Justification

Request for Approval under the “Generic Clearance for the Collection of Qualitative Feedback on Agency Service Delivery”

(OMB Control Number: 2030-0051; EPA ICR Number: 2434.268)

TITLE OF INFORMATION COLLECTION:

Homeowner Perceptions, Barriers, and Intentions to Install a Living Shoreline Interview

PURPOSE:

In Tampa Bay, there is interest from local government officials, coastal planners, environmental engineers, and other stakeholders to identify opportunities for increasing living shorelines on private properties, particularly by reducing the barriers around costs and the permitting process. Living shorelines are increasingly being championed as a nature-based solution that can offset some of the effects of climate change in coastal communities and an environmentally friendly alternative to hardened shorelines and gray infrastructure, such as seawalls. Despite increasing policy support for living shorelines at local and state levels, adoption rates on private properties remain relatively low. Much of the discourse around this issue of uptake has centered on the prohibitive costs of installing living shorelines for homeowners, as well as the lengthy or complicated process of obtaining a permit for installation. To date, however, the majority of research has focused on post hoc evaluations of the drivers and barriers to shoreline enhancements, with a preferential bias toward homeowners who previously adopted a living shoreline. There is a considerable lack of research capturing the entirety of the decision-making timeline—from initial exposure to installation intentions to final decisions. In order to promote the adoption of living shorelines on private waterfront properties in Tampa Bay, it is crucial that future campaigns are informed by behavioral insights from more thorough social-ecological research investigations.

The results of this study will provide several novel insights into homeowners’ decision-making about living shorelines and constitute Phase I of a larger Living Shoreline Campaign created by the Tampa Bay Estuary Program (TBEP). Data will be used to (1) identify the demographic, behavioral, and psychosocial predictors of living shoreline permit intentions, (2) estimate the effect of visual information on homeowner interest and intentions, (3) quantify the relationship between baseline and final intentions (and their predictors), (4) quantify the relationships between intentions, likelihood, and actual behavior, and (5) identify the primary barriers and motivations to adopting living shorelines on private waterfront properties in St. Pete Beach, which will have important implications for future campaign messaging and partnerships for promoting living shoreline adoption across Tampa Bay.

DESCRIPTION OF RESPONDENTS:

A total of 332 homes are within the DonCesar neighborhood, which represents the potential respondent universe. Of these, 78 homes in the study area will receive a living shoreline design plan for their property as part of an ongoing living shoreline installation project funded by the Tampa Bay Environmental Restoration Fund (TBERF). These 78 waterfront property homeowners will be the primary target group for this collection of information, with 20 homeowners anticipated for inclusion in follow-up interviews (“InterviewG1”) based upon a 25% response rate.

TYPE OF COLLECTION: (Check one)

[ ] Customer Comment Card/Complaint Form [ ] Customer Satisfaction Survey

[ ] Usability Testing (e.g., Website or Software [ ] Small Discussion Group

[ ] Focus Group [ X ] Other:_Semi-structured Interviews___

To assist review, please provide answers to the following question:

Personally Identifiable Information:

1. Is personally identifiable information (PII) collected? [ X ] Yes [ ] No

2. If Yes, will any information that is collected be included in records that are subject to the Privacy Act of 1974? [ ] Yes [ X ] No

3. If Yes, has an up-to-date System of Records Notice (SORN) been published? [ ] Yes [ ] No

Gifts or Payments:

Is an incentive (e.g., money or reimbursement of expenses, token of appreciation) provided to participants? [ ] Yes [ X ] No

BURDEN HOURS

Category of Respondent	No. of Respondents	Participation Time	Burden
Individuals (“InterviewG1”)	20	60 minutes	20 hr
Totals			20 hr

FEDERAL COST: The estimated annual cost to the Federal government is: $ 1,361.40

• Assume 20 hours total of EPA senior team member (GS 13, Step 10) review all the information:

• Average hourly rate of a GS-13, Step 10 in the Atlanta area for 2024: $68.07

• Total Federal Cost per year: 20*$68.07 = ~$1,361.40

If you are conducting a focus group, survey, or plan to employ statistical methods, please provide answers to the following questions:

The selection of your targeted respondents

1. Do you have a customer list or something similar that defines the universe of potential respondents and do you have a sampling plan for selecting from this universe? [ X ] Yes [ ] No

If the answer is yes, please provide a description of both below (or attach the sampling plan)? If the answer is no, please provide a description of how you plan to identify your potential group of respondents and how you will select them?

We have been provided access to a list of homeowners’ names, addresses and emails (where available) by the President of the DonCesar Property Owners Corporation. All 78 waterfront property owners will be targeted for the collection of information through multiple channels. Homeowners will have the opportunity to participate in semi-structured interviews (“InterviewG1”) regarding their feedback on the living shoreline design plans provided to them either (1) over the phone or (2) in person.

Administration of the Instrument

1. How will you collect the information? (Check all that apply)

[ ] Web-based or other forms of Social Media

[ X ] Telephone

[ X ] In-person

[ ] Mail

[ ] Other, Explain

2. Will interviewers or facilitators be used? [ X ] Yes [ ] No

Please make sure that all instruments, instructions, and scripts are submitted with the request.

CERTIFICATION:

I certify the following to be true:

1. The collection is voluntary.

2. The collection is low-burden for respondents and low-cost for the Federal Government.

3. The collection is non-controversial and does not raise issues of concern to other federal agencies.

4. The results are not intended to be disseminated to the public.*

5. Information gathered will not be used for the purpose of substantially informing influential policy decisions.

6. The collection is targeted to the solicitation of opinions from respondents who have experience with the program or may have experience with the program in the future.

* NOTE: Anonymized results will be published as open-access TBEP Technical Reports and/or peer-reviewed journal articles and made publicly available in the TBEP’s online library. No data or results containing personally identifiable information will be disseminated to the public.

Name: Felicia Burks, EPA Region 4

4