Open Collections

UBC Graduate Research

Public Consultation Data Analysis : A Review of Qualitative Data Analysis Methods in Planning and Engagement Solmundson, Maureen 2019-09-30

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Notice for Google Chrome users:
If you are having trouble viewing or searching the PDF with Google Chrome, please download it here instead.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
66428-Solmundson_Maureen_PLAN_528A_Public_consultation_data_analysis_final_report.pdf [ 1.66MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 66428-1.0392607.json
JSON-LD: 66428-1.0392607-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 66428-1.0392607-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 66428-1.0392607-rdf.json
Turtle: 66428-1.0392607-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 66428-1.0392607-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 66428-1.0392607-source.json
Full Text
66428-1.0392607-fulltext.txt
Citation
66428-1.0392607.ris

Full Text

UBC Social Ecological Economic Development Studies (SEEDS) Sustainability Program Student Research Report Public Consultation Data Analysis:  A Review of Qualitative Data Analysis Methods in Planning and Engagement Maureen Solmundson University of British Columbia PLAN 528ATheme: Waste, Buildings, ClimateSeptember 30, 2019 Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS Sustainability Program provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student research project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore, readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Sustainability Program representative about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report”.PUBLIC CONSULTATION DATA ANALYSIS: A review of qualitative data analysis methods in planning and engagement Prepared by: Maureen SolmundsonIn Partnership with Campus and Community Planning, University of British ColumbiaSeptember 2019E X E C U T I V E  S U M M A R YThis project is part of the UBC SEEDS Sustainability program and is in partnership with UBC’s Campus and Community Planning (C+CP) department. The project seeks to advance the ability of C+CP staff to analyze community feedback and report back on what they heard through public consultation in a more robust and meaningful way. To accomplish this, the project consisted of three parts: background research, informant interviews and a document analysis of consultation summary reports from various organizations. Thirteen informants were interviewed and ten consultation summary reports were reviewed, along with two C+CP documents. The report is organized around four key insights that emerged from the document review and informant interviews. These include:1.  Data analysis is just one part of the process. How you design the engagement, the questions asked, and what you do with the data is more important.2. It’s not just about numbers, but the overall meaning.3. Engagement by its very nature is biased and that is okay. Be upfront about who participated in the process and who did  not.4. Building trust and being accountable are essential.Integrated throughout the key findings sections are general ‘tips and tricks’ for all engagement professionals. C+CP is doing many of these already and can choose what to glean from these tips, if relevant.The findings revealed that C+CP is already doing many of the ‘best practices’ identified by other engagement professionals.  A major limitation of this research was that there is a gap in the academic literature related to public opinion polling data analysis (related to qualitative data) methodologies. Another limitation was that informant interviews were conducted with experts working in non-academic settings. A recommendation of this report is to conduct further research with academic institutions and academic researchers on this topic. Coupled with this research, academic informants interviews could help C+CP improve their data analysis.Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 3C O N T E N T SI N T R O D U C T I O N  4M E T H O D O LO GY 6D O C U M E N T A N A LY S I S  8K E Y F I N D I N G S  1 1R E C O M M E N D AT I O N S  2 5R E F E R E N C E S  2 8A P P E N D I C E S   2 9Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 4I N T R O D U C T I O NPublic engagement is an integral part of the planning process. It is becoming increasingly expected in public institutions throughout decision-making processes . Nurturing public engagement is a fundamental goal that many local governments and public institutions share, including the University of British Columbia (UBC). This research focuses on analyzing qualitative data analysis methods in order to provide recommendations to Campus and Community Planning (C+CP) at UBC.Several public engagement frameworks exist that identify core values or principles that are important to public participation processes. The International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) in an organization which promotes the values and best practices associated with involving the public in government decisions that affect their lives. Many practitioners working in public participation look to IAP2 for best practices. The organization also provides training and a certification program for public participation professionals.  IAP2 has developed 7 core values that they believe should be incorporated into every public participation process (a set of these principles in included in Appendix A). UBC also has its own set of engagement principles and guiding practices, titled “The Engagement Charter”. The Engagement Charter includes a set of principles for defining, designing, implementing and concluding public engagement for planning processes (included in Appendix B). This charter governs how public engagement processes are designed, implemented and concluded at UBC.The public engagement process in general and at UBC typically consists of the following:11. Defining the process2. Designing and implementing the process3. Concluding the process (reporting, evaluating, etc.)It is the last part of the public engagement process – concluding the process - that is the focus of this report. Specifically, this project looks at analysis and reporting of input from public consultation processes. Analyzing the data that is collected during a public consultation process is a major challenge that many practitioners in the field continue to struggle with. Some questions that arise include:• What is the best way to interpret data in a objective and neutral way? • How should the process be structured to ensure information collected is useful?• How can we balance perspectives and voices (who are either in support or opposition) while 1  From UBC’s Engagement Charter.Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 5remaining transparent?• How can we reach a representative population to ensure different voices are being included?This project seeks to answer some of these questions. P r o j e c t  C o n t e x tThis project is part of the UBC SEEDS Sustainability program and is in partnership with UBC’s Campus and Community Planning (C+CP) department. C+CP is responsible for the long-range planning of the UBC campus. Some of this work includes campus and landscape design, licensing and permitting, regulating development, and creating land use policy. Public engagement is integrated into the planning and design process to create two-way communication, informed participation, and a culture of collaboration.This project seeks to advance the ability of C+CP staff to analyze community feedback and report back on what they heard through public consultation in a more robust and meaningful way. Strengthening the analysis and reporting process will ultimately build greater trust between C+CP staff and the UBC Community.   