Needs Assessment for Training in Climate and Hazard Adaptation

FINAL REPORT Needs Assessment for Training in Climate and Hazard Adaptation March 2014 Eastern Research Group, Inc. Written under contract for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Coastal Services Center NOAA Coastal Services Center (843) 740-1200 www.csc.noaa.gov

Needs Assessment for Training in Climate and Hazard Adaptation NOAA Coastal Services Center Contract # EAJ33C-09-CQ-0034 ii

Needs Assessment for Training in Climate and Hazard Adaptation FINAL REPORT TASK ORDER 31 CONTRACT #EAJ33C-09-CQ-0034 Submitted to: NOAA Coastal Services Center 2234 South Hobson Avenue Charleston, SC 29405 Submitted by: Eastern Research Group 110 Hartwell Avenue Lexington, MA 02421 March 20, 2014

Table of Contents ACKNOWLEDGMENTS... I EXECUTIVE SUMMARY... 1 SECTION 1. GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND TARGET AUDIENCES FOR THE TRAINING NEEDS ASSESSMENT... 2 SECTION 2. DATA COLLECTION METHODS AND TECHNIQUES... 3 SECTION 3. VERIFICATION OF PRELIMINARY FINDINGS... 4 SECTION 4. PROPOSED TRAINING MODULES... 8 SECTION 5. CONCLUSIONS... 13 APPENDIX A. RESULTS FROM REVIEW OF BACKGROUND MATERIALS/ LITERATURE... 15 APPENDIX B. SUMMARY OF APRIL 24, 2013, FOCUS GROUP... 17 APPENDIX C. HIGHLIGHTS FROM ROUND ONE INTERVIEWS... 21 APPENDIX D. SUMMARY OF AUGUST 15, 2013, FOCUS GROUP... 25 APPENDIX E: SUMMARY OF ROUND TWO INTERVIEWS... 33

Acknowledgments NOAA Coastal Services Center and Eastern Research Group would like to thank the following people for their enthusiastic involvement and valuable contributions to this assessment: Cathy Angell, Padilla Bay NERRS Miguel Ascarrunz, Broward County, Florida, Environmental Protection & Growth Management Department, Emergency Management Division Lisa Auermuller, Jacques Cousteau NERRS Stephen Borth, FEMA Emergency Management Institute, Response and Recovery Donna Brewer, U.S. Department of the Interior, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Conservation Training Center Josh Bruce, Assistant Director, Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience, University of Oregon James Burke, National Disaster Preparedness Training Center Gary Chock, Martin & Chock Consulting Julie Dennis, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity Allison Hardin, Planning Department, City of Myrtle Beach, South Carolina Carolyn Harshman, Emergency Planning Consultants Charlie Henry, Gulf of Mexico Disaster Response Center Misha Jackson, Hawaii State Civil Defense Jennifer Kline, Georgia Department of Natural Resources Zoe Johnson, State of Maryland Department of Natural Resources Julia Knisel, Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management Sasha Land, Chesapeake Bay NERRS Emily Meyer, FEMA Region IX Ian Miller, Washington Sea Grant, University of Washington Tancred Miller, North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Vern Miyagi, Hawaii State Civil Defense Erin Musiol, American Planning Association Tara Owens, University of Hawaii Sea Grant College Program Jeffrey Perlman, North Jersey Transportation Planning Authority Kevin Richards, Hawaii State Civil Defense Andrew Rumbach, University of Hawaii James Schwab, American Planning Association Wesley Shaw, StormSmart Coasts Network / StormSmart Connect Gavin Smith, UNC Center for Coastal Hazards Adam Stein, NOAA CSC Heidi Stiller, NOAA CSC Henrietta Williams, FEMA Region I Cover photo: U.S. Coast Guard's initial Hurricane Katrina damage assessment of New Orleans. U.S. Coast Guard, Petty Officer 2nd Class Kyle Niemi. i

Executive Summary Eastern Research Group, Inc. (ERG) conducted a needs assessment for NOAA s Coastal Services Center (CSC) to determine the training needs of coastal resource managers, coastal land use planners, disaster planning professionals, and other audiences for incorporating and implementing climate resilience in comprehensive planning and pre-disaster redevelopment planning (PDRP). After conducting a comprehensive literature review, ERG worked with CSC to carefully select Individuals from the target audiences to participate in interviews and focus groups to gather information and opinions related to training needs, topics, and delivery mechanisms. Using the preliminary results, ERG worked with CSC to craft five draft training modules, and conducted a follow-up focus group and interviews to collect input on the draft modules. TRAINING NEEDS ASSESSMENT STEPS Phase 1: Work with NOAA team to select interviewees and focus group attendees. Phase 2: Use interviews and a focus group to gather information on status, barriers, role of training, training content, and effective formats. Phase 3: Create draft training modules designed around information gathered from respondents in Phase 2. Phase 4: Collect feedback on the draft training modules. Phase 5: Report results to NOAA. Preliminary findings from the literature review and the initial interviews and focus group included the following: People prefer in-person trainings that include multiple agencies/departments/organizations. People would like training content to be customized for the local setting. Respondents mentioned several training topics that would be relevant to them, including quantifying economic impacts of climate change/natural disasters, selecting appropriate climate change planning tools, communicating risk, engaging and communicating with the public, and case studies for all of these issues. Trainings need to take into account regional differences in understanding and accepting climate change hazards and how to address them. In response to preliminary findings, ERG and CSC developed the following five potential training modules: #1: Creating local pre-disaster redevelopment plans. #2: Incorporating planning for climate and natural hazards impacts into comprehensive plans, policies, and processes. #3: Protecting natural systems in climate change adaptation planning and implementation. #4: Communicating the economic case for implementing climate adaptation strategies. #5: Sharing case studies in climate adaptation planning and implementation. 1

These modules were cross-checked with interviewees and a second focus group to determine target audience interest. Feedback and comments for Modules #1 and #2 included information NOAA CSC may want to consider when developing similar trainings in the future: Overall, responses to the PDRP module (#1) indicated a range of experience when it came to developing and implementing PDRP, possibly related to the potential for some politically sensitive issues related to this topic, such as relocation. Overall, PDRP training as outlined in Module #1 was rated useful or very useful by nearly all interviewees. Overall, comprehensive planning training as outlined in Module #2 was rated useful or very useful by all interviewees. Interviewees had some questions regarding the intended audience of potential future trainings because of the variation in comprehensive plans from municipality to municipality. Additional conclusions that were drawn from both rounds of interviews and focus groups included the following: ERG found that there is a need for the kind of training outlined in all the draft modules; audiences not only desire this content, but also believe that CSC is the one to deliver it. A focus on implementation will require CSC to develop a deeper capacity for more charrette style training to meet the demand for more locally relevant assistance. CSC should consider developing partnerships with other agencies and professional development training associations (e.g., FEMA, APA) for climate change adaptation and PDRP training design and delivery. There is a wide spectrum of already existing experience and action. Training content and format need to address professionals who are very experienced in the area of climate hazards as well as those with less experience. Section 1. Goals, Objectives, and Target Audiences for the Training Needs Assessment As outlined in ERG s needs assessment plan (finalized March 27, 2013), this needs assessment was designed to identify the following: Coastal planners desired and actual level of information and skills for adaptation planning, PDRP, and implementation. The expectations that planners have for training, including the time commitments they are willing and able to make, and other potential considerations or barriers. The optimal instructional design and delivery method(s) for the target audience. Existing training courses and tools that can be referenced, leveraged, and/or adapted to meet the target audience needs, as well as gaps in these existing resources. Needs for follow-up technical assistance and performance support products. The results of the needs assessment will help inform CSC s decision-making in choosing the appropriate delivery mechanisms and develop training materials that best meet the needs of coastal planners and other key audiences for training in climate and hazards adaptation planning and implementation. The 2

ultimate goal of this work is to help communities implement adaptation strategies to address the impacts of coastal inundation processes, including sea level rise, storm surge, and coastal flooding. Target audiences for the needs assessment were identified as: People who make decisions about whether to spend time and money on staff training for professionals in coastal management, land use planning, disaster preparedness, planning for post-disaster redevelopment, and other areas (includes state, county and municipal level coastal zone management (CZM), emergency response, land use planning, transportation, and/or floodplain managers). People who deliver training directly to audiences and have needs related to technical training delivery issues, learning goals, curriculum design, and availability of courses from existing sources. People who make decisions about which trainings to add to their catalog of existing offerings. Planning professionals who are the likely classroom and online audience to receive training at the request of their directors and are also likely to make decisions about attendance of line staff (includes program and project managers and state, county, and municipal level CZM, emergency response, land use planning, transportation and/or floodplain managers). Section 2. Data Collection Methods and Techniques ERG s detailed needs assessment plan, developed in close consultation with the CSC Project Team, specified the data collection methods and techniques, and methods for data analysis. ERG s original proposal for the needs assessment (September 5, 2012) called for an extensive online survey of stakeholders that would include questions on current training, perceived need for training from a list of options, and other topics. However, CSC determined that, given other surveys and ongoing conversations, an online survey could result in stakeholder fatigue and was not an acceptable method for gathering information. ERG therefore revised its approach so that design and implementation of the needs assessment relied on detailed input from a small group of people through interviews and focus groups, rather than on input from a large representative sample of planning and emergency response professionals. While this approach is not as broad as a survey and does not lend itself to statistical analysis, it has the advantage of depth, allowing for results to include detailed commentary from carefully selected leaders and experts in the coastal management arena. The needs assessment was conducted using the following data collection methods: Analysis of the extensive background research (course evaluations, training products, other needs assessments, etc.) that ERG has compiled since the beginning of the project (see Appendix A for a summary of results from the background research). Results from interviews with 15 individuals (see Appendix C). These individuals were selected from among the target audiences, ensuring appropriate geographic and other representation. The plan specifies categories of questions to help the interviewers guide semi-structured telephone conversations. The same individuals were contacted for both rounds of interviews. 3

