OEA Compatible Use Program of Assistance Review

Facilitators Guide

Office of Economic Adjustment Compatible Use Program of Assistance Review

Department of Defense

Office of Economic Adjustment

2231 Crystal Drive, Suite 520
Arlington, Virginia 22202-3711

3/12/2018

OMB CONTROL NUMBER: XXXX-XXXX

OMB EXPIRATION DATE: XX/XX/XXXX

AGENCY DISCLOSURE NOTICE

(TO BE READ ALOUD TO PARTICIPANTS)

The public reporting burden for this collection of information, [Insert OMB Control Number], is estimated to average eight hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or burden reduction suggestions to the Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, at whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collections@mail.mil. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.

PLEASE DO NOT RETURN YOUR RESPONSE TO THE ABOVE ADDRESS.

Responses should be sent to:

Department of Defense
Office of Economic Adjustment
2231 Crystal Drive, Suite 520
Arlington, Virginia, 22202-3711
david.r.kennedy.civ@mail.mil

OEA — Compatible Use Focus Group Discussion Guide – DRAFT

1. Introduction (15 minutes)

Agency Disclosure Notice

The public reporting burden for this collection of information, [Insert OMB Control Number], is estimated to average eight hours per response, including the time for reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed, and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding the burden estimate or burden reduction suggestions to the Department of Defense, Washington Headquarters Services, at whs.mc-alex.esd.mbx.dd-dod-information-collections@mail.mil. Respondents should be aware that notwithstanding any other provision of law, no person shall be subject to any penalty for failing to comply with a collection of information if it does not display a currently valid OMB control number.

Explanation of purpose of listening session.

MOD NOTE: OEA seeks to obtain feedback on the compatible use process and its support to communities from its customers to specifically understand how its support assisted, or hindered, state and local government compatibility efforts.

DC Group will prepare an executive summary and a written record of the proceedings for each meeting. Comments will not be attributed to specific individuals, and these reports will not be shared externally. A final report on the overall findings will also be produced and will not be shared externally. This information will be used to make improvements to DOD and OEA’s current and future service delivery by understanding which tools, resources and technical assistance have been helpful and what needs to be modified or created to assist communities facing similar encroachment issues. It will be used to inform OEA program changes and may be cited if asked by DOD or others for recommendations on how the Compatible Use process can be improved.

• Background of what will be covered during the groups

  • The meeting will cover the general areas of the Compatible Use Joint Land Use Study process, both study and implementation, and your experiences with OEA and the process and lessons learned.

  • Moderator instructions/ground rules

2. Opening Session (Approximately 1.5 hours)

Participant/Moderator introductions (15-20 minutes)

1. Each participant will be asked to provide a brief overview (no more than 3 minutes) about their past project(s)

Listening Session Exercise #1: Challenges, Accomplishments, Lessons learned (75 minutes)

1. After the participants provide an overview of their Compatible Use projects and lessons. Participants will be asked to take 5 minutes and write down their (50 minutes)

• The 2 Most Difficult Challenges?

• The 2 Biggest Accomplishments?

• Two Lessons Learned to Pass Along?

Mod Note: Capture information on flip charts as each participant gives their list

2. Rank: Participants will then vote for a rank order of the challenges from the most pressing to least. After vote a short discussion of the priorities and answering any participant questions.

MOD NOTE: This exercise helps create rapport among the participants as they see the successes and struggles of the others in a common situation. It also helps to establish a measure of priority among the past perceptions and experiences of participants that can lead to more actionable outcomes for OEA, as opposed to treating all challenges listed as being of equal weight.

(Suggest Break – 15-20 minutes)

3. Joint Land Use Studies – Process phase 1

Introduction: (5 minutes)

Our discussions will now concentrate on the various components of the Compatible Use process. At first, we are going to look at the Study process. We have broken down the initial Joint Land Use Study into the following components:

(GIVE LIST AS HANDOUTS TO PARTICIPANTS)

Phase 1:

1. Submitting nomination request through military service

2. OEA initial site visit and encroachment validation

3. Defining military mission and footprint

4. Define community economic development and growth objectives

5. Determine encroachment challenges

6. Submitting application to OEA

7. Organizing and obtaining participation proclamations, MOUs, etc…

8. Putting together Policy and Technical Committees

9. OEA post-award kick off meeting

Phase 2:

10. Preparing RFP’s and contractor selection

11. Gathering technical data and information

12. Public Participation Events

13. Oversee the Joint Land Use Study process

14. Develop alternatives for each challenge

15. Receiving Study Results and selecting best alternative

16. Receiving Implementation Recommendations and Develop Action Plan

Phase 3:

17. Obtain legislative approval

JLUS Study: Deep Dive:

Phase 1: (40 minutes)

1. Submitting nomination request through military service

2. OEA initial site visit and encroachment validation

3. Defining military mission and footprint

4. Define community economic development and growth objectives

5. Determine encroachment challenges

6. Submitting application to OEA

7. Organizing and obtaining participation proclamations, MOUs, etc…

8. Putting together Policy and Technical Committees

9. OEA post-award kick off meeting

Okay, let’s take a look and unpack this first piece of the JLUS Study. Here we are looking at submitting the nomination up until the OEA post-award Kick off meeting. For now, let’s keep our answers focused on this part of the process.

1. Does the group agree with this list, or do you have any additional major components for this part of the process to add?

(New components will be added if recommended using different marker color to flip chart & by participants to their handouts)

2. As you are remembering back, we want to know what your thoughts on this part of the process?

• What worked well in your community at this juncture?

• What were the biggest challenges and hurdles?

3. How did you identify and recruit new partners? What drove the decision to do so?

• Who were the partners you engaged with at this phase? (and how was that partner relationship?)

• Were there partners in hindsight you wanted to engage with?

3. What can OEA do to be better engaged – e.g., how they do it - in this phase of the process?

3. How can the information flow be improved amongst all parties? What tools are useful?

Phase 2: (55 minutes)

Phase 2:

10. Preparing RFP’s and contractor selection

11. Gathering technical data and information

12. Public Participation Events

13. Oversee the Joint Land Use Study process

14. Develop alternatives for each challenge

15. Receiving Study Results and selecting best alternative

16. Receiving Implementation Recommendations and Develop Action Plan

Okay, let’s take a look and unpack this next piece of the JLUS Study process. Here we are looking at the meat of what it takes to do the study up to and including the results. For now, let’s keep our answers focused on this part of the process.

1. Does the group agree with this list, or do you have any additional major components for this part of the process to add?

(New components will be added if recommended using different marker color to flip chart & by participants to their handouts)

(Mod Note: Break Group into two or three small working groups to address this phase. Ask them to compile and report out)

2. As you are remembering back, we want to know what your thoughts on this part of the process? Consider :

   • Consider the RFP process, was their enough diversification in responses?

   • Were the recommendations you received for your community relevant and specific for your community?

• What worked well in your community at this juncture?

• What were the biggest challenges and hurdles?

3. What can OEA do to be better engaged – e.g., how they do it - in this phase of the process?

3. How can the information flow be improved amongst all parties? What tools are useful?

3. Were there any policy, communications or political pressures at this juncture?

(LUNCH – between 45-60 minutes)

Phase 3:

Phase 3: (15 – 30 minutes)

17. Obtain legislative approval

1. Let’s talk about gaining legislative approval. I will ask everyone to jot down 1-2 challenges in gaining legislative approval and 1-2 best practices. Do a round Robin.

2. Based on your experience, is there a need for potential policy or legislative considerations that you would want OEA and DoD to be aware of or reconsider?

Wrap Up this Phase:

Before we move on to the next phase. Let’s do a round robin.

1. Any final thoughts or things you want to make sure we capture in relation to the JLUS Study.

   • Comments for OEA to consider?

   • Comments on policy, approaches, concerns?

4. Carrying Out Implementation Strategies

Our discussions will now continue on the next aspect of the Compatible Use process. Our second phase covers the carrying out of the Implementation Strategies identified in the Joint Land Use study. Below are the major components of this phase (Give list as a handout):

IMPLEMENTATION STRATEGIES

Local

• Establish Implementation Committee (Local)

• Determine priorities and timetable for actions (Local)

• Determine which actions require federal or other assistance (Local)

• Obtain community and elected official support for plan of action (Local)

• Memorandum of Understanding for Military Planning & Coordination (Local)

• Comprehensive Plan Addendum related to Land Use Coordination and Cooperation (Local)

• Public Use Statement (Local)

• Update Zoning Regulations (Local)

• Small Area growth plan (Local)

• Real Estate Disclosure (Local)

• Establish GIS Database Clearinghouse (Local)

• Adopt Dark Sky Lighting requirements (Local)

• Develop sustainment strategy (Local)

Regional

• Military Influence Area Voluntary Public Awareness Statement (Regional)

• Compatibility & Coordination Area Guidelines (Regional)

• Military Overlay District (Regional)

• Establish Economic Development District (Regional)

• Establish Regional Council of Local Governments (Regional)

State

• Access the Governor’s Military council (State)

• Pursue State Military Installation Statutes (State)