Currently, C+CP conducts surveys with both qualitative and quantitative questions to better understand the community’s interests at different stages of key planning projects on campus. Staff conduct qualitative theming analyses on survey data, then provide a “summary consultation report” summarizing community feedback and input received during the engagement process.The author would like to thank the Public Engagement staff at UBC’s C+CP for the opportunity to contribute to this research and for their feedback throughout the duration of the project. P r o j e c t  O b j e c t i v e sThe project’s main purpose is to review current public consultation feedback analysis methods and provide recommendations for how to improve the data analysis approach to better align with the C+CP Engagement Charter. More specifically, the project objectives (provided by C+CP) included the following:Conduct a review of best practices for public institutional survey analysis;Conduct interviews with engagement staff from other public institutions and organizations to better understand their survey methodologies; andProvide a critique on C+CP’s current process of public engagement survey analysis and recommendations on how to improve the C+CP survey analysis process to better meet the goals of the C+CP Engagement Charter. Introduction123Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 6M E T H O D O LO GYThe key findings and recommendations are informed by background research, a document review, and informant interviews. The project consisted of three parts. The first part included exploratory and background research on public consultation data analysis in planning. The second part involved informational interviews with engagement and planning professionals. In the third part, a review of “consultation summary reports” was conducted. B a c k g r o u n d  R e s e a r c h / D o c u m e n t  R e v i e wLiterature directly speaking to data analysis in engagement and planning was limited. The focus shifted to a document review of “what we heard”/consultation summary reports which helped to understand how data collected in public engagement processes was being analyzed and reported on. These summary reports often described what they did (what type of engagement), how they collected the data and how the data was analyzed and coded. Eight engagement summary reports were reviewed and analyzed. The eight reports were recommended by the interviewees. Two C+CP reports were then reviewed and compared against the eight reports (discussed in the analysis section).The following is a list of documents reviewed (a full list of reports and links is included in Appendix C):1. Olympic Plaza Cultural District Engagement & Design Report (October 2016)2. What We Heard: No. 264 – A new vision for the Kensington Legion Site (Fall 2015)3. Millennium Line Extension Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report ( July 2017)4. Social Sustainability Strategy for Township of Langley – Phase 1 and 2 Engagement Summary (July 2018)5. Vancouver’s Non-motorized Watercraft Recreation Strategy (Phase 3 Summary Report) 6. Metro Vancouver Mobility Pricing Study (May 2018)7. BC Ferries Horseshoe Bay Terminal Development, Summary of Phase 3 Engagement Results Background ResearchDocument ReviewInformant InterviewsKey Findings and RecommendationsPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 7(June 2018)8. BC Ferries: Ferries for the Next Generation Engagement Summary Report (August 2019)9. What We Heard - City of Calgary 2026 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games Bid engagement program (November 2018)10. New Westminster: Official Community Plan Review - Summary of Feedback (April 2017)More details on key findings from this document review is included in the document analysis section of this report.Engagement platform organizations such as ‘Bang The Table’ and ‘Delib’ also provided informational articles on their website discussing qualitative data analysis. These resources also informed the key findings and recommendations, and are included in the references section. I n f o r m a n t  I n t e r v i e w sThirteen individuals were initially contacted for informant interviews. Of the thirteen, eight interviews were conducted. Of the eight interviews, five were conducted with individuals working in the public sector (for local governments or public institutions) and three were with individuals working in the private sector (consulting). A list of those interviewed is included in Appendix D. The following organizations were interviewed:PUBLIC SECTOR• YVR Community Relations• BC Ferries• City of New Westminster• City of Port Alberni• City of Powell RiverPRIVATE SECTOR• Intelligent Futures, Engagement Firm• MODUS Planning & Engagement• Context, Engagement FirmAn interview guide was created to help guide the interviews. However, the interviews were meant to be organic-flowing, and the questions only helped to guide the conversation. Not all questions in the guide were always asked, and new questions were asked depending on the conversations. A copy of the interview guide is included in Appendix E. MethodologyPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 8D O C U M E N T A N A LY S I S10 reports were analyzed to review how different organizations report out on community input. The reports offer different contexts – some were technical, and others were broader in scope and visionary. The nature of the reporting out often depended on the context of the engagement process. For example, some of the reports were more ‘closed’ and sought opinion on specific questions (Millennium Line Broadway Extension, Vancouver’s Non-motorized Watercraft recreation strategy). These reports tended to report on feedback matter-of-factly, going question by question. Others were more ‘open’ and sought general input. These reports tended to summarize feedback more generally.A table summarizing the reports is included in Appendix F and identifies the following:• Type of report (i.e. who is the information for? What was the input sought on?);• A description of report;• Data collection methods;• Number of participants involved in the data collection;• How the data organizes the reporting out of input, • Whether counts were included or not;• What kind of demographics were collected; • The timing of the report (i.e. if it came out after the planning process was over, etc.); and• Any special notes of interest.Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 9A n a l y s i s  o f  C C + P  D o c u m e n t sRaw data spreadsheets and summary reports by C+CP were provided for review. Two reports provided were reviewed to gain an understanding of the current reporting and what could be improved. The two reports reviewed include:• Stadium Neighbourhood Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report (May 2019) •  U Boulevard Area 2018 Updates Phase 2 Consultation Summary Report (Winter 2018)A brief description of the report and how the data was presented follows.Stadium Neighbourhood The purpose of the engagement was to get feedback on plan options. Feedback collected was organized by key elements of the plan options (Building Types and Height, Public Realm and Ecology, Street Connectivity and Access and Community Amenities). Feedback was also sought on the potential to add more housing for the UBC Community as well as general feedback on the plan overall.The survey included both qualitative and quantitative questions asking for the publics preference for options or general comments. Demographics were also collected on UBC affiliation (i.e. student, staff, faculty, alumni, UBC resident, etc). The consultation summary report organizes input by the key elements of the plan options which also was the topic of each question.  Under each element, the question asked is shown and sub-themes are shown in a table.The number of comments received for each sub-theme is shown. The results from the quantitative questions are compared against the qualitative analysis.An example of how the data is presented is shown in the table below2:2 Stadium Neighbourhood Phase 3 Consultation Summary Report, p. 14Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 10U BoulevardThis report sought input on the draft design vision for revitalizing the Bosque. Both quantitative and qualitative questions were included, asking for preference or general comments. Demographics were collected on UBC affiliation (i.e. student, resident, faculty, etc.). The input is presented by theme with sub-themes listed and includes counts (number of times participants made a comment for each theme or sub-theme).  