Results from two focus groups (conducted via conference call) allowing discussion and interaction in the area of pre-disaster redevelopment planning and implementation. The first group, convened on April 24, 2013, comprised professionals with expertise in pre-disaster redevelopment planning and implementation (see Appendix B). The second group, convened on August 15, 2013, comprised members of a disaster resiliency committee organized through the Governors South Atlantic Alliance and several other individuals. This group helped determine training needs of likely training recipients, and allowed ERG to test information about content and delivery methods gleaned from the first focus group (see Appendix D)). ERG worked with the CSC Project Team to refine the list of interviewees, the questions to help guide the interviews, and the design for the focus groups. Because the plan called for interviewing more than nine non-federal individuals, and two focus groups, we also submitted requests for OMB clearance. The request to interview approximately 18 individuals was approved on May 20, 2013. ERG shared preliminary findings with CSC after the first focus group and first round of interviews were completed (submitted June 7, 2103). Based on those findings, CSC and ERG designed five potential training modules (described in Section 4) for review and comment by a second focus group and a second round of interviews with the original interviewees. The training modules are rough sketches of trainings created as a method to gather information from the target audience and should not be viewed as approved, final products. They were designed considering formats and content identified during the first round of information gathering. CSC and ERG collaborated to design the focus group agenda and second round of interviews focusing on the proposed modules. The results of the second focus group and second round of interviews are included in Appendices D and E and are discussed in Sections 3 and 4 of this report. In summary, ERG s process for assessing the training needs of CSC s target audience included a sequence of: Holding broad, open-ended conversations with leaders and experts (gathering answers to questions like Do you need training at all?, What should it cover?, How should we deliver it? ) Based on the results of these conversations, drafting modules with learning goal language. Cross-checking modules with original respondents (testing the content and format needs expressed by respondents). Section 3. Verification of Preliminary Findings ERG found that, for the most part, respondents during the second round of focus groups and interviews verified the value of our information-gathering process in which potential training topics were identified (as summarized in the five modules). The response to each training module was very positive, and overall, respondents were excited, encouraging, and curious about when potential future trainings would be offered by CSC. Although they understood the modules presented to them were draft ideas, respondent enthusiasm indicated an appreciation of an assessment process in which information was gathered from them, analyzed, and applied. Section 4 provides additional detail about the modules and respondents views. In addition, ERG found that the design and role of training evolves when coastal managers are moving from thinking and learning about climate change adaptation planning and PDRP towards 4

implementation of these concepts. As members of the target audience move into implementation (or continue to advance implementation), more specificity will be demanded from trainings (both from the trainers and trainees) for example having the right people (representing current authorities) attend, understanding of budgets, knowledge of existing local conditions. For less advanced communities without an adaptation or PDRP framework in place, case studies on other communities and their attempts (whether successes or failures) seem to be the most sought-after training material. Key Themes Revisited Below are ERG s preliminary findings, which were further tested in subsequent discussions with the target audiences. Additional findings or responses based on the second round of discussions are indicated in italics. Full summary results from the second focus group and second round of interviews can be found in Appendices D and E. (1) NOAA is a respected source of coastal management training as well as complementary skills training. Existing CSC trainings on climate change adaptation are well regarded, and several respondents highlighted the importance to their work of skills trainings that CSC currently offers, including meeting facilitation, social marketing, participatory mapping, multi-stakeholder collaboration, and project management. Respondents indicated that it is appropriate and expected that NOAA would be performing a training needs assessment. This preliminary finding was fully confirmed in the second phase of discussion with respondents. Component parts of professional training already offered are exactly the same skill sets that respondents noted in the context of climate change adaptation planning, especially participatory mapping. (2) Respondents highly value training formats that serve as venues for actual local decision-makers to work and learn together using local information and examples. In many ways, participants are seeking a facilitated simulation of their local reality. They want the actual people who have to work together on adaptation implementation to be the ones in the training, working collaboratively to solve implementation issues and creating or strengthening partnerships. ERG verified that this is a format valued by the target audience. Respondents made suggestions to conduct train the trainer sessions to allow for more customized, locally relevant information-sharing regarding implementation. (3) The respondents are consistently pointing to the importance of a training approach that is inclusive of the whole community, particularly at the local level. The simple act of getting coastal/land use professionals and disaster/emergency response professionals in the same room for training is highly valued. It was also suggested that CSC develop exercises about how to navigate relationships among local, state, and national players, and further develop side-byside training for disparate audiences. Further investigation revealed concern about exactly how to achieve this goal without requiring people from different agencies to sit in training not appropriate to their needs. Time is valuable and trainings should be a proper fit to ensure trainee involvement. The training of elected officials was one issue that many respondents grappled with, with some believing elected officials should be attending trainings themselves and others believing officials should be briefed on important points, but not attend. Additionally, several people raised the need to reach certain audiences for particular training modules, such as tribes and small rural communities. 5

(4) While the respondents recognize the advantages (cost, accessibility) of online training, a clear preference is emerging for in-person training, particularly if it can be given onsite or involves limited travel (3 hours away or less). Disadvantages of Web-based training mentioned are that the online format does not build a local community of practice, people don t pay attention, people don t get their questions answered, cities have old computers that don t support virtual training, and 508 compliance is difficult. If Web-based trainings are the only option, they should be kept short (under 90 minutes), and involve exercises and materials to keep the audience engaged. With this finding in mind, proposed modules were designed as in-person trainings and although this was not explicitly mentioned to interviewees, responses indicated that in-person trainings were assumed (e.g., NERRS representatives mentioned they would be happy to host any future CSC trainings based on the proposed examples). (5) The audiences highly value case studies, real-world examples, and information about best practices. They want to hear from people (or about people) who have been there and have the needed technical expertise. With this in mind, they also want plenty of time to ask questions and engage in discussion. Training-related module #5 was designed to specifically address this demand for real world experience regarding implementation of climate change adaptation plans and PDRP. Several second interviews indicated this training option was the most important. The value from case studies for implementation will come from their specificity for example, what implementation means for local public works officials. It would be helpful if all agencies addressing climate change adaptation implementation and PDRP could work together to develop and aggregate case studies for NOAA CSC audiences. (6) The information from our respondents and the literature review suggests that the following are key content needs; in a few cases these are gaps in the content of currently available training, while others may deserve greater emphasis or further development. In drafting modules, we considered the following items mentioned in our preliminary findings: How to conduct and communicate cost-benefit analysis how to quantify economic impact of decisions made (or not made). This topic was raised by most of the interviewees. Addressed in Module #4 Tool selection how to select the appropriate climate change-related tool under a given circumstance. Addressed in Modules #2 and #5 Case studies these are currently included in trainings when possible, but people are hungry for them. They want to see how similar communities have planned and implemented climate change adaptation strategies. Addressed in Module #5 How to better help decision-makers understand and assess the risks of not taking action, and understand the risk reduction that comes from developing and implementing predisaster redevelopment plans. Addressed in Module #4 Training for disaster responders in community engagement. How to develop interest in and support for pre-disaster redevelopment planning and implementation among diverse social groupings (e.g., not just education but creative approaches such as social marketing approaches). How climate change is affecting communities (data on impacts, social vulnerability of communities, future conditions mapping ) and what other communities are doing (case studies and best practices), including international lessons. Addressed in Module #5 6

Scoping climate change impacts to planners major areas of responsibility or interest, so that everyone understands their respective roles and how these roles intersect with those of other professionals and technical specialties. Addressed in Modules #1 and #2 Helping planners understand all federal, state, and local legal and regulatory requirements applicable to climate change initiatives as they are addressing their specific needs related to inundation or other adaptation issues. Addressed in Modules #1 and #2 (7) The audiences value trainings that generate take-aways such as recommendations, draft action plans, process maps, lists, workbooks, etc. CSC already does this well and the demand to continue generating products is there. (8) Interviewees and focus group participants may have difficulty separating training needs around climate and hazard adaptation implementation from other needs affecting implementation. That is, they may not agree that a lack of appropriate training is an important barrier to implementing adaptation plans. Past surveys indicate that factors such as a shortage of political will, lack of money, and interest group resistance may be more important barriers to implementation. This was confirmed in during the second round of interviews. Training will not help resolve some softer issues (e.g., political will, public support), and therefore it is not a shortcoming of NOAA CSC training to find that climate change adaptation-related implementation is slow or halting. Some interviewees mentioned the need for trainings on how to effectively conduct public outreach or stakeholder engagement. (9) Cost is not a barrier to holding trainings, but it is for attending. Training hosts seem to be more than capable of locating venues and tracking down instructors at cost. Many emergency management training programs receive funding from the federal government. Costs only become an issue when there is significant travel or time that has to be taken to attend the training. Respondents made few comments about these issues during our additional investigation. (10) Preliminary results point to regional differences in stages of climate change adaptation and the importance of using the right language. Practitioners from the Northeast tended to request more one-on-one technical assistance as local communities attempt to implement adaptation plans (or address climate change and hazards through existing plans). In the Southern and Midwestern regions of the United States, communities are more often at the beginning stage of planning, so that a training format may be more useful. In addition, in these areas adaptation may not be the best framing: using the phrase climate change or global warming is less acceptable, so adaptation is packaged as preparing for storm surge or other hazards. This was further confirmed in interviews as we received comments that displayed a wide range of experience implementing PDRP. For example, Florida and Maryland are two states that see themselves as ahead of the curve, and discussions with respondents from these states yielded more tips or suggestions about resources they could share with others. (11) Partnering with other agencies and professional societies. Similar to what occurs in the NERRS or in some local government planning departments, CSC could incentivize training by offering continuing education or professional credits through APA or other professional accreditation organizations. Several respondents mentioned the desirability of FEMA and CSC getting on the same page when it comes to trainings, especially with regard to the National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDRF). As FEMA moves forward with trainings related to the NDRF, interviewees wondered how issues of phraseology and differing political leanings could be reconciled to avoid 7

redundancy and move adaptation implementation and PDRP forward from a united NOAA-FEMA front. The appendices to this report provide additional detail for these themes, as identified in the analysis of the background materials, focus group summaries, and interview results. RESULTS FROM NOAA CUSTOMER SURVEY CONFIRM TRAINING TOPICS AND FORMAT NEEDS Approximately every three years, CSC performs the Coastal Resources Management (CRM) Customer Trends survey to assess the needs of coastal resource managers. ERG implemented this survey in 2013. Preliminary results (expected to be finalized in May 2014) showed that: 80 percent of coastal managers requested training and information on: Selecting and using economic methods. Successfully engaging communities. Effectively communicating risk. The preferred learning method (87 percent) is in person at conferences and workshops. Section 4. Proposed Training Modules Five modules were designed in response to information gathered during the first portion of the assessment summarized in ERG s Preliminary Findings report. Respondents in the initial focus group and interviews generally indicated a preference for one-day or less, in-person trainings, so the modules were designed with those parameters in mind. Additionally, ERG found that when asked about training needs related to advancing climate change adaptation planning/pdrp or implementation, people tended to comment on issues beyond what may be considered barriers to training, such as lack of political will, public engagement challenges, and assistance in implementation. A majority of respondents indicated that examples of successful or unsuccessful attempts at climate change adaptation implementation (case studies) are a critical need. In designing the modules, ERG and CSC considered all the desired content areas and formatting expressed by respondents. To account for the strong demand for case studies/real world examples, ERG proposed a fifth module that was not a stand-alone training like the first four, but instead described methods of providing information to the target audience. 4.1 Proposed Training Module #1 Focus: Creating local pre-disaster redevelopment plans. Purpose: Train local officials and professionals in how to create redevelopment plans now to be ready for effective redevelopment in the event of actual coastal natural disasters. 8

