you!  Looking forward to the future courses dealing with techniques."
David Larson

 

"The course was outstanding.  It was quite interactive and held my interest."
Dena King

 

"This was a very relevant exercise to try o make public participation planning a piece of every Mn/DOT project.  It should be a part of scoping and its use expanded."
Robert Hutton

 

 

Introduction to Hear Every Voice: Tools and Resources  

 

Mn/DOT is making a commitment to its employees and its transportation partners to support their efforts by providing on-line:

• Planning and implementation tools
• Templates
• Technique and descriptions
• Additional resources
• Examples

 

The dynamic on-line resource will offer new items and be refreshed periodically to provide current best practices and assistance.

 

Foundations of Effective Participation - Tools
What must I understand about participation before I begin?

 

Six powerful concepts!

1. Foundations of Public Participation
2. Core Values for Public Participation Programs
3. Spectrum of Participation Levels
4. Orbits of Participation
5. Mn/DOT's Public Involvement Approach
6. Activities and Techniques for Participation - considerations

 

Foundations of Public Participation
Provided by permission from the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) http://www.iap2.org 

 

Consider the context. All public involvement approaches are not alike! Public involvement plans should be developed and tailored to the complexities of the project.

 

Each Mn/DOT plan, initiative or project is centered within a unique context such as:

• Finance/budgets
• Transportation needs
• Stakeholder values
• Political environment
• Potential impacts

 

Given that the context elements vary with every plan, initiative and project, one cookie approach will not achieve an effective outcome. Nor can one approach meet the public involvement and stakeholder engagement needs in all situations.

 

Go to Top

 

Three guiding principles must be underscored prior to achieving effective involvement of the public in any plan, initiative or project decisions. These foundations are:

• Public participation is value–based.  All parties, both public and governmental, have a set of values that drive their perceptions, opinions and behaviors. Some values are shared by many members of a community; while others are not. Competing and/or conflicting values are the source of most controversy that affects projects. Consequently, understanding how values affect plan, initiative or project decisions will guide the involvement approach applied.  

Example:  A small town highly values their ethnic heritage and the unique character of their downtown. The road authority values highway safety and efficiency.  How can these different value sets work together to solve problems on the section of state highway that runs through the main shopping district?

 

• Public participation is decision-oriented. The outcome of participation must result in the public and/or stakeholders having a role in formulation of direction, recommendations or decisions. If such a role for the public/stakeholders does not exist, public participation is not appropriate. Instead, an alternative that gathers public opinion may be more useful such as market research.
• Public participation is goal and objective driven. Involvement activities with the public are aligned with specific steps in the plan, initiative or project process and clearly articulated goals and objectives for anticipated outcomes of the participation.  Unfocused activities seldom contribute benefits and may be counter-productive. 

Example: During scooping, the decision is made to hold four public open houses. In the scoping phase, specific goals and objectives for involvement have not yet been formulated. Consequently, focus and purpose for the open houses are lacking.

 

As the project progresses and stakeholders and issues are further identified, a clearer awareness of public interest is gained. In re-evaluating the public involvement needs, stakeholders (local government, economic development representatives, large employers, etc.) make it known they have major issues and concerns that they want considered. Open houses, alone, will not meet the expectation/need for participation on the part of those stakeholders.

 

The following objectives need to be met with these stakeholders:

• A dialogue with all parties to get a broader understanding of the different and competing needs of the stakeholders.
• The ability to work together to map alternatives:
• will educate stakeholders regarding federal, state and local standards and guidelines,
• will be generated and reviewed by multiple perspectives,
• will save time and provide the real-time, give-and-take dialogue,
• will provide a workable alternative that satisfies key stakeholders, can be formulated and, then, taken forward for review at an open house.

 

With a clearer understanding of what needs to occur and with whom, a series of hands-on working sessions will be held with key stakeholders. The involvement activity is now focused and has anticipated outcomes that can be measured.

 

Go to Top

 

Core Values for Public Participation Programs

http://www.iap2.org/displaycommon.cfm?an=4

 

Effective public involvement and stakeholder consultation require thoughtfully developed programs of participation. Rigorous consideration should be applied to planning and project management. Such rigor is equally important in the design of public involvement programs.

 

Public involvement programs accomplish the following:

• Clarify the purpose of the plan, initiative or project.
• Identify interested and/or potentially affected parties.
• Broaden the identification of potential impacts and issues.
• Define and communicate how a decision will be made and by whom.  What degree of participation is possible?
• Identify the steps within the plan, initiative or project leading to a decision.
• Set technical and public participation objectives to be achieved at each step.
• Select involvement activities that are designed to achieved the objectives established.  Avoid non-or counter-productive activities and techniques.
• Document and evaluate the process.

 

A best practice framework upon which to design public involvement programs exists within the IAP2 Core Values.  IAP2 has identified common themes among initiatives that have resulted in productive involvement. The purpose of the Core Values is to assist organizations and their public make decisions that reflect the interests and concerns of potentially affected people and entities. They also serve to fulfill the mission and responsibilities of the organizations.

 

Public participation programs should incorporate objectives directly addressing each core value in planning, initiatives and projects. 

 

Spectrum of Participation Levels
There are multiple reasons why all public participation program cannot be alike.  Key examples are listed below.