The report also incorporates quotes from participants throughout the report, which gives the reader a strong understanding of sentiment.Combined, the review of 10 engagement summary reports,  2 CC+P summary reports,  background research and 8 informant interviews, 4 key f indings emerged. These key f indings inform the recommendations for CC+P, described in the next section.Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 11K E Y F I N D I N G SData analysis is just one part of the process. How you design the engagement, the questions asked, and what you do with the data is more important.It’s not just about numbers, but the overall meaning.Engagement by its very nature is biased and that is okay. Be upfront about who participated in the process and who did not.Building trust and b eing accountable are essential.1 .2 .3 .4 .Key  F i n d i n g sPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 12D a ta  a n a l ys i s  i s  j u s t  o n e  p a r t  o f  t h e  p ro ce s s . h ow  yo u  d e s i g n  t h e  e n g a g e m e nt,  t h e  q u e s t i o n s a s ke d ,  a n d  w h a t  yo u  d o  w i t h  t h e  d a ta  a re  m o re i m p o r ta nt .1 .“There’s a whole process including creating the communications and engagement strategy. What’s governing the strategy will govern what questions you ask and how you analyze it. We always try to have a robust engagement strategy in the beginning that lays out exactly what questions we’ll ask and how we’ll report on it, etc. Data analysis is just part of that, the things that come before are extremely important.”- Engagement Consultant, Private FirmAn emerging finding in this research was that the data analysis is one part of a large process that goes in engagement.  How data will be interpreted depends on the goal of the public engagement process. A couple informants stressed that the first step in data analysis is to plan your communications/engagement strategy. A good place to start is by asking the following:What am I trying to find out? What data do I need? How will I report the findings? Some engagement processes may have the goal of seeking a broad range of views and comments from the public, while others may be seeking specific input on specific options that will factor into a decision making process (i.e. should we go with Option A or B?).  A report seeking to find general comments and views should attempt to extract a number of conclusions from the data by summarizing the most prominent points. If the goal is to get answers on very specific options, questions will likely be closed-ended such as yes or no questions with limited qualitative questions. In this case, the analysis will seek to clarify the answers to these specific questions. Informants discussed that the data analysis and reporting out depends on the goal of the engagement. Understanding the main goal behind the public engagement process will shape what kind of questions you ask. It was also mentioned that during the communications strategy brainstorming step, it is essential to have questions that will be meaningful to the project team (i.e. questions shouldn’t be asked that the team can do nothing about). Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 13The research showed that almost all organizations (including C+CP) are doing data analysis very similarly. There were slight variations such as programs used or how they report on the findings. In analyzing C+CP’s raw data and consultation summary reports, it was clear that they are very rigorous in their analysis, in fact more rigorous than other organizations. C+CP applies academic rigour to their analysis being as they are an academic institution. The key informants interviews occurred with professionals working in non-academic settings and therefore there was a gap around evidence-based approaches taken to data analysis.One informant spoke of how their staff apply the level of academic rigour in their data analysis that they learned through their academic backgrounds at university. It was difficult to assess data analysis methods as organizations could only share consultation summary reports which were public and the researcher was not privy to their raw data or to observe how they do this. A second round of interviews in the future which dives deeper into this could be helpful.As mentioned, the interviews revealed that data analysis is done similarly by all, with a few small variations. The general steps include:1. Organize the data2. Coding3. Review and read the data4. Choose your codes.5. Go through data and assign code to every piece of data.6. Report out on what you heard (by theme or by question).These steps are described below in more detail:O r g a n i z e  t h e  D a t aThe majority of interviewees organized data in a spreadsheet form (using Excel or Google Sheets). One organization organizes the data in a word document, as this is the format they need to import the data into a coding software they use (the software is called Dedoose). A Bang the Table (a popular online engagement platform) webinar on qualitative data analysis identified two ways to possibly organize the data. As shown in the screenshot below, data is organized data source, and multiple codes going across the X-axis (in columns).  Key FindingsPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 14The second way that was identified by the webinar is to go by person (labelling them). This was said to be a method to use if you know it’s the same person saying something multiple times. The webinar did not discuss how to analyze this when it came to reporting.C o d e  t h e  D a t a1. Review and Read the Data This step often comes before you come up with the codes. There are different ways to select the codes such as:• Inductive/open: This is when there are no pre-decided codes. You can go in and read the data and select codes. • Deductive/selective: This is when you already have a specific set of themes (such as topic areas, principles, etc.) that you are looking to fit the data too.Which method is chosen depends on the project and what the main objectives of the project are. A best practice identified in this research is to go in and read a proportion of the data (depending on how much data you have, some suggested reading a quarter, others suggested 10% of the data) and to select your codes from that sample. A further step is to then switch with a colleague (once you have read some sample of the data) and have a discussion about what you each coded data as and whether it is accurate. This can help to check biases and create a more objective analysis process. The code selection process is iterative, often going through at least a couple rounds. One interviewee noted that they do around 3 rounds of coding. In the first round, 12 – 20 themes are brainstormed. Then, they will apply 1 – 3 themes to each piece of data. By the second or third round of coding, the ideal number of codes is around 8 – 12 codes. The next step is to sub-code, there can be many sub-codes.ThemesDemographic data Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 15Another interviewee explained that a preliminary review of the data is conducted to come up with main themes, then various members of the team work on google sheets to code each piece of data.  A meeting is sometimes set up as a team to make sure everyone is interpreting codes the same way. Multiple rounds of coding, which get finer-grained, take place. One organization interviewed explained their use of a software called Dedoose. Dedoose is a software that helps to code and analyze data. It was explained that the user uploads the codes that will be used. In their coding process, they will do a scan of the first 50 – 100 responses, usually in pairs. Once the codes are selected (and uploaded to the software), one person will typically go through assigning codes to every piece of data. An interviewee working in local government noted that if it is a big process (large data set), a team meeting will be scheduled to go through the data together and come up with themes. Coding Framework/Reference SheetThe background research and many of the interviewees noted that once you have selected a set of codes, having a coding reference or framework sheet is useful. A coding framework/reference sheet is a legend for your codes that lists the codes and what they mean. Planning the codes in advance helps to create a more objective analysis and helps to not have too many codes. Code and Sub-CodeOnce the coding framework is developed, each piece of data is assigned codes in the first round. In the next round(s), the comments may be assigned sub-codes.2. Analyze the DataIn this step, the majority of the interviewees use the pivot table feature in Excel to analyze the data. The major themes (most common), trends and/or patterns are identified. If demographic data is available, cross-tabulation and filtering can be done to determine if any significant trends appear.