Intended audience: Selected officials, managers, and staff from disaster response, coastal management, land-use planning, public works, and related departments in specific local areas who must work together to create plans for redevelopment of built and natural infrastructure in the event of natural disasters in their community. Learning objectives: Know who needs to be at the table and how to get them there. Identify local information, technical, data and mapping needs. Assess the status of current redevelopment plans. Anticipate opportunities and conflicts in PDRP. Apply common elements of an effective PDRP. Simulate real-world PDRP to prepare for actual planning. Descriptive Narrative: Pre-disaster redevelopment planning in specific areas requires the engaged attention of officials and managers from many different government agencies and other stakeholders. This training is designed to simulate as closely as possible the actual process of PDRP as it would happen in the trainees local area. To request the training, the local host would guarantee that: (a) selected agency representatives are present, and (b) requested local information and maps are provided. The training will allow those likely to be involved in PDRP to practice planning in preparation for the real thing. Module feedback: This training module was rated useful or very useful by the majority of interviewees. Two not very useful ratings were based on PDRP already being advanced within those interviewees current work environments. Overall, responses to this module indicated: A range of experience when it came to developing and implementing PDRP. For example, counties in Florida are already implementing and receiving guidance on PDRP from the state, whereas in South Carolina most communities do not have plans in place. Concern over potential for this module to address politically sensitive issues (e.g., relocation). A narrowing of the intended audience and the content as a way to improve this module. 4.2 Proposed Training Module #2 Focus: Incorporating planning for climate and natural hazards impacts and other adaptation considerations into comprehensive plans, policies, and processes. Intended Audience: Coastal planners/managers, land use planners, economic development staff, elected officials, nongovernmental organizations, public works managers, and others. Learning Objectives: Understand the importance of incorporating adaptation considerations (e.g., responses to climate change and natural hazard impacts) into existing comprehensive plans, policies, programs, and permitting. Evaluate common elements of comprehensive plans that are likely candidates for amendment to assure adequate consideration of climate change adaptation and/or natural hazard impacts. 9

Review and compare elements of effective incorporation of these issues using selected examples. Identify information, data, technology and mapping needs. Practice using identified tools and methods. Descriptive Narrative: Many jurisdictions have comprehensive plans that are important in guiding land use and related decisions, including the use of permitting, zoning, and other tools. As concerns about adaptation to climate change and adequate responses to natural hazards increase, planners need to incorporate responses to these issues into existing comprehensive plans. If separate climate adaptation or hazard mitigation plans are being created, it will be important for these plans to align with existing comprehensive plans for maximum effectiveness. In this session, trainees will learn how to review, and (where necessary) suggest amendments to, comprehensive plans to assure that climate adaptation and natural hazard planning issues are considered and addressed. Module feedback: This training module was rated useful or very useful by all interviewees. Overall, responses to this module indicated the following: Interviewees have some questions regarding intended audience due to the variation in comprehensive plans from municipality to municipality. Sub-modules on specific technical issues could be created within this module (especially the use of permitting). The content of this module could be presented in conjunction with content from module #4, since both are connected to local budgets and planning. 4.3 Proposed Training Module #3 Focus: Methods for protecting natural systems in climate change adaptation planning and implementation. Purpose: Improve ability of trainees to understand and use techniques for assuring the protection, conservation, and restoration of natural systems when development and implementing climate change adaptation plans. Intended Audience: Coastal managers, land use planners, environmental planners, public works managers, parks and recreation managers, foresters, fisheries and wildlife managers, ecologists, landscape designers, activists. Learning Objectives: Understand and affirm importance of protecting natural systems in climate adaptation effort.. Compare and contrast considerations for common and creative methods of natural system protection in adaptation planning (e.g., policies, permits, regulations, public ownership/management, incentives, cost, criteria for success, key partners). Identify and use information, data, and maps related to this work. 10

Descriptive Narrative: The potential negative effects of climate change on built infrastructure are a priority in adaptation planning and implementation. Effective adaptation, however, also requires a focus on the protection of natural systems, both for their own sake as providers of ecosystem services and habitat, and as critical elements in a green infrastructure approach to adaptation. Natural systems include wetlands, flood plains, forests, beaches, estuaries, and more. This module will provide training for professionals to learn more about planning and implementation techniques to protect and use natural systems as part of climate adaptation programs. Module feedback: Similar to module #1, this training received a few not very useful ratings, but overall the majority of interviewees rated it useful or very useful. Overall, responses to this module indicated: Relevance of this module may depend on how much of a community s shoreline is in a natural state already. The module could be improved with incorporation of a hands-on component on how to implement as well as case examples of successful implementation. This module may be less of a priority for some interviewees compared to the other modules; however, one interviewee pointed out the timeliness of a training like this for the Gulf of Mexico region given activities related to the RESTORE Act. 4.4 Proposed Training Module #4 Focus: How to develop and communicate the economic case for taking action on implementing climate adaptation strategies. Intended Audience: Coastal managers, planners, technical staff, and communications/ outreach/marketing staff. Learning Objectives: Gain a layman s understanding of the strengths and weaknesses, appropriate uses, and limitations of selected financial models used by economists, insurance companies, government finance officers, courts, attorneys general, trial lawyers, and others to calculate and assess risks. Identify key inputs to climate hazard risk assessment equations. Identify possible sources of needed data. Assess methods for communicating the economic case for climate adaptation action to decision makers and the general public. Develop proficiency for preparing a Scope of Work if and when outside economics expertise is needed. Descriptive Narrative: Public support and political will for investing in implementation of climate adaptation strategies partially depends on an assessment of the cost of responding to probable climate related hazards/disasters in the future versus the upfront cost of adaptation activity now. While no one expects coastal management and land use planning staff to become professional economists, it is important to understand the basic structure of these calculations, how to assess their quality, and how to use this information in making decisions and building public support. 11

Module feedback: This training module was rated useful or very useful by all interviewees, except one who was concerned it may be too complicated to do accurately. Overall, responses to this module indicated: Respondent perspectives varied on whether elected officials would benefit from a training like this. However, this was the module for which interviewees most frequently suggested elected officials as an intended audience. The content of the module generated significant interest from all interviewees. Some saw the content as really benefitting public outreach efforts regarding adaptation while others saw it as more of a valuable technical exercise that would generate information to move adaptation forward in local communities (e.g., generate accurate inputs for HAZUS). 4.5 Proposed Training Related Module (#5) Focus: Develop and share case studies in climate adaptation planning and implementation through presentations, searchable databases, conference panels, publications, webinars, and other means. Purpose: Help trainees learn from, and develop relationships with, professionals in other jurisdictions who are creating and implementing climate adaptation plans, programs, and strategies. Intended Audience: Coastal managers, land use planners, elected officials, disaster response managers, transportation and public works managers, environmental protection managers, activists, consultants. Learning Objectives: Understand common problems and opportunities involved when moving from adaptation planning to implementation of strategies and actions. Gather political, technical and financial insights from stories of jurisdictions currently involved in implementation activities. Identify possible climate adaptation implementation tools involving policies, permitting, financing, conservation, restoration and construction projects, education and training, and other areas. Descriptive Narrative: Although many jurisdictions have engaged in some level of planning for adaptation to current and future hazards related to climate change, only some have made strong efforts to implement these plans. Although the tools above are not stand alone training modules, they are methods of providing information, ideas, and contact names that may prove useful to the intended audience as part of an overall climate change adaptation training initiative. Module feedback: This training module was rated useful or very useful by all interviewees except one. Overall, responses to this module indicated: A high level of enthusiasm for this content. Unsolicited, several interviewees indicated this module as the most important out of the five selections. The idea of a database received the most critiques as a delivery mechanism for this content. (An alternative could be an online community of practice as a means to connect professionals with each other.) Respondents expressed a desire to learn about both successes and failures in case studies. 12