Federal

• Army Compatible Use Buffer Program (Federal)

• Department of Defense Sustainable Ranges Program (Federal)

• Forest Legacy Program (Federal)

• Installation Operational Noise Management Plan (Federal)

• Range Compatible Use Zone (RCUZ) Program (Federal)

• Readiness and Environmental Protection Initiative (REPI) Program (Federal)

• Sentinel Landscapes (Federal)

Understanding what was successful and Unsuccessful: 50 – 60 minutes)

1. Does the group agree with this list, or do you have any additional major components for this phase to add?

(New components will be added if recommended)

2. On your handout, take a few minutes to assess which of these strategies has been successful, which were unsuccessful. Use a star to mark success, and X to mark unsuccessful, and if you aren’t sure or have one that you want to discuss put a question mark by it. There’s a lot here, so I am going to give you 5 to ten minutes to review this.

• Overall, which Compatibility Development Tools/Actions were most effective for your community?

3. Okay, so now we are going to ask everyone to use the voting dots on the table to mark these so we can see. If everyone takes some time to vote, I’ll give you a 10 minute break here to stretch and regroup.

• Green is for successful, red is for unsuccessful and yellow is that in between that we might want to talk about.

MOD Note: Moderators will look at consensus and pick top 2 successful implementation strategies and top 3 (or 4) unsuccessful implantation strategies.

4. Discussion of top Successful and Unsuccessful Strategies

• Successful strategies: What are some of the fundamentals that you think make this strategy successful in multiple communities? Given its success, what do you wish you knew now that you didn’t know before your implemented it?

• Unsuccessful strategies:

  • Let’s discuss what made this strategy unsuccessful?

  • What types of tools or information could you have used to change the outcome?

  • Are there considerations for OEA as they look to guide future JLUS implementations that we should take away?

Break

Recommendations & Considerations for JLUS Implementation (30 minutes)

Participants will again be divided into three small-groups. The groups will be tasked with identifying recommendations related to Compatible Use Implementation Strategies as follows:

1. Each Group will be asked to discuss, capture and report out on the following questions.

• What can OEA do to be better engaged – e.g., how they do it – In this phase of the Compatible Use process?

• How can the information flow be improved amongst all parties? What tools are useful?

• What should be the policy considerations – local, state and federal?

MOD NOTE: Give 20 minutes for participants to develop recommendations. Groups will then spend 5 minutes each making their report out including recommendations.

2. Group Discussion based on follow up report outs:

• How would you recommendations impact/adjust OEA’s outreach and program assistance for any future Compatible Use Implementation support?

• How would your recommendations help Communities utilizing OEA support to better engage/collaborate with the military services?

• How would your recommendations inform other federal agencies to revise/update their support for any future Compatible Use Implementation Strategies?

• Based on your recommendations, is there a need for potential legislative changes?

5. Conclusion (15 minutes)

• Of all the things we’ve discussed and evaluated today—what stood out the most? Why?

• What best advice would you give to leaders in future Compatible Use JLUS communities to use or consider when using OEA services? e.g., what would you say to him or her?

• Based on your experiences and our discussions today, what are the OEA’s strengths as an organization and as a service provider? What about weaknesses?

• Is there anything surrounding these issues that we didn’t talk about that you wish we had covered? What is it, and why?

(Thank and Dismiss Respondents)

1. Ground Rules

• EVERYONE PARTICIPATES

• TREAT EACH OTHER WITH RESPECT

• POSITIVE MENTAL ATTITUDE

• NON ATTRIBUTION…OPEN AND HONEST

• NO BLACKBERRY OR SIDE BAR DISCUSSIONS 

• ALL IDEAS ARE RECORDED

• BE CRISP AND SAY ONLY WHAT IS KEY

• HONOR CONFIDENTIALITY

• EXPERIMENT: TRY OUT NEW IDEAS AND BEHAVIORS

• LISTEN, LISTEN, LISTEN AND RESPOND

• PIGGYBACKING, OR BUILDING ON IDEAS IS ENCOURAGED

MY ROLE AS FACILITATOR

• START & END ON TIME

• KEEP CONVERSATION ON TRACK (SOMETIMES I MAY INTERRUPT)

• NEUTRAL SERVANT OF THE GROUP

• SEEK & TEST CONSENSUS

• DOES NOT EVALUATE OR CONTRIBUTE IDEAS

• ENSURES BALANCED PARTICIPATION

• PROVIDES GROUP MEMORY

PARKING LOT:

We may at times get off track or stumble upon something that needs to be “tabled” we will record this item in the parking lot and go back to this list at end of meeting to discuss action items