*A note on comments which touch on multiple themes: if a comment mentions more than one theme, assign it multiple themes. If you are providing percentages, ensure you are taking the total number of codes, not respondents. For example, if 3,500 people participated and 10,000 separate comments (assigned codes) were generated, you use the 10,000 to generate a percentage.Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 16T I P S  A N D  T R I C K S : The following is a list of general practical tips and tricks learned from the previous section, on data collection, coding and analysis for all public institutions or those doing related public opinion polling work:• Prior to beginning engagement, strategically determine what information you need, what questions will get you that information, and how you will set up the summary report. • Before beginning coding of data, a clear idea of how the report will be organized should be understood. • Depending on the project size, context and resourcing, perform a preliminary review of data coding in either pairs  (a senior manager should be involved) or as a team (if project is large).• Create a coding framework/reference sheet/legend that describes the codes.• Separate comments that are about the process or are not directly related to the aims of the engagement. Report on these questions separately. DATA COLLECTION AND CODINGKey  F i n d i n g sPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 172 I t ’s  n ot  j u s t  a b o u t  t h e  n u m b e rs ,  b u t  t h e  ove ra l l m e a n i n g .“I try not to be a slave to the question and instead report on themes. Earlier on in my career, I used to go question by question, but when I got more experienced, I realized people don’t always respond to that question there. They say whatever is on their mind and put their answers everywhere.” `- Senior Planner, Local Government-  Five of the ten reports analyzed did not include counts3. One report only included counts when doing a detailed analysis meaning that some themes showed counts and other did not.4 Examples are shown on the next page. Organizing by theme emerged in interviews as a way to neutralize or balance the data.One interviewee expressed that decision makers can get hung up on numbers that, in the end, are not statistically significant. Another interviewee reported that in cases where sample sizes were small, they never reported on counts. Deciding to include counts depends on the nature of the report and what information is needed. If the report is asking respondents to vote on preferences, then counts make sense. If a report is looking to gather general sentiments and public input, themes may be more meaningful.How data is reported out became more important in this research than how the data was being coded or analyzed because meaning is created through the reporting. When conducting the document analysis of ten reports, it was observed that the majority of the documents reported by theme, and few by question. Two of the reports organized by broader “research areas”,  topics, or by principles. For example, one report prepared for a contentious proposed development provided input organized by the project principles which became prominent themes. This was a powerful way to tell the story of the data because it brings the reader back to the foundation of the project – the principles we can all agree on.3  Two of the four reports included counts in the appendix, however, did not include in the body of the report.4  The BC Ferries Next Generation report included two types of analysis: detailed and summarized. All data was reported by theme and sub-theme. For some themes (more complex ones), counts were provided. For others, counts were not provided. Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 18Some examples of report layouts (with commentary in blue and indicated by arrows) are shown below:Project principleKey theme (emerged from of engagement)Sub-themes (highlighted yellow, explain what participants said about heights)Example verbatim help reader to how people said what they did about heights. Quotes add colour and help tell the story. Easy to read in a table-like formatIncludes counts in an easy to see where the most common comments wereIncludes snapshot of comments that fall under that themeMain themeSub-themeThemes only shown, no countsFrom: What We Heard: No. 264 – A new vision for the Kensington Legion Site (Fall 2015)From: Metro Vancouver Mobility Pricing Report From: BC Ferries Horseshoe Bay Terminal Development, Summary of Phase 3 Engagement Results (June 2018)Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 19Used two ways to analyze - summary analysis and detailed analysis (for more complex  topics)Uses demographic data collected to show relationships between answersFrom: BC Ferries Next Generation Engagement Summary ReportThis page is taken from the  the reportSame question, in appendix with themes, and sub-themesThemes shown only, no countsFrom: Olympic Plaza Cultural District Engagement & Design Report (October 2016)Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 20T I P S  A N D  T R I C K S : The following list are some practical tips and tricks learned from the previous section, on report layout and presentation for all public institutions or those working in engagement:• You do not always need to include counts, instead present the themes and its sub-themes. Counts can be included in the appendix for transparency. Telling the story and providing the meaning is the goal.• Come up with creative ways to present the data that is digestible and easy to read for the public (i.e. by project principle, see page 17, what we heard for the legion report for an example)• Try to dig deeper behind participants responses to questions to learn what their motivations are for answering a question the way they did. For example, if respondents say “no buildings above 20-22 storeys”, look for and present reasons why they say this. Are they concerned about shadowing? Their views being impacted? etc. This can be done by theming by building and height and then describing sub-themes under that (shadowing, privacy, etc.). Present the data in this way so that motivators are clear.• Consider summarizing feedback in a snapshot format such as an infographic so that those who do not have time to read the whole report can get the overview quickly. An example of a snapshot infographic is included in Appendix G.• Consider the different audiences who will read the report. Readers have different levels of engagement: they may skim, absorb or analyze the content. The report should be laid out in a way that can satisfy all three.1 1 For a further explanation on this and an excellent resource on visuals in planning, see UBC graduate research report on “Planning Visually: design that takes plans off the shelf and into the public.” by Aaron Lao.REPORT LAYOUT AND PRESENTATIONKey  F i n d i n g sPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 21En g a g e m e nt  by  i t s  ve r y  n a t u re  i s  b i a s e d  a n d  t h a t ’s o ka y.  B e  u pf ro nt  a b o u t  w h o  p a r t i c i p a te d  i n  t h e  p ro -ce s s  a n d  w h o  d i d  n ot .3Due to the nature of public engagement, consultations are often not fully representative. Key informants suggested that using language such as “40% of responses received”, can help distinguish that. Pulling data from multiple sources was also identified as a strategy to balance representation. For example, pulling in survey data, focus group data and stakeholder data together in the analysis can provide a broader representation and may show patterns or trends.One interviewee emphasized the importance of making sure that minority perspectives are amplified. Part of this is ensuring the “seldom heard” are reached out to. For example, another interviewee spoke of an example from a public engagement process for an Official Community Plan. It was found that home-owners were over-represented in survey data. Once they realized this, they launched engagement strategies to target renter-householders (through facebook ads, etc.)Demographics can also be part of this. Collecting demographics can be powerful. Demographic data can be used to cross-tabulate (for example, comparing the same answers against demographics to see if there is a pattern) to show who is being overrepresented or underrepresented.  