• The level of impact the public has on the outcome may be minimal.  For example, the decision to install railroad crossing safety devices at a dangerous and accident prone vehicle and pedestrian intersection may be a decision Mn/DOT is compelled to make. The opportunity for the public to affect the decision to install devices is low. (Note, however, that the public and stakeholders may have a role in providing input on issues associated with the crossing devises i.e. impact of stacked traffic on businesses, pedestrian crossing issues, etc.)
• The decision may have few impacts or associated issues about which the public-at-large cares.  For example, resurfacing of a rural section of interstate highway may not garner the interest of the general public.
• Stakeholders and/or members of the public may not want to dedicate considerable time and/or energy to participation.  Their preference may be to give input or react to draft recommendations.
• The level of complexity and/or controversy surrounding a potential outcome/decision may be significant. In these cases, stakeholders and some members of the public may want an extensive, hands-on role in determining the outcome/decision. Others may not.
• The public may not understand that participation has the most affect in the planning stages of an initiative or project. Motivating participation in planning is a considerable challenge. The public requires education and outreach to raise awareness of why participating in planning contributes to future decisions and initiatives.

 

Go to Top

 

Whatever the reason, understanding that the degree of participation applied will vary with each plan, initiative and/or project.

 

An interpretation of this concept in has been created in the “IAP2’s Public Participation Spectrum.”

 

The Spectrum identifies five degrees or levels of participation.  Each level is accompanied by a goal of what will be achieved with the public/stakeholders.  Also, each level clearly notes the responsibility of the organization to the public – a promise.  Brief descriptions of the levels appear below.  For more detail go to http://www.iap2.org/associations/4748/files/Spectrum.pdf.

•  Inform
• Goal:  Provide balanced, objective information.
• Promise:  Keep the public apprised of activities and outcomes.
• Consult
• Goal: Obtain feedback on potential solutions and recommendations presented.  
• Promise:  Keep the public informed, listen to and acknowledge public input and identify how public input affected the decision.
• Involve
• Goal:  Maintain on-going communication with the public throughout the planning process, initiative or project – to ensure public concerns and aspirations are consistently understood and considered. 
• Promise:  Consider input and reflect public opinion/needs in the outcome/decision whenever feasible. Report back to the public on how input impacted the decision (or, if not, why).
• Collaborate
• Goal: Partner with the public to develop ideas and/or alternatives to address issues.
• Promise: Look to the public and stakeholders to actively assist in the development of the plan, initiative or project.
• Empower
• Goal: Place the final decisions in the hands of the stakeholders and/or public.
• Promise: Implement the decision of the stakeholders and/or public.

 

A promise of any level between 2 & 5 (Consult to Empower) always includes the goals and objectives of the next descending number level. Collaboration also includes informing, consulting with and involving the public.

 

Selection of the appropriate degree/level of participation on the Spectrum occurs when the need and desire of the public to participate and feasibility issues come into balance.  Feasibility issues to consider include:

• Controversy of the issue
• Potential risks from doing an abbreviated public participation process
• Valid time constraints
• Limited budgets
• Availability of personnel skilled in advanced participation techniques.    

 

Promising a role for the public that the organization cannot implement or sustain has long-lasting repercussions. Faith and trust, both internally and externally, can be broken. Future participation is jeopardized. The opportunity for political intervention increases. Consequently, selection of the degree/level from the Spectrum ultimately cannot exceed what can be delivered.

 

Go to Top

 

Orbits of Participation
Not every member of the public or every stakeholder will share the same amount of interest and commitment to the plan, initiative or project. The following diagram shows that the further the public and stakeholders perceive themselves to be from the impacts of a decision/outcome – the less intense is their interest and commitment to participation.

 

Labels applied to the orbits reflect the level of interest of the individual in participating. Deciders want to be “at the table.” Planners want to be actively involved in identifying needs, formulating concepts and establishing decision criteria.

 

Used with permission of Lorenz Aggens, Founding Member, IAP2

 

Mn/DOT’s Public Involvement Approach
In developing a public involvement plan, consider Mn/DOT’s public involvement approach:

 

Early and continuing public involvement opportunities throughout the transportation planning and programming process.

 

Timely information about transportation issues and processes to citizens, other interested parties, and segments of the community affected by transportation plans, programs, and projects.

 

Reasonable public access to technical and policy information used in the development of the plan and STIP.

 

Adequate public notice of public involvement activities and time for public review and comment at key decision points, including, but not limited to, action on the plan and STIP.

 

A process for demonstrating explicit consideration and response to public input during the planning and program development process.

 

A process for seeking out and considering the needs of those traditionally underserved by existing transportation systems, such as low-income and minority households which may face challenges accessing employment and other amenities.

 

Periodic review of the effectiveness of the public involvement process to ensure that the process provides full and open access to all and revision of the process as necessary.

 

Activities and Techniques for Participation – considerations
Risk is high if techniques are selected prior to adequate participation planning!

 

Essential steps to technique selection are:

 

 

Links to Tools and Resources by Type

 

1. Assessing the Need for Participation – Tools
2. Designing a Participation Plan – Tools
3. Selecting and Implementing Participation Techniques – Tools
4. Communicating with the Public and Stakeholders – Tools
   1. Communications Planning Format
   2. Public Information – Design Build
   3. Mn/DOT Design Build Public Information Check List
5. Other Resources
   1. Practitioner's Handbook - The Center for Environmental Excellence by AASHTO

 

Go to Top