Section 5. Conclusions ERG found that there is a need for the kind of training outlined in the five draft modules; audiences not only desire this content, but also believe CSC is the one to deliver it. The modules used during the second focus group and second round of interviews are schematic; ERG recommends that CSC consider building out all the modules through further conversation with appropriate audiences. Overall, there was a great deal of enthusiasm over all the proposed modules and although the intent of the assessment was not to develop trainings, these schematics may be a good place to start. Existing CSC professional skills development trainings are an important part of stakeholder educational needs (participatory mapping, facilitation, social media, etc.) and critical in preparing communities for adaptation and PDRP implementation. Respondents noted that successful trainings often depend as much on who is in the room, as on the content and delivery method of the training. Specifically, they suggested that successful training on some topics require the involvement of professional communities who may not usually attend trainings together, such as disaster response and recovery people (more associated with FEMA) and land use/coastal planning staff (more associated with NOAA). When involvement of specific professionals is needed for training success, CSC should work closely with local training hosts to ensure that the right people are encouraged (or even required) to attend. A focus on implementation will require CSC to develop a deeper capacity for more charrette style training. In a charrette, the trainer guides the participants through a practice run of implementing selected aspects of an adaptation plan or PDRP. Although these are collaborative sessions, because the content areas (PDRP, implementation of adaptation plans, etc.) will be new to people, CSC will be facilitating and aiding in the design of a sophisticated method of practice. The participants will come into the charrette with the relevant local information and data and will leave with a better understanding of implementation approaches, as well as a tangible to-do list. Because training in these areas in cross-disciplinary, CSC should develop partnerships for training design and delivery with other agencies and professional development training associations (e.g., FEMA, APA). There is a spectrum of already existing experience and action; trainings should reflect where people are on that spectrum. Results of the assessment pointed to the fact that many communities are beyond the Climate 101 awareness stage, and demand for a Climate 101 introduction is declining. (However, a tool such as a short video may still be useful for those who can benefit from a more basic introduction). Items that may not be considered traditional training materials such case studies, best practices online, contact names, etc. resonated strongly with respondents in this assessment. 13

It is important to build on and connect people to existing training and tools already found to be useful. For example, the proposed training module #3 on methods for protecting natural systems in climate change adaptation planning and implementation dovetails with existing CSC training on green infrastructure. In addition, the use of existing tools (such as ERG-developed tools listed in the box below) could be considered as new trainings are developed. TRANSFERABLE TOOLS AND METHODS FOR ADAPTATION TRAINING FROM PAST ERG WORK Desk-top spreadsheet model for evaluating the economic impacts of sea level rise on recreation areas and wetlands (Adapting to Rising Tides). Economic tradeoff approach for shoreline management: Recovery options post-hurricane Sandy. How to Quantify Costs and Benefits of Resilient Infrastructure An Economic Framework for Communities. Facility managers methodology for conducting high-level vulnerability assessment and adaptation response actions (Department of Justice). Predicting Climate Change and Land Use Impacts on Future Flooding and Assessing the Economic Benefits of Green Infrastructure for Reducing Flood Damages. 14

Appendix A. Results from Review of Background Materials/ Literature The literature review for this needs assessment considered a range of materials that included needs assessments, training evaluations, and studies on relevant topics (i.e., the so-called background materials for the assessment). As a result, while some of the materials reviewed were specific to training needs, others addressed the needs of target audiences more broadly. Materials included in the review were identified through the following means: (1) drawing on ERG s inhouse domain knowledge during the project s proposal phase, (2) soliciting suggestions from the NOAA project team during the initial phase of the project, and (3) identifying other resources in the course of compiling the list of materials for review (e.g., through Web searches and by reference from documents already identified). ERG conducted a review of the background materials to identify tendencies and trends in training needs as expressed across multiple studies and types of materials. We undertook this review with an awareness of the potential limitations of the findings (e.g., general differences in studies reviewed, the potential for subjectivity to have an influence on what stands out when looking across studies). The literature review suggests the following needs and preferences. Training Topics Adaptation for climate change impacts and coastal hazards are topics of interest in particular, the effects of sea level rise on community infrastructure. In the area of natural disaster preparedness, training needs are focused on response, recovery, and protection. Training and technical assistance is needed at the local level in the use of decision-making tools. For instance, it is useful to demonstrate technologies to help managers quantify risks of hazards and select effective mitigation measures. Training Format The literature suggests the need to give students an opportunity to personalize training information for their jurisdictions and to leave the training with the seed of a plan regarding adaptation (e.g., workshops based on worksheet exercises). Considerable interest has been expressed in the use of case studies as part of training. For instance, there is interest in local examples of adaptation and mitigation measures. The literature also points to interest in dialogue and interaction of trainees with each other and with organizers/experts as part of the training. Training Duration, Barriers, and Delivery Interest was generally in half-day, one-day, or two-day trainings. 15

Cost of travel and heavy workload are factors that affect ability to attend trainings. While in-person training opportunities are generally preferred, Web-based trainings and webinars are considered useful. The information highlighted above from the review of background materials seems to suggest the utility of developing further workshop-type training that is customized to the particular locality and that emphasizes the use of case studies, simulation exercises, and demonstrations of technical decisionmaking tools. Another important feature would be to provide opportunities for participants to engage each other and relevant experts for information exchange. In-person training appears to be preferred, which may make the most sense for workshop-style training. Length of training might vary depending on the complexity of issues in the particular locality. Notwithstanding the apparent interest in such training, in comparing various needs identified in the literature with examples of available training that might address aspects of the needs, we identified the following potential training gaps. (Note that other examples of relevant training may exist that were not identified by the literature search.) Interpreting and implementing laws and regulations. Scoping climate change impacts to trainees major areas of responsibility or interest. Obtaining and using socioeconomic data / information on the social vulnerability of communities. In conducting the review of background materials, ERG also identified a wide range of resources that could be considered when developing content for future training. The full literature search summary was submitted as a separate deliverable on December 21, 2012 (draft) and February 6, 2013 (final). 16

Appendix B. Summary of April 24, 2013, Focus Group Professional Development Training Needs: Pre-Disaster Planning for Recovery and Redevelopment, and Implementation of Recovery and Redevelopment Plans Focus group purpose: To gain perspectives related to training needs in pre-disaster recovery and redevelopment planning, and implementation of recovery and redevelopment plans. The audiences included coastal resource managers, coastal planning professionals, disaster/emergency response professionals, and others. Participants: The session included the following professionals with appropriate expertise: Julie Dennis, Planning Analyst, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity Carolyn Harshman, President, Emergency Planning Consultants Erin Musiol, Program Development & Research Assoc., American Planning Association Emily Meyer, Project Manager, FEMA Region IX Andrew Rumbach, Professor of Urban Planning, University of Hawaii Gavin Smith, Professor of City and Regional Planning, UNC Center for Coastal Hazards Adam Stein, Coastal Hazard Specialist, NOAA CSC Heidi Stiller, Coastal Management Specialist, NOAA CSC Facilitator: Kevin Doyle, Principal, Green Economy Monitor: John Bergin, ERG Charge to participants: As part of the federal government's increased investment and focus on longterm recovery following natural disasters, NOAA is looking to support coastal communities in achieving their natural resource management and sustainability goals in the context of disaster recovery. As subject-matter experts, NOAA seeks your counsel in identifying areas of particular training concern for coastal management and disaster preparedness professionals. DISCUSSION THEMES RELATED TO TRAINING NEEDS (1) Include the whole community and use real-world simulations for training. The expert group stressed the importance of making pre-disaster planning and implementation inclusive for the entire community. There was agreement that just as planning and implementation should happen at the local level, so training should be held at the local level and should involve the same breadth of stakeholders that are likely to work together on both pre-disaster planning and implementation and post-event recovery and redevelopment. It was suggested that training that brings together an inclusive community might focus on how planning at the state and local level can integrate with the National Disaster Recovery Framework (http://www.fema.gov/national-disaster-recovery-framework). In such an example, trainers could use table-top exercises or other real-world exercises focused on helping professionals from federal, state, and local government agencies simulate the interactions needed for effective planning and implementation in their jobs. 17

Training should also address issues about who typically benefits from the opportunities presented by disaster recovery and how best to open up decision-making for stakeholders across the community. To ensure that short-term benefits are not over emphasized, training should bring out the need to promote long-term sustainability and resiliency as much as (or more than) short-term economic benefits. (2) Teach methods for attracting and maintaining interest in pre-disaster planning and implementation of plans. The experts noted that building and maintaining broad-based interest in the need for pre-disaster planning and implementation was critical for establishing the necessary constituency for political action including getting important buy-in from elected officials. One suggested way to do this was through effective risk communication. Establishing clarity among decision makers about the real risks of not taking action and the reduction of risks that comes from making and implementing pre-disaster plans for recovery and redevelopment is an essential task for the targeted professionals. Therefore, training in risk assessment and communication methods might be part of an overall training package. Since attracting and maintaining interest by different social, economic, occupational, ethnic and other social groupings will be essential to changing (or supporting) individual and organizational behavior, training in creative social marketing techniques would be a probable component of training curriculums. Training developers were urged to consider the example of Charlotte-Mecklenburg, North Carolina, involving broad agreement on future-conditions mapping. One focus group member suggested that relevant training lessons could be drawn from community-based efforts in international settings involving capacity-building and self-reliance. (3) Teach methods for involving coastal managers in emergency response planning. Although the group seemed to agree that a best case scenario for training involved local people discussing and planning for local situations, using real-world local information and maps, it was understood that this would not always be possible. Picking up the strategic theme behind this recommendation, the experts suggested that some level of training was needed to teach methods for ensuring that coastal planners/managers be more directly involved in pre-disaster planning and implementation with emergency response managers and others from that professional world. Training might help coastal planners and professionals better understand the structure of existing emergency response planning and plans, so that they could determine how and where to improve the plans by raising additional issues, suggesting alternative approaches, and/or bringing GIS and other planning tools into the mix. (4) Incorporate peer-to-peer mentoring opportunities and use best practice examples. Whenever possible use best practice examples for teaching about pre-disaster planning and implementation. Engage professionals who were directly involved in the best-practice example to present and/or serve as trainers. 18