For example, the Social Sustainability Strategy report for the Township of Langley includes a section at the end explaining who was overrepresented in the data. The BC Ferries Next Generation summary report notes demographic trends where they are significant. For example, when asked what elements could be offered to make outdoor spaces better on the ferries, under the sub-theme, music, it was noted that 65+ year-olds were more likely to make a comment related no music. It was noted by interviewees and observed through the document analysis, that demographic measures are more meaningful when compared against the neighbourhood demographic/profile.However, it was noted by an interviewee that people are becoming increasingly protective of their privacy and data, and are less likely to be keen to share data such as age, gender or income. It was noted by a couple interviewees that data that will not be used should not be collected, therefore do not collect demographic data unless you intend to use it meaningfully. Five of the ten reports collected demographic data (beyond location) and reported on it. One report only asked for location, while five asked for further demographics such as income, age, gender, etc. Four did not share any demographic data (so can be assumed it was not collected). The decision to collect demographic data depends on the nature of the project and the goal of engagement.Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 22T I P S  A N D  T R I C K S : REPRESENTATION AND DEMOGRAPHICSThe following list are some practical tips and tricks learned from the previous section, on representation and demographics for all public institutions and engagement professionals:• Think about what kind of demographics could help to understand people’s sentiments and include demographic questions in the data collection process that will help elevate the data analysis. (*note: only include demographic questions if you will use it).• Use demographics collected to cross-tabulate. (e.g. what percentage of those aged 65+ disliked option A?)• If the data pertains, include a statement about who is being overrepresented or underrepresented. Amplify minority perspectives. • Include a disclaimer in the report that the data is not representative of all views and is only representative of views of those who chose to participate.Key  F i n d i n g sPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 23Tra n s p a re n cy,  b u i l d i n g  t r u s t  a n d  b e i n g  a cco u nta b l e a re  e s s e nt i a l .4 “Don’t direct questions you can’t do anything about. The questions have to be carefully thought out. You have to be accountable”- Engagement Specialist, Private FirmA key finding that emerged in this research was the importance of transparency, building trust and being accountable. This begins with the types of questions included in the engagement – only questions which will be useful to the team should be asked. It was noted by interviewees that the process should make it clear what the goals of engagement are and what people are invited to comment on. Transparency can be tackled by providing responses to comments if possible. For example, in “A New Vision for the Kensington Legion Site - What We Heard” report, project team responses were provided under each theme. In these responses, the team answered questions, clarified matters, explained certain decisions and noted what they were planning to change now that they had this input. This was similarly done in the report summarizing the engagement on Olympic Plaza. The City provided ‘practical considerations’ and also best practices/leading thinking in those areas was explained. Of course, this takes more work and depends on when the consultation report comes out and what the context of the project is. Response from team From What We Heard: A New Vision for the Kensington Legion Site Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 24T I P S  A N D  T R I C K S : TRANSPARENCY, TRUST AND ACCOUNTABILITYThe following list are some practical tips and tricks learned from the previous section, on transparency, building trust and being accountable for all public institutions or those working in engagement:• Do not ask questions you cannot do anything about. • Always try to respond to questions, matters of clarification and concerns in summary reports. For example, if there are practical considerations behind certain elements that people are showing concern about, explain what these are. This will help create transparency, educate people and ultimately build trust.• Close the loop after concluding an engagement process by sharing with participants what you did, what you heard and what impact their feedback had or will have (i.e. how is the plan being changed according to feedback, was there any feedback that will not be taken because it is not feasible, why?)• Include all verbatim comments in appendix.Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 25R E C O M M E N D AT I O N SBelow is a list of all of the tips and tricks from each section that along with the key findings, form the basis of the recommendations for all public institutions doing engagement and for other organizations doing related work. C+CP is already doing many of these ‘best practices’ and the recommendations serve as a refresher and are to be used as a general resource for those interested in elevating their engagement. Data Collection and Coding• Prior to beginning engagement, strategically determine what information you need, what questions will get you that information, and how you will set up the summary report. • Before beginning coding of data, a clear idea of how the report will be organized should be understood. • Depending on the project size, context and resourcing, perform a preliminary review of data in either pairs or as a team (if there is a lot of data and the project is large).• Create a coding framework/reference sheet/legend that describes the codes.• Separate comments that are about the process or are not directly related to the aims of the engagement. Report on these questions separately. Report Layout and Presentation• Decide how to lay out the report and whether it will be by question or themes. • Counts may not always be necessary. If they are not included, they can be included in the appendix for transparency. • Explore creative ways to present the data that is digestible and easy to read for the public. • Dig deeper behind participants responses to questions to learn what their motivations are for answering a question the way they did. For example, if respondents say “no buildings above 20-22 storeys”, look for and present reasons why they say this. Are they concerned about shadowing? Their views being impacted? etc. This can be done by theming by building and height and then describing sub-themes under that (shadowing, privacy, etc.).Representation and Demographics• Think about what kind of demographics could help understand people’s sentiments and include demographic questions in the data collection process that will help elevate the data analysis. However, demographics are most powerful with large sample sizes.• Use demographics collected to cross-tabulate. For example, what percentage of students Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 26who participated in stadium neighbourhood had concerns about building types and heights?• If the data pertains, include a statement about who is being overrepresented or underrepresented. Amplify minority perspectives. • Ensure questions asked are around areas that are negotiable (i.e. can be changed).Transparency, Trust and Accountability• Always try to respond to questions, matters of clarification and concerns in summary reports. For example, if there are practical considerations behind certain elements that people are showing concern about, explain what these are. This will help create transparency, educate people and ultimately build trust.• Close the loop after concluding an engagement process by sharing with participants what you did, what you heard and what impact their feedback had or will have (i.e. how is the plan being changed according to feedback, was there any feedback that will not be taken because it is not feasible, why?)• Include all verbatim comments in appendix.These tips are general and are for all public institutions and engagement professions. C+CP is already doing many of the techniques, tips and approaches described in this report and analyzing data in a rigorous way. This research found that there is a gap in the academic literature around public participation data analysis methodologies. Further, interviews surrounded around experts who work in non-academic settings.  Because C+CP works in an academic setting, there is a higher standard when it comes to data analysis. Many of the informants discussed applying a level of rigour to their analysis. However, it was difficult to gauge this across all the informants as the researcher did not have access to their raw data or get to see exactly how they code and analyze.Further research is recommended focusing on interviews with academics (e.g. researchers at UBC) and other academic and public institutions (e.g Simon Fraser University) to gain further insight into this topic. Research with academic informants will allow C+CP to integrate the insights learned in this research into an academic context. RecommendationsPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 27Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 28R E F E R E N C E SQualtiative Analysis for Community Engagement with Nathan Connors and Koel Wrigley, Bang the Table, [Video], found here: https://www.bangthetable.com/resources/engagement-webinars/qualitative-analysis-community-engagement/?fbclid=IwAR2m_ByYg3I_LVbT1Wp0l_gw5NDMB4UEXiL4a_5SvQOqUTcCmNzWsIiyawUAnalysis: Getting to Know Your Data, Matthew Horsnby of Delib, found here: https://delib.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/203431249-Analysis-Getting-to-know-your-dataPlanning Visually: design that takes plans off the shelf and into the public, Aaron Lao, found here: https://ubc.summon.serialssolutions.com/2.0.0/link?t=1565665531327Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 29A P P E N D I C E SA p p e n d i x  A :  I A P 2  P u b l i c  Pa r t i c i p a t i o n  Co re  Va l u e sA p p e n d i x  B :  U B C  -  En g a g e m e nt  C h a r te rA p p e n d i x  C :  D o c u m e nts  Rev i ewe dA p p e n d i x  D :  I n te r v i ew  L i s t A p p e n d i x  E :  I n te r v i ew  G u i d eA p p e n d i x  F :  D o c u m e nt  Rev i ew  Co m p a r i s o n  Ta b l eA p p e n d i x  G :  E xa m p l e  En g a g e m e nt  S n a p s h otPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 30IAP2 CORE VALUES FOR THE PRACTICE OF PUBLIC PARTICIPATION1. Public participation is based on the belief that those who are affected by a decision have a right to be involved in the decision-making process.2. Public participation includes the promise that the public’s contribution will influence the decision. 3. Public participation promotes sustainable decisions by recognizing and communicating the needs and interests of all participants, including decision makers. 4. Public participation seeks out and facilitates the involvement of those potentially affected by or interested in a decision. 5. Public participation seeks input from participants in designing how they participate. 6. Public participation provides participants with the information they need to participate in a meaningful way. 7. Public participation communicates to participants how their input affected the decision.Source: https://www.iap2.org/page/corevaluesAppendix A - IAP2 Core Values for Public ParticipationPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 31ENGAGEMENT PRINCIPLES  AND GUIDING PRACTICES(“THE ENGAGEMENT CHARTER”)Appendix B - UBC Engagement CharterPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 32UBC is a unique and diverse community. It is a global centre for research  and teaching, with a large student population that changes regularly, the third largest employer in Metro Vancouver, and a growing residential community.  UBC also plays an important role in both the regional and provincial economy,  is neighbours with the City of Vancouver, University Endowment Lands, and is located on traditional ancestral unceded territory of the Musqueam people. Campus + Community Planning is committed to engaging the campus community and its neighbours to continue to contribute to new thinking, research and practice towards the regeneration of neighbourhoods and community wellbeing.  We integrate public engagement in the planning and design of UBC’s academic campus and neighbourhoods to create two-way communication, informed participation and a culture of collaboration, both during planning processes and  on an ongoing basis. We use a number of approaches to engage with the public, from informing, consulting, joint problem solving, collaborating through to partnership. The type of engagement we use is determined by the mandate,  impact and interest of each planning process. Included here are a set of principles for defining, designing, implementing  and concluding public engagement for planning processes. These are also guiding practices for each principle that describe how the principles can be activated.  These were both developed in consultation with the UBC community, including various interests on and off campus (listed on back). COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT, through its various forms, serves to enhance social  and environmental wellbeing. It is a pillar of the University’s strategic vision, Place and Promise, which recognizes UBC’s leadership role in enabling dialogue  and action on societal issues through learning, research and partnerships. Community engagement is core  to the University’s academic mission, administration  and planning. These Engagement Principles and  Guiding Practices provide the foundation for UBC  to honour its commitment to public engagement  in planning processes.2Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 33ENABLE TWO-WAY INFORMATION FOR INFORMED PARTICIPATION AND PLANNINGENGAGE IN A MANNER THAT REFLECTS THE DIVERSITY AND NEEDS  OF THE COMMUNITYCHOOSE METHODS OF INVOLVEMENT THAT MATCH  THE ENGAGEMENT OBJECTIVES AND LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTSRESOURCE THE PROCESS TO DELIVER ON THE PLAN  AND ENGAGEMENT OBJECTIVESUNDERSTAND THE NEEDS AND CONCERNS OF INDIVIDUALS AND INTEREST GROUPSREACH OUT TO THOSE IMPACTED OR INTERESTEDBE CLEAR ABOUT HOW AND WHY INDIVIDUALS AND INTEREST GROUPS WILL BE INVOLVED IN THE PLANNING PROCESSHOW? WH0? WHY?defining  the process campus + community planning engagement principlesdesigning + implementing the processINTEGRATE PLANNING PROJECTS WITH ONGOING COMMUNICATION, RELATIONSHIP BUILDING AND RESEARCH EVALUATION OPPORTUNITIESEVALUATE THE PROCESS WITH PARTICIPANT FEEDBACKSHARE THE OUTCOMES OF THE PROCESS AND HOW PARTICIPANT  INPUT WAS USEDconcluding   the processThe following pages define guiding practices for each of these principles.3Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 34defining  the processBE CLEAR ABOUT HOW AND WHY INDIVIDUALS AND INTEREST GROUPS  WILL BE INVOLVED IN THE PLANNING PROCESSREACH OUT TO THOSE IMPACTED OR INTERESTEDDefine and communicate the level of involvement of individuals,  groups leaseholders and organizations in the planning process.Pre-engagement notification process:Identify possible individuals, groups, leaseholders and organizations.Define the purpose  and scope of the plan  or project and relevant  areas of the campus.Clearly communicate  key issues and purpose  of the planning process  in the notifications  (e.g. use maps, photos  and simple text).Create a list of contacts along with likely concerns and interests, as well as level of interest.Determine the level  of interest in the  planning decision.Determine appropriate communication/notification channels (electronic and print) and ensure interested and