(5) Use online training/webinars when they are appropriate to meet learning needs. The expert group understood the advantages of online training and webinars in terms of providing opportunities to make training available to a wider range of stakeholders (e.g., avoids travel time and cost and increases scheduling flexibility). Some cautions were offered, however, regarding the limitations of online training in terms of building and strengthening local communities of practice. (6) Training needs in this area may overlap with existing professional skills training. Although pre-disaster planning and implementation for post-event recovery and redevelopment is in many ways a unique area for professional development training, several of the skills involved might be developed through existing trainings available from places like the NOAA Coastal Services Center. These include meeting facilitation, social marketing, participatory mapping, multistakeholder collaboration, and project management DISCUSSION HIGHLIGHTS The comments below, from the meeting transcript, reinforce the major themes presented above, raise questions proposed by the experts, and provide greater depth. Cooperation Among City Planners and Designers City planners need to be involved in disaster planning to get into the mindset that they are needed not just to build, but to rebuild as well. Question: How do we inform/educate design professionals about resilient design, sustainability, and their roles in disaster recovery? Highlight need for coastal managers and other planners to use GIS and other data tools. o Similarly, recognize the need to keep scope focused without divorcing coastal management from social and political issues. Data is the way to maintain focus. Highlight gap between Emergency Managers and Urban Planners territory and jurisdiction issues represent a major roadblock. Useful to train planners on what authority they do have, as well as how that integrates with other municipal structures. o o Help planners to better understand the options open to them, especially in cases where funding is coming from federal organizations. In addition to availability of funding, planners need to have some level of approval or even mandate to sanction planning efforts. Intergovernmental Collaboration Value the importance of real participatory processes, which can help to resolve conflicts and competition. o Disaster recovery is laborious and needs to be taken on deliberately with long-term goals in mind, rather than short-term gains (or profits). Understand the role of states and engage local players increasingly private or non- and quasigovernmental and organizations instead of relying solely on the federal government to manage issues. o Develop communication paths, especially to help disseminate information about funding options, authority, and decision-making priorities. o Inform stakeholders about their legal standing in decision-making. 19

Nesting of national, statewide, and local pre-planning/recovery frameworks is essential should build on each other, rather than being counter to one another or duplicative of one another. o Often the type of government is highly variable village to town to city requiring tailoring of training and planning methods. Holistic Preparedness Cultivate a pre-disaster mindset. o Help the public recognize the scale a disaster could have in order to convey the importance and benefits of pre-disaster plans. Build self-reliance, capacity, and resilience across several dimensions: economic, social, and environmental. o Addressing social vulnerability and engaging vulnerable (often marginalized) groups is a key issue. (Social equity issues are not in the professional background of planners and emergency managers.) o Disaster response is about three resources: financial, technical assistance (outreach and training), and policy. The training of disaster responders in community engagement is currently not done well, but is essential to successful responses. o Need to focus on the recovery-and-response phase to better coordinate restructuring and redeveloping in the wake of disasters. o Need to roll out a recovery planning effort to the entire community from city leadership to every corner of the community to gain support, insight, and buy-in from a broad cross-section of stakeholders. Peer-to-Peer Training and Social Networking Build connections and social networks across the disciplines involved in disaster relief and recovery. o For example, the Florida Department of Economic Opportunity partnered with the American Planning Association on the delivery of a webinar about several planning topics with 450 participants nationwide: Underscores desire to be involved if certain barriers are removed (e.g., travel costs). o Also, modeling the behavior of an emergency manager and planner together in a training session can serve as an example for effective interaction. Expand circle of training activities to a wide range of audiences big players, small players, government, non-profits who all might be involved in planning and training to respond to a situation of any scale. o Develop exercises about how to navigate relationships from local to state to national, public to private. o Encourage NOAA to explore and continue side-by-side training mechanisms for disparate audiences. 20

Appendix C. Highlights From Round One Interviews The following are highlights from 15 interviews with Coastal Training program (CTP) coordinators, a state coastal resource manager, municipal and regional planners, a federal conservation professional, disaster preparedness professionals, and several emergency management professionals involved in training, conducted May 29 to June 24, 2013. The comments cover the desired content of training, barriers and important factors affecting training, and other forms of assistance. DESIRED CONTENT OF TRAINING Conservation Professional: Downscaling modeling, bioclimatic modeling. Decision-making curriculum just for managers (expand existing trainings related to decisionmaking in the face of uncertainty). CTP Coordinators: Cost-benefit analysis of specific adaptation approaches would be a useful training (how much money saved?). Cover the thought process behind selecting climate change adaptation pilot projects. Trainings that explore quantitative data and diverse case studies (including lessons learned and best practices) would be helpful. People need help in how to decide which tools are best for particular situations. A workbook of great case studies (including alternatives considered, how much money was saved, etc.) would be very useful to give to communities. FEMA has a good new workbook; it is mitigation-focused, but some ideas are similar and are presented in a nice distilled way. Disaster Preparedness Professionals: Participants are interested in water issues (drought, fires, flooding). Has seen this interest especially in the Midwest where people are not keen on the idea of climate change adaptation but feel better about adapting to severe drought conditions. Other important training content: o Climate hazards for heavily urbanized areas. o Preparedness for extreme weather events. Emergency Management Professionals: Have heard from some participants about the need to develop a tool that could help communities quantify economic impact of decisions made. How to account for long term not just short term economic growth and quantify short and long-term costs. Costs of disasters are going up and we ll need to address this sooner rather than later. Would like to see courses becoming more performance-based and evaluate students on what they can do at the end (conducted in person). Interested in designing courses as series to provide a pathway of learning rather than having people attend courses randomly. Professional Planners (Municipal and Regional): What is the impact to the bottom line? Costs/savings. 21

Conduct training related to the value of natural resources (ecosystem service values), e.g., calculate money saved by not treating stormwater with chemicals but rather using natural systems. Develop a course for climate change skeptics. Pure data here are the impacts that we ve seen, these are the trends (change in temperature, change in land use, etc.). Then, here are programs that can help manage these changes (funding, law/language for regulations, etc.). Planners need assistance translating census and other data. Teach us how to use surveys and focus groups more effectively through a classroom-based training. Address how climate change affects me directly and what other communities are doing (case studies). There are so many tools related to climate change that a training on how to select the appropriate tool would be very useful. This training would be most useful if held in person so participants could complete exercises under guidance of trainers. Two- or three-day workshop on a suite of tools would give people the opportunity to explore scenarios. EPA, NOAA, FEMA, and USGS should together offer a training that takes participants through every step of developing and implementing an adaptation plan (climate modeling, inundation mapping, use of HAZUS and other tools, costs of damages, prioritization of infrastructure protection, etc.). It should be geared towards state agencies, but capable of being turned into a module for local communities. Another important topic is what to do about housing and other development in floodplains (can be a particularly touchy subject). State Coastal Resource Manager: An important training topic is how to make decisions with uncertain sea level rise data. BARRIERS AND IMPORTANT FACTORS AFFECTING TRAINING Conservation Professional (Federal): There is tremendous value in collaborating and partnering with states, NGOs, universities. This can help reduce redundancy of trainings and keep content relevant. It is important to design trainings that are scalable and adjustable for specific geographic regions (e.g., Alaska isn t interested in sea level rise issues). Most people will not travel very far if the course isn't longer than two days. The audience is no longer interested in broad trainings on implications of global climate change on resource management. Webinars should never be longer than 1.5 hours. Online learning is possible, but you need to have assignments and a way for participants to connect online (such as Moodle or other blackboard-like tools), but not during the webinar. CTP Coordinators: The priority is always cost (how to maximize the number of people reached for smallest amount). Also important to consider the value of content for specific audiences, e.g., offering something unique that will make event/training a priority for audience. 22

Timing of event and time of year are important; multiple-day events are challenging. For example, a three-day day training was harder to get people to attend compared to a half day or whole day. Training can t have strong advocacy spin when federally funded. Need to match tone with audience knowledge. Most communities are beyond the Climate 101 level. Move communities away from realm of risk awareness and into planning. Sandy helped make people aware. There is value in classroom training but there is more significant interaction when you go out into the community and become involved in the process. Carefully consider which part of state to hold training in (have to consider where trainings have been held in the past, venue availability, estimated attendance, etc.). Disaster Preparedness Professionals: Some people would prefer to discuss hazards, not climate change. Framing of issue and language used is important. Almost all courses require group work, or teaming up with another person, so Web-based training is not an option. Video-conferencing was attempted for group work and still wasn t effective (although may be effective with other types of training). Certain courses can never be Web-based, e.g., natural disaster awareness. Length of course can be an issue when longer than one day. For example, one particular two-day course was highly attended the first day, but no one showed up the second day. This is an issue when conducting pre- and post-course testing. Emergency Management Professionals: For floodplain management courses (FEMA) there is a wait and see attitude when it comes to climate change. Getting pressure with budgets to reach more people more cheaply. FEMA/ASFM survey in 2000 and 2007 was a statistically significant review of what people like to learn and need to learn. Respondents enjoyed the classroom, but preferred not to be away from the office (conflicting answers). Most disliked was computer-based training but if they had to do an online course, they preferred training to be under an hour. Professional Planner (Municipal and Regional): There is a perception that planning can t be trusted (both by other agencies and the public) because it creates more work. Money and time are largest obstacles. Travel is a huge barrier and generally should be kept under three hours so participants don t have to spend the night. Easy to be distracted during webinars, but the trend due to budgets seems to be towards more online training. Really would love to have CSC coming on site and helping (recognizing that this is asking a lot). There are numerous municipality staff (planners, engineers) to train across state/region. It is important to address politically touchy subjects like re-mapping floodplains and relocating structures. Web conferences can work if there is more handholding and appropriate packets of information provided. 23

State Coastal Resource Manager: People don t pay attention in webinars/virtual trainings. Face-to-face and other more traditional interactions work best. People never get their questions answered during webinars. Municipalities have old computers that don t support virtual training programs. In-person trainings are best but can t be more than a day. OTHER FORMS OF ASSISTANCE Conservation Professional: Sometimes constant bad news about climate change can be overwhelming for people. Decision science courses/trainings help people feel like they have some control. CTP Coordinators: Developed a website ( Getting to Resilience ) with different sea level rise maps to allow for understanding future risk due to sea level rise. Take communities through evaluation questions. Direct one-on-one technical assistance is important work directly with counties and state (writing and updating hazard mitigation plans, helping integrate sea level rise and climate change risk). People love real world examples and getting to hear the perspective of someone who was directly involved in implementation. Cited the one-day conference on Lessons Learned from the Gulf Coast (hazard mitigation) as a good example. Cited a survey of local communities conducted to better understand how existing tools are being used in adaptation efforts, how adaptation is being integrated into existing plans, and how climate change impacts are being addressed. Emergency Management Professionals: Brought up the issue of a fine line between education and training. FEMA does a lot of coordination with higher education institutions and is developing the first graduate program in the country in floodplain management. Beginning to work more with webinars for training; however, very comprehensive 508/504 requirements make this it harder the template for online courses is static and limits what they can do. Online transcription is one of the challenges. Professional Planner (Municipal and Regional): Maintain a robust website, blog; include an online library with materials. State Coastal Resource Manager What is considered training? CZM staff are learning from one another on a daily basis through meetings. 24