impacted groups receive targeted communication.Specify the type(s) of engagement that will be used, ranging from notification through to partnership, depending on the mandate, scope and impact of the process.Send notifications to the list of contacts  (individuals, leaseholders and organizations)  and through communication channels in advance  of public engagement (e.g. 10 days prior to event).Where appropriate, conduct pre-consultation with key individuals,  leaseholders and interest groups (e.g. AMS, GSS, faculty, staff, UNA,  Musqueam, etc…) to determine level of interest and reach out  to those typically harder to engage. Identify the objectives of the community engagement process (i.e. purpose of engagement process and how input will be used).HOW? WHO? WHY?HOW? WH0? WHY?4Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 35CHOOSE METHODS OF INVOLVEMENT THAT MATCH THE ENGAGEMENT OBJECTIVES  AND LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTSSelecting Engagement MethodsUse engagement methods that are most appropriate for the level of interest and impact the planning decision will have on individuals, leaseholders and organizations.Be innovative with the types of engagement techniques and practices. Continually refresh and update tools  and techniques.Choose engagement methods that will appeal to and fit the participants.RESOURCE THE PROCESS TO DELIVER ON THE PLAN AND ENGAGEMENT OBJECTIVESCreate a project schedule and work plan that addresses the needs of participants, staff and decision makers.Ensure engagement processes are timed to allow outcomes from activities to inform  planning decisions.Connect and time project schedule with other relevant projects to allow them to build off each other.Schedule engagement activities during times of the year when people are more available. When this is not feasible, meet with key representatives to explain why and explore alternatives.Align project schedules with key board meetings dates, when necessary (Board of Governors, and other relevant boards and governing bodies).designing + implementing  the processUNDERSTAND THE NEEDS AND CONCERNS OF INDIVIDUALS  AND INTEREST GROUPSDesign engagement activities to connect community needs and interests with plan content.Understand community assets and values related to the scope of the plan or project (e.g. review relevant research, plans and reports).Acknowledge community concerns and clearly communicate the rationale behind proposed recommendations.WHAT? WHEN?5Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 36ENGAGE IN A MANNER THAT REFLECTS THE DIVERSITY AND NEEDS OF THE COMMUNITYENABLE TWO-WAY INFORMATION FOR INFORMED PARTICIPATION AND PLANNINGPlan events and activities that encourage broad participation of students,  faculty, staff, residents and neighbours who live on and off campus. Use a variety of methods to send and receive information.Determine what language(s) notifications will be sent out in and  the need for translation  services at events.Provide information to  the community that is  clear, concise and can  be understood by a  non-technical audience  and by those who speak English as a second language.Choose locations and  times for events that are easy to find and access.Use the Campus + Community Planning website as the main source for project information (including technical reports and background materials), update information throughout the project and make print copies available upon request.Provide activities for children at events,  when appropriate.Acknowledge that UBC is located on traditional, ancestral, unceded territory of the Musqueam people.?Coordinate with stakeholders, working groups, and committees during the course of the project to share project information with their networks.Ask objective and open ended questions, whenever possible, to elicit public opinion.Formal public feedback will be gathered to meet legislative requirements, when mandated.Set minimum feedback periods for projects that have a greater impact or interest. (e.g. 2 week period)designing + implementing  the processhello!6Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 37INTEGRATE PLANNING PROJECTS WITH ONGOING COMMUNICATION, RELATIONSHIP BUILDING AND RESEARCH EVALUATION OPPORTUNITIESMaintain continuity of contact with key individuals, organizations and the broader campus community. Update key individuals, organizations and the broader campus community on upcoming projects, engagement opportunities and outcomes, as part of ongoing communications and meetings.Engage with students, faculty, staff, residents and neighbours about planning at UBC and how they can be involved.Support and champion research opportunities  with faculty, students and staff that explore innovations in engagement.SHARE THE OUTCOMES OF THE PROCESS AND HOW PARTICIPANT INPUT WAS USEDEVALUATE THE PROCESS WITH PARTICIPANT FEEDBACKPublish a report that summarizes engagement outcomes at key points  in the planning process.Gather feedback on the engagement process that asks how well the engagement  principles were upheld and use outcomes to improve future processes.Summarize notification process, engagement methods used, conduct a theme analysis on written feedback received and report out themes  (e.g. report themes that recur 5% or more times).Provide an engagement process questionnaire at all engagement events and make the questionnaire available online.Provide an explanation of how feedback gathered informed the planning process and outcomes  (e.g. include responses  to feedback in the  consultation report).Include written feedback received as an appendix  to the summary report.Post-Engagement Notification ProcessDetermine appropriate communication/notification  channels through which to circulate plan outcomes.Send notifications to stakeholders and interested individuals about the plan outcomes and next steps.concluding  the processHave an annual check-in meeting with campus  stakeholders (both on and off campus) on how well  Campus + Community Planning is upholding the engagement principles.7Public Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 38The principles and guiding practices were developed in consultation with the following groups:On campus:+  Alma Mater Society+  Campus and Community Planning+  Community Partnership Unit+  Graduate Student Society+  Infrastructure Development+  Student Housing and Hospitality Services+  UBC First Nations House of Learning+  UBC Sustainability Initiative+  University Faculty and Staff Tenants Association+  University Neighbourhoods Association+  Vice President – Academic+   Vice President – Finance, Resources and Operations+  Vice President – StudentsTHE ENGAGEMENT PRINCIPLES WERE ADOPTED BY THE UBC BOARD  OF GOVERNORS ON SEPTEMBER 30, 2014. LAST REVISED, ON APRIL 14, 2016.ENGAGEMENT PRINCIPLES  AND GUIDING PRACTICESOff campus:+  City of Vancouver+  Musqueam First Nation+  Metro Vancouver+   Parent Advisory Councils  (University Hill Elementary, University Hill  Secondary and Norma Rose Point Elementary)+  University Endowment Lands – Administration+   University Endowment Lands – Community  Advisory CouncilPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 39Report/Document Link1. Olympic Plaza Cultural District Engagement & Design Report (October 2016)https://www.calgary.ca/engage/Documents/OPCD%20Final%20Document%20October%202016.pdf2. What We Heard: No. 264 – A new vision for the Kensington Legion Site (Fall 2015)http://engage264.ca/what-we-heard3. Millienium Line Extension Phase 1 Engagement Summary Report ( July 2017)https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.translink.ca%2F-%2Fmedia%2FDocuments%2Fplans_and_projects%2Frapid_transit_projects%2FMillennium-Line-Broadway-Extension%2FMLBE-Phase-2%2FBroadway_-Extension_Phase_1_Engagement-Summary_Report.4. Social Sustainability Strategy for Township of Langley – Phase 1 and 2 Engagement Summary (July 2018)https://webfiles.tol.ca/CommDev/Phase%201%20and%202%20Engagement%20Summary.pdf5. Vancouver’s Non-motorized Watercraft Recreation Strategy (Phase 3 Summary Report) https://vancouver.ca/files/cov/2019-06-11-on-water-research-and-analysis-report-web-version.pdf6. Metro Vancouver Mobility Pricing Study (May 2018)https://www.translink.ca/-/media/Documents/plans_and_projects/mobility_pricing/Research-and-Reports/Final-Reports/mpic_full_report_-_final.pdf7. BC Ferries Horseshoe Bay Terminal Development, Summary of Phase 3 Engagement Results ( June 2018)https://www.bcferries.com/files/AboutBCF/publicconsultation/terminal-development/2018-hsb-terminal-development-engagement-summary-report.pdf8. BC Ferries Ferries for the Next Generation Engagement Summary Report (August 2019)https://www.bcferries.com/files/AboutBCF/projects/2019-bcf-nextgen-engagement-summary-report.pdf9. What We Heard - City of Calgary 2026 Olympic and Paralympic Winter Games Bid engagement program (November 2018)https://s3.ap-southeast-2.amazonaws.com/hdp.au.prod.app.cgy-engage.files/3415/4151/9018/2026_Olympic_and_Paralympic_Winter_Games_-_What_We_Heard_Report.pdf10. New Westminster: Official Community Plan Review - Summary of Feedback (April 2017)https://www.newwestcity.ca/database/files/library/OUR_CITY_Council_Report_24_April_2017.pdfAppendix C - Documents ReviewedPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 40Organization RoleYVR (Community Relations) Communications Specialist City of New Westminster Senior PlannerCity of Powell River Senior Planner City of Port Alberni Manager of Planning BC Ferries Manager of EngagementContext Engagement and CommunicationsSenior ConsultantIntelligent Futures Engagement LeadModus Planning and Engagement Engagement SpecialistAppendix D: Interviews ListPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 41Qualitative Analysis Interview Questions  Introductory Brief: Public consultation is an essential part of any planning process. However, learning how to manage, analyze, interpret and report on community feedback can be a difficult task.  In partnership with the Campus and Community Planning team at UBC, this research looks at methods of qualitative analysis in public consultation processes. The intent of the research is to learn best practices of qualitative analysis, specifically methods for analyzing data collected in large public consultation processes.    Interview Questions  1. What is your current role and what are your main responsibilities related to public consultation and engagement? 2. What are some past public consultation processes in which you have been involved? 3. What methods or tools do you typically use for collecting public feedback? (e.g. online surveys, etc.) a. Who is involved in the process?  b. Development permit applications: Are they involved in that process at all? What does the public consultation process look like for DP applications? Do  4. What are some of the biggest challenges (ex. double-counting) in qualitative data analysis? 5. What are some ways that help overcome these challenges? 6. How large is the sample size you typically work with? 7. Can you recommend any resources and/or literature that speaks to public consultation analysis? 8. Is there anyone else you can recommend that I speak to about this topic?  Appendix E -  Interview GuidePublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 42Document Review ComparisonReport/Project Type Description Data Collection Methods Number of ParticipantsData/Report Organization Counts IncludedDemographics CollectedTiming of reportOther NotesOlympic Plaza Cultural DistrictLocal Government - neighbourhood plan Input was sought to help set a new vision for the City of Calgary's Olympic Plaza District.Ditigal Platform (with 3 survey questions) , social media, mobile texting service, sounding boards and interior feedback displays (interactive boards with questions), walking tour, scavenger hunt (response questions), pop-ups.Close to 2,300Organizes community feedback around "challenge questions", i.e. question the City should consider when developing the vision. Each question includes feedback from the community, practical considerations and context from the City and stakeholders, and best practices/leading thinking in these areas. Key themes are summarized for each question asked at the beginning.Not in the body of the report. But includes counts in the appendix.Location 5 months after engagementIncludes quotes from participants. More detailed data is in the appendix.A New Vision for the Kensington Legion Site - What We HeardParternship between developer and non-profit - developmentThe Legion and a developer partner to build a mixed-use development. The project was quite contentious. The report shares information about the engagement process (what we heard), responds to the Stakeholder meetings, engagement storefront, sounding board (interactive boards with questions), feedback form on website, email, phone, social media.468 Organizes community feedback around  5 development principles (which act as the main themes), then under each principle, sub-themes are included. Under each theme, there is a "From the Project Team" section that responds to the feedback or answers questions. No None Few months after engagement (not clear how many months. Engagement took place in late July to early August, Includes quotes from participants. More detailed data is in the appendix.Millenium Line Broadway Extension - Phase 1 Summary ReportLocal Government and Public Agency - transportation infrastructure Engagement was conducted to consult the public on the design development of the Millenium Line SkyTrain extension. Stakeholder meetings, open houses, telephone poll, online surveyOver 800Organized by theme and sub-theme. Yes None 4 months after engagementVancouver's Non-motorized Watercraft Recreation Strategy (Phase 3 Summary Report)Public Agency - Strategic ReportStrategic plan for non-motorized watercraft activity in Vancouver's public waterways. The engagment sought to gauge the current user profile of Vancouver's non-motorized watercraft community, frequency and distribution of exisitng use, challenges, opportunities, and Online survey, open houses and workshops, pop-ups487 Organized by theme and top priority (respondents were asked to rate priorities within themes).Yes (percentages)Asked the following: Identify as aboriginal; identify as person with disability, housing tenure, primary transportation mode, location, age and gender, types of users by activites, N/A Detailed survey questions by nature of study Appendix F: Document Review Comparison TablePublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 43Report/Project Type Description Data Collection Methods Number of ParticipantsData/Report Organization Counts IncludedDemographics CollectedTiming of reportOther NotesMetro Vancouver Mobility Pricing Study Public Agency - Strategic ReportThe Mayors' Council and TranksLink board asked the Mobility Pricing Independent Commission to study how a mobility pricing system could be implemented in Metro Vancouver. Online engagement platform, events, public opinion polling, stakeholder meetingsOver 12,000Organized by themes ad subthemes Yes location, gender, income, age, children, cultural identity, primary mode of transportation, frequency of driving a carOver a year Cross-tabulates demographics with public support ratesTownship of Langely - Social Sustainability Strategy, Phase 1 and 2 Engagement SummaryLocal Government - Strategic ReportDevelopment of a strategy looking at social sustainability. Sought input on current challenges and strengths, vision for the future and priorities for action.Online surveys, workhops, pop-ups (with interactive boards)Over 400Organized by theme and sub-themes. Not in the body of the report. But includes counts in the appendix.Gender, age, marital status, number of children, income, number of years in Canada, dwelling type, tenure, neighbourhood location, work in township1 month after engagementNotes who is overrepresented (compares to neighbourhood profile)BC Ferries - Horseshoe Bay Terminal Development, Summary of Phase 3 Engagement Public Agency - Development ConsultationSought input on look and feel of a new terminal. Workshops, online survey Over 1,400Organized by tactic (I.e workshop, online), then what was askedNo None 2 months after engagementPublic Consultation Data Analysis - Report Draft 44Appendix G: Example Engagement Snapshot

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            data-media="{[{embed.selectedMedia}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
https://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.66428.1-0392607/manifest

Comment

Related Items