Appendix D. Summary of August 15, 2013, Focus Group Professional Development Training Needs: Pre-Disaster Planning for Recovery and Redevelopment, and Implementation of Recovery and Redevelopment Plans Focus group purpose: To gain perspectives related to training needs in pre-disaster recovery and redevelopment planning, and implementation of recovery and redevelopment plans (PDRP). The suggested training audiences include: coastal resource managers, coastal planning professionals, disaster/emergency response professionals, elected officials, and others. Also, to solicit input on a brief description of a possible PDRP training module (see Appendix D-1) based on comments from an earlier focus group. Participants: The session included state agency representatives with appropriate expertise from Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, North Carolina, and Oregon, along with two Sea Grant professionals familiar with these jurisdictions: Josh Bruce, Assistant Director, Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience, University of Oregon Gary Chock, Structural Engineer and President, Martin & Chock consulting, Hawaii Julie Dennis, Planning Analyst, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity Misha Jackson, Disaster Assistance Planner, Hawaii State Civil Defense Jennifer Kline, Georgia Department of Natural Resources Ian Miller, Coastal Hazards Specialist, Washington Sea Grant, University of Washington Tancred Miller, Coastal & Ocean Policy Manager, North Carolina Division of Coastal Management Vern Miyagi, Executive Officer, Hawaii State Civil Defense Tara Owens, Coastal Hazards Specialist, University of Hawaii Sea Grant College Program Kevin Richards, Earthquake and Tsunami Program Manager, Hawaii State Civil Defense Also: Adam Stein, Coastal Hazard Specialist, NOAA CSC Bethney Ward, NOAA CSC Facilitator: Kevin Doyle, Principal, Green Economy Monitor: John Bergin, ERG Charge to participants: NOAA is interested in gaining your perspectives related to training needs for coastal resource managers, coastal planning professionals, and other local officials in coastal communities related to pre-disaster planning for redevelopment and long-term recovery. DISCUSSION KEY POINTS Ideas about Training Needs Related to PDRP Connections with NDRF. Training is needed on how FEMA would be interacting with state and/or local governments in the context of the National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDRF). Specifically, training on who should be at the table during long-term recovery planning, and what a state coordinating agency might look like in practical application. 25

Reaching small rural communities. Training approaches are needed that are specifically useful for educating small rural communities about PDRP because often they have not really addressed much planning beyond the most immediate considerations. Engagement of the economic development sector. Training for economic development professionals on their role in PDRP is needed because they are key stakeholders who tend to think they don t have a role to play. As a result, they tend to focus on short-term recovery priorities. Further, it s advantageous in planning to address natural and cultural resources in the context of local economies to avoid recovery options that are less desirable from an environmental perspective. So it s important that economic development professionals are trained and engaged in the planning process. Training context and purpose. Whatever training is developed, it needs to present information within the context of established requirements and protocols. Also, it is important that any training focus on a specific purpose or deliverable/product that stakeholders can use for further action. Input from Tribal nations and other indigenous peoples. Tribal nations and other indigenous peoples should be asked for input on training development, since often they are leaders in many respects on approaches to balancing environmental and cultural resource considerations in the planning process. Reactions to Possible PDRP Training Module Leverage what s already in place. NOAA already has some well developed programs that are familiar to many communities and that touch on PDRP. So, it s best to leverage what s there and add to it as needed. Similarly, the planning community has many resources available to inform PDRP (specifically through the American Planning Association) that could be leveraged and incorporated into training. The utility of a planning exercise. A simulation exercise approach is useful because it takes the planning from being a process to focusing on an event, making it more real for people. Also, the exercise approach is important because it s the way emergency management personnel learn. Potential challenges with the exercise approach. There are challenges with developing a onesize-fits-all training for use with various communities because some communities will not have established the necessary materials or expertise beforehand, particularly the smaller communities. Another challenge with a template approach is that planning requirements and other considerations tend to be different in each state. So it seems as though the local jurisdiction would essentially have to develop the exercise before it can be presented. Possibilities for an overview approach. Another training approach would be to review the general types of mechanisms that have been used for PDRP as well as the overall regulatory and policy context in order to give participants an overview of possible paths to implementation. Then they can consider how these are relevant to their own jurisdiction. 26

SUMMARY OF MAIN DISCUSSION POINTS Discussion Round 1: Ideas about Training Needs Related to PDRP Jennifer Kline, Georgia Department of Natural Resources: In Georgia, the state will be working with local governments on PDRPs as pilot communities by sitting down with emergency management agencies and walking through the PDRP process with them. So training needs are more focused on staff at the state coastal management program, where there is a need to know more about FEMA s goals and requirements related to the National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDRF). The state also has a need for facilitators who are knowledgeable about PDRP to help the state work with local governments. Once the state has finalized its statewide plan, they will pilot it in local governments, and at that point may learn about other training needs at the local level. Tara Owens, University of Hawaii Sea Grant College Program: The planning community has many resources available to inform PDRP, specifically through the American Planning Association. That is, a lot of thinking has been done that goes beyond the initial emergency response. For example, APA has recently issued a draft ordinance for reconstruction phases; also APA s so-called green book serves as a planning resource for activities related to PDRP. If such resource could be integrated into training, that would be helpful for communities. Julie Dennis, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity: Florida has been providing training on PDRP for a number of years, but the new consideration is the NDRF. So, Florida is now trying to understand the connections between state planning and FEMA s framework. This is an area where training is needed to help figure out those connecting pieces. Specifically, there is a need to understand more about who would be at the table during long-term recovery under the NDRF. Also to understand what a state coordinating agency might look like under the NDRF and how it would look in practical application. Thus, training could address the question of how would FEMA be interacting with the state and/or local governments? Often such practical applications of this sort are worked out through exercises. While long-term recovery planning may not readily lend itself to such exercises, it seems that a practical application exercise could be developed. State department heads would benefit from this type of training, and then the lessons learned could be passed along from the state to the local level. Ian Miller, University of Washington Sea Grant Program: In Washington, there exists an urban-rural divide in terms of access to training that possibly could be addressed in the training approach. That is, there s got to be some way to reach small rural communities, which in the case of Washington tend to be coastal communities. Because largely they haven t really addressed PDRP beyond the most immediate considerations. In contrast, urban communities generally have already taken action on PDRP. So for rural communities, training would need to more or less start from the beginning (for instance, with county and municipal staff). The challenge is how best to reach those smaller communities. Josh Bruce, Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience: 27

In Oregon also, the rural communities are often starting at the beginning, such that sometimes even the concept of PDRP may be new. So training on what PDRP involves may be important for such communities. Also, there is a need to get economic development professionals up to speed on what their role is at the regional level and all the way down to individual businesses because they are key stakeholders. Often they think they don t have a role to play. So, need training on their role for both pre and post disaster. It may be important to have both training that is specifically focused on economic development professionals as well as training for them with other stakeholders. The concern with just doing broad, all-sector training is that it can be too generalized. Tancred Miller, North Carolina Division of Coastal Management: In North Carolina, state law mandates that coastal county land use planning be conducted, and so state agency staff help local governments with land use planning. While historically PDRP has not been included in these plans, it could be included in land use planning updates. So, since the state agency does not have PDRP expertise in-house, there s a need to have agency land use planning staff trained on PDRP and to have training modules available for planning staff at the local level. Discussion Round 2: Reactions to Possible PDRP Training Module (in Appendix D-1) Jennifer Kline, Georgia Department of Natural Resources: There are challenges with developing a one-size-fits-all training for use with various communities. For instance, a couple years ago Georgia coordinated with CSC to conduct a planning for climate change workshop for the state s largest urban community on the coast. The workshop was effective for that community because they have planners on staff and they had all the resources needed (such as transportation maps and materials). In contrast, the rural communities don t have that. Also, at the state level, relevant rules and requirements vary by state. Kevin Richards, Hawaii State Civil Defense: NOAA already has some well developed programs that are familiar to many communities and that include an element that addresses long-term recovery from disasters. Possibly these could be enhanced, but it s not necessary to create yet another program. It s better to leverage what s there and add to it as needed. Tara Owens, University of Hawaii Sea Grant College Program: In agreement that there is a need to add to the existing program because currently there is no community in Hawaii that is doing long-term PDRP. Rather, a good job is being done on mitigation and short-term recovery planning. But there is a major gap when it comes to the transition to long-term planning. In Hawaii, we re working now on how to take components from hazard mitigation planning and forward those to long-term planning. When there is no long-term plan, then there tend to be no conditions on how a community rebuilds and people tend to redevelop in hazardous areas. So, we need information on how to transition from immediate recovery to permitting and rebuilding, and how to accept funds for doing that (for example, how the funds are going to come from FEMA, and go the state, and then trickle down to the counties where all the decisions are made in terms of redevelopment). We also need to consider how things like emergency proclamations will affect reconstruction. For instance, when 28

the governor declares an emergency, then historically all the environmental regulations have been waived. That s not ideal, so how do you work within that framework? Also in agreement that there will be challenges in making a training exercise relevant across various communities. Yet, such an exercise could be useful. Julie Dennis, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity: Out of all the communities in Florida that have gone through the PDRP process, the two that took the plan a few steps further did some sort of exercise like that being considered for the new CSC training. The communities used an exercise because it takes the planning from being a process or a plan on the shelf to an event, making it more real for people. (One community may have used an exercise from the FEMA Emergency Management Institute in Maryland.) The exercise approach is important because it s the way emergency management personnel learn. Gary Chock, Martin & Chock consulting, Hawaii: To make a PDRP exercise that is effective for a community, it seems as though the local jurisdiction would essentially have to develop the exercise that tests a local scenario. Otherwise, you would be asking them what they are doing in this area. So it s not clear how NOAA would go about creating a local exercise. And it s important when bringing stakeholders together that they get something out of it and come away with something they can use to take action. Since stakeholders are already aware of the need for planning and are ready to move toward implementation, another training approach to consider would be to review the types of mechanisms that have been used as well as the regulatory and policy context to give participants an overview of possible paths to implementation. Then they can consider how these are relevant to their own jurisdiction. Discussion Round 3: Additional Thoughts and Comments Julie Dennis, Florida Department of Economic Opportunity: [In response to question about how outreach to the economic development community has been conducted in states where PDRP is or was required at the local jurisdiction.] In Florida, PDRP used to be required and now is not, but the state still strongly encourages it. But for outreach to economic partners or economic development organizations, a section on economic recovery was included in the state PDRP guidance. However, the state agency has started exploring that subject in more depth and has come to think that training for economic development professionals is probably a fairly significant need because they have a different way of communicating and different priorities. Often they are very focused on short-term recovery priorities. In practical applications, the state agency has been working with a couple communities in the past year on long-term recovery plans. This was done largely from a community planning and development standpoint in the re-visioning of a downtown area (in Live Oak, in north Florida). This has been approached in a somewhat different way in a coastal community (Franklin County, also in north Florida) that is creating what is essentially a longterm recovery plan, but calling it an economic diversification strategy in light of the economic crises there related to oyster farming. The reason for the shift to the economic focus in Florida is that the state agency was moved to come under the Department of Economic Opportunity. Very recently they met with the economic development liaisons in all of the state agencies and talked with them about long-term recovery. Training for economic development professionals is very much needed. (References the following website as a useful resource: http://restoreyoureconomy.org/). 29

Adam Stein, NOAA CSC: NOAA s mandate is really around coastal resources, specifically natural and cultural resources. And NOAA s primary concern and role in the NDRF is captured in the natural and cultural resources domain, where we work with our partner federal agencies and with the states, counties, and municipalities on helping with natural or cultural resources recovery. The economic importance of natural resources for coastal communities is apparent in many cases. The beaches, dunes, wetlands, the natural beauty can be drivers for the local economy. However, after a major disaster, other agencies such as a state economic development authority or the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development are going to be driving much of the work (and funding) carried out after an event. NOAA s role is focused on the specific needs of coastal communities, around their natural environment and cultural resources. Thus, a question about whether there is anything in particular for a training that NOAA should be certain to capture related to this interplay of agencies and communities. Jennifer Kline, Georgia Department of Natural Resources: It would be beneficial for coastal managers if the CSC provided training or guidance on how other states have looked at issues such as rolling easements, setbacks, restoration, and beach re-nourishment. Coastal managers could then take such information to local governments. Josh Bruce, Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience: In regard to Oregon s coastal communities, it s difficult to disconnect environmental and cultural resources from the local economies. Many coastal communities are struggling due either to impacts from degradation of those resources or from regulations that have precluded access to those resources. The economic health of communities and by extension their ability to think about PDRP can be compromised. Many of the coastal communities have transitioned from a resource-based economy to a tourism-based economy primarily because of some of that tension. For this reason, it s important to have economic development professionals at the table. Otherwise, when a disaster does occur, those stakeholders are going to be involved in the recovery. So it s important that they are trained and engaged in the planning process. Vern Miyagi, Hawaii State Civil Defense: Economic recovery and cultural resources are co-capabilities (under an annual FEMA requirement to identify any planning gaps and shortfalls). In terms of economic recovery, the state includes a range of stakeholders in the discussions. Agreement on the need to train/involve economic development professionals in the planning process, since they will be involved in post-recovery. Whatever training is developed, it needs to present information within the context of established requirements and protocols. Also, agreement that it s important that any training have a specific outcome or deliverable/product that stakeholders can use. Tara Owens, University of Hawaii Sea Grant College Program: Natural and cultural resources considerations are a very important consideration. In fact, they are the impetus for the project being initiated in Maui County that involves working in conjunction with the planners who do all the coastal zone management planning and permitting. There have been some small emergencies on Maui that have resulted in recovery options that are less desirable from an environmental perspective. For this reason, planners 30

have started to get involved in recovery planning so that something like that does not become the norm on a large scale after a disaster. Regarding involving the economic sector in planning, this is not currently happening in Hawaii but is something for consideration. Josh Bruce, Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience: Suggested to include representatives from Tribal nations and other indigenous peoples for input and/or as a target audience for training. Since in the Pacific Northwest, Tribes are leaders in many ways on approaches to balancing environmental and cultural resource considerations. Closing Thoughts and Comments Kevin Richards, Hawaii State Civil Defense: Again, there is a lot of work going on in this area. So it s important to stay aware about what s already established or under way and to leverage where it makes sense. Gary Chock, Martin & Chock consulting, Hawaii: Should give some consideration to how to best to effectively engage political appointees (for instance, those serving on commissions or other appointed bodies) who will play an important role related to planning and economic development, but whose tenures are generally more temporal. Josh Bruce, Oregon Partnership for Disaster Resilience: Agreement about the importance of leveraging what s already been established. Another aspect of leveraging is the importance of accessing available expertise to inform planning efforts. For instance, community redevelopment may not really fit within the knowledge base of emergency managers, so leveraging the expertise of land use planners as well as economic development professionals will be important for informing long-term planning efforts (such as master plans). Josh Bruce also provided the following resource information after the meeting: o Link to OPDR Recovery Planning Page: http://csc.uoregon.edu/opdr/recovery o Specific link to a local recovery planning project we completed in 2011: http://csc.uoregon.edu/opdr/recovery/southwestcounties o Two attachments: Lessons Learned from our 2011 project and our Recovery Forum Training Manual. 31

Focus Group Summary Appendix D-1 Possible PDRP Training Module Focus area: Creating local pre-disaster redevelopment plans Purpose: Train local officials and professionals in how to create redevelopment plans now to be ready for effective redevelopment in the event of actual climate and coastal hazard natural disasters Suggested audience(s): Selected officials, managers, and staff from disaster response, coastal management, land-use planning, public works and related departments in specific local areas who must work together to create plans for redevelopment of built and natural infrastructure in the event of natural disasters in their coastal areas. Suggested learning objectives: Know who needs to be at the table and how to get them there. Identify local information, technical, data and mapping needs. Assess status of current redevelopment plans. Anticipate opportunities and conflicts in PDRP. Apply common elements of an effective PDRP. Simulate real-world PDRP to prepare for actual planning. Draft descriptive narrative: Pre-Disaster Redevelopment Planning in specific local areas requires the engaged attention of officials and managers from many different government agencies and other stakeholders. This training is designed to simulate as closely as possible the actual process of PDRP as it would happen in the trainees local area. To request the training, the local host would guarantee that: (a) selected agency representatives will be present, and (b) requested local information and maps are provided. The training will allow those likely to be involved in PDRP to practice planning in preparation for the real thing. 32

Appendix E: Summary of Round Two Interviews Modules evaluated: #1: Pre-disaster redevelopment planning #2: Incorporating climate hazard planning into existing comprehensive plans #3: Protecting and using natural systems in climate adaptation programs #4: Communicating the economic case for climate adaptation strategies #5: Case studies in climate adaptation planning and implementation (training-related) Questions used during follow-up interviews: Q1: On a scale of 1-4, how useful do you think this training would be for you personally? Q2: On a scale of 1-4, how useful do you think this training would be for others in the intended audiences? Q3: Is there any intended audience that you think this training would be particularly useful for? Q4: What questions, comments, edits, compliments or concerns do you have about this training option? 1= Not at all useful 2 = Not very useful 3 = Useful 4 = Very useful Summary of Findings The second round of interviews focused on gathering feedback on the four proposed training modules and one proposed assistance approach. Of the 15 people interviewed in round one, ten people were participated in the second round of interviews. Some interviewees expressed confusion about the first two ratings questions on the usefulness of the training personally and for the intended audience. For the majority, the first question was interpreted as how useful the trainings would be to them, as a staff member at their organization/agency, and the second question was interpreted as how useful would the trainings be to the people their organization/agency normally serves. Overall, the response to all the modules was overwhelmingly supportive (no ratings of 1 and very few 2 s). There were often particular audiences who were identified by interviewees as missing from the module descriptions, but this could also be an issue of different agencies/organizations using different titles to refer to particular positions. As mentioned below, the most contentious audience discussed was elected officials (in regards to module #4). There was a wide spectrum of responses on whether they should be included in this training or not. Other comments were made about potentially consolidating some of the modules and ensuring that these courses were not replicating past efforts. In general, people appeared excited about the potential training options and wanted to know when CSC would move forward with offering them. Responses to Questions 1-3 are consolidated in Table 1 and responses to Question 4 are consolidated in Table 2. 33

Table 1. Answers to Questions #1-#3 Interviewee Module # Q1 Q2 Additional comments (Q1, Q2) Professional Planners (2) 1 - PDRP 2, 4 4, 3 Already have a plan; however, not many communities have these plans. Audience this training would be useful for? Anyone missing from existing list? (Q3) Urban planners, emergency managers, code enforcement and building inspectors. 2 Comp plans 3 Natural sys This is right up my alley; exactly what I m working on. 3, 4 4, 3.5 We ve done this, but some people are not on board yet. Working with an organizational partner on developing proposal on this very point. 3, 3 3, 3 There are a lot of communities that don t have natural system like marsh along shoreline, more about infrastructure. Land use planners who don t understand climate change adaptation, public transportation officials, water resource managers. Local environmental officials; local groups working on conservation issues. Urban forestry community not mentioned. CTP Coordinators (3) 4 Econ case 5 Case studies Less of a priority than first two. 4, 4 4, 4 Budget directors, financial directors, elected officials, senior management, appointed officials. Shouldn t narrow the audience down too much for this one; audience should be similar to the audience for module #2 because comprehensive plans are connected to budgets. Evaluating financial impacts in community discussions could be a way to get the public engaged. 4, 3.5 4, 3.5 Very important Local planning directors, appointed planning officials/commissioners. Case studies can be valuable; helps to have examples to point to. 1 - PDRP 3, 3, 3 3, 4, 2 Just recently received funding to address this, so otherwise would have been higher. 2 Comp plans 4, 4, 3 4, 4, 3 We re in process of developing climate change planning class: how to incorporate climate change planning and sea level rise planning into current plans. Disaster response staff, public works staff, land use planners. Need to be more specific with identifying this audience. Land use and shoreline planners, hazard mitigation planners, flood plain managers, emergency managers, stormwater managers, natural resource planners, municipal engineers, township administrators. 34

3 Natural sys 4 Econ case 5 Case studies [Score of 4] but only if this meant developing a hazard plan specific to the reserve. Maybe more specific American Institute of Certified Planners (AICP) designations instead? 4, 3, 2 4, 4, 3 Shoreline planners, other coastal managers, public health officials. 4, 4, 3 3, 4, 3 Elected officials, outreach staff, engineers, non-profits. Be more specific than coastal managers NERRS? Sea Grant? etc. 4, 4, 3 2, 4, 3 Even if not exact fit, useful to Planners, coastal mangers, elected people. officials, public works. Disaster Preparedness Professionals (2) Onus doesn t have to be on CSC to present we could act as intermediary. 1 - PDRP 3.5, 3 3.5, 4 Planners, local county mayors offices, county commissioners, emergency management, redevelopment, tribal public works officials. 2 Comp plans 3 Natural sys 3.5, 3 3.5, 4 Planners, natural resource managers, Emergency management trainers, private sector businesses. 4, 2 4, 3 Like this one the best. Timing just makes sense with RESTORE Act from BP oil spill. Audience listed is good. Universities maybe. Emergency Management Professionals (2) 4 Econ case 5 Case studies Feel like there s already an effort online available related to this module. A lot of groups talking about this particular topic. 3, 4 3, 2 Doing this well is complicated, but it would be super useful. 4, 3 4, 3 Really high. Feels like CSC already does this but with new CSC magic may be useful. 1 - PDRP 3, 3 4, 3 Keep in mind that counties in Florida have received PDRP planning guidance from State DEM. National Disaster Recovery Framework: one function is Depends on who can best collect accurate data and ensure the numbers coming out of this exercise are accurate. Municipalities, mayors, county and parish presidents, executive boards, municipal governments. Public information/relations people, lead federal agency manager. Depends on focus of case studies. Elected officials. Disaster response managers (assuming this also includes recovery ). Emergency management, building/permitting staff. 35

Conservation Professional (1) 2 Comp plans 3 Natural sys 4 Econ case 5 Case studies community planning and capacity building and it has a pre-disaster component. Would enhance and fill climate change aspect gap. 4, 3 4, 4 Emergency management is Audience listed is good. usually just about crisis; most of money doesn t go to mitigation. 3, 2 3, 2 Local beach re-nourishment managers. 3, 3 4, 3 This is making the case for taking action to implement climate adaptation strategies. People definitely interested in it. Everyone listed, need to add elected officials, emergency managers, risk management, members of the media. 4, 3 4, 4 Good stuff here! Audience listed is good (as long as disaster response managers means not just people involved in response but also recovery phase). 1 - PDRP 4 3 Not focus of what we do, but Community groups. very important to those that do it. 2 Comp plans 4 4 Higher [importance] than first [module]. Conservation professionals and natural resource planners are missing. 3 Natural 4 4 Very useful Public needs to be included. sys 4 Econ case 4 4 Very important Natural resource professionals. 5 Case studies 4 4 Most important. Should have the broadest audience of all the modules. Additional comments regarding audience : One interviewee mentioned considering consultants for all of the modules since they are often hired to help local governments. Many interviewees grappled with inclusion of elected officials or not, especially for the economic case module (#4). Some felt passionate that elected officials attend while others felt that information from these trainings should be distilled down for elected officials by others. A few people mentioned considering a train the trainer approach for all of these modules. 36

Table 2. Question #4 Comments, questions, concerns etc. Interviewee Module # Comments Professional Planners 1 - PDRP Seems straightforward; overall description is fine. Key will be in details as you break out. 2 Comp plans Public health departments in cities are starting to look at this (e.g., Philadelphia). 3 Natural sys There should be a hands-on component for this module how to implement using data, maps, etc. Customize this demonstration for the region. Would like to see training touch somehow on environmental justice considerations. How to spread environmental wealth so it s a little more equitable? 4 Econ case Learning objectives seem a little too broad and generic need something more specific to each community. In some ways, this is the toughest of the four modules, because communicating economic case can be challenging. Don t underestimate the challenges in making this successful. People have a lot of fixed ideas of what works economically and what doesn t. 5 Case studies If you develop an online database, make sure it s easy to navigate; these can become hard to follow (urges caution with this option). APA has done this with some projects, but hasn t seen CSC do it: develop a series of briefing papers that can be put online, two-page PDFs, in color, printable intended for wide public consumption but useable by local planners. Need something people can use going into a hearing to distribute to the public. CTP Coordinators 1 - PDRP PDRP should be spelled out. Not everyone is familiar with acronym. Title/focus: title is confusing; redevelopment plan talks about after disaster, but reading description, realized it was a pre-planning exercise. Purpose: unclear term in the event of climate climate doesn t make sense. What s a climate disaster at this point? Wording is awkward. Learning objectives: acronym is not spelled out prior. In general: this module took me the most time to understand. Written the most unclearly. Concern: this could potentially be a highly political conversation, very sensitive. I m assuming a lot will be related to relocation. It would be really useful if CSC would help local host navigate that concern. 2 Comp plans Loved it!! So much aligned with Getting to Resilience website we ve created. The training should address how to incorporate adaptation into any type of infrastructure or hazard planning that occurs across different municipalities (e.g., sewer plans, hazard mitigation plans), IF these plans are consistent across jurisdictions. Would this type of training be offered to multiple counties at once? Comprehensive plans differ county to county. 3 Natural sys Retreat along coast how to make sure there are opportunities for natural systems to retreat. Studies in MD in Dorchester County (Blackwater NWR). 4 Econ case Not only about people understanding risks, but giving people the language that speaks to people s emotions, not just intellect. True for any of these modules. Present in a way that general public can start to consider how it affects them personally. Recent work: this module aligns with the work Heidi Stiller has been doing at CSC. Probably could use her case studies. Real challenge is to make this locally relevant because we need to be able to 37

Disaster Preparedness Professionals Emergency Management Professionals Conservation Professional apply in the end. Would be useful if CSC could help identify people in the community who hold positions that we could turn to for help, e.g., academic institutions, outside the circle of people we normally turn to. Making connections and building local tech/information sources beyond traditional networks. 5 Case studies 1 - PDRP Net is being cast too broadly. 2 Comp plans Integration into module 4. 3 Natural sys Reservations about this one given limited resources. Would rather see other trainings occur above this. 4 Econ case General thought: given limited resources, have CSC hire/train a super nerd on this topic who can work with local community and help them actually crunch the numbers. Training someone on the ground vs. having someone at CSC. Would like to see the focus be on developing really good, accurate numbers. For example, HAZUS is only valuable when input data are accurate. 5 Case studies It s important to paint a picture of not just successes but also failures; really identify reasons why communities need to address these issues. 1 - PDRP Will there be some kind of planning guide or standard to be taught or used in training? Should mention recovery in addition to disaster response. Keep in mind that counties in Florida have received PDRP planning guidance from State DEM. Additionally, ensure PDRP planning is integrated with a jurisdiction s long-term community recovery strategy. 2 Comp plans Ensure GIS Staff are available for technical mapping support, as needed. 3 Natural sys You d have to have case studies, examples of things that have been done. Whether in our country or other, e.g., the Netherlands. How to implement? 4 Econ case Lends itself to simulated press briefings. Role-playing. Performance-based training should be use for this one. The economic case for Climate Adaptation Strategies is similar to that for implementing hazard risk reduction strategies identified in mandated Local Disaster Mitigation Plans. (Source: FEMA and the Multi-Hazard Mitigation Council Each dollar spent on mitigation saves society an average of four dollars ). 5 Case studies Resources might include President s Climate Change Resiliency Initiative and best practices identified by the Federal Interagency Climate Change Adaptation Task Force. 1 - PDRP Scenario planning we do have courses related to this. Very difficult to facilitate a group looking at alternative futures. People have hard time with this. 2 Comp plans Written too generically, what does planning for impacts mean? Climate change is not something that impacts overnight. Most impacts are gradual. End-result? Lacks specificity. 3 Natural sys Caution: none of us trying to manage for impacts of climate change are trying to protect this is just naïve. Adaptation is not a protective term. Systems will need to be resilient, more about sustaining natural systems and recognizing that there is no normal anywhere. 4 Econ case We ve tried to do something similar to this but have found that there aren t good techniques. Really a hard stretch to put monetary value on a bird. What s the biological cost? What s the tree/habitat worth? How to assess developer for cutting down tree? 5 Case studies 38

Additional Comments for all modules - What will the delivery mechanism be? - It s important for all these trainings to coordinate with appropriate professional organizations to provide certified credits/continuing education requirements. Maybe coordinate with NERRS (because accreditation is already in place). Flood managers, building officials, emergency response managers, architects, engineers, and surveyors all have professional accreditation bodies (these may not all be necessary depends on the module content). - CSC usually works with local host prior to trainings, but CSC needs to provide more information on what they want the local host to bring to the table to make the training successful, e.g., maps, people, etc. CSC will then have the ability to be more locally relevant. For example, local officials/titles vary from state to state, but if CSC can in advance say to the host, it would be useful if an emergency management professional was in the room o Providing local maps, data, etc. is another area where local host could come into play. - Assuming all modules are being developed for delivery to local communities have these audiences think about what their objectives as members of community should be, e.g., How important to have pre-disaster plan? For example, post-sandy people now have a plan in place so that after boardwalk burnt down again, enabling a quicker response. - Instead of developing four courses, maybe develop two or three and look at combining some of the content. There is definitely some overlap between the modules. Delineating audiences more specifically will help with this. - Training should complement the local climate change action plan, if one exists. For example, the South Florida Regional Climate Change Action Plan addresses many of the areas suggested for the proposed training modules. Implementation of training should also be coordinated with an outreach education strategy to engage elected leaders (possibly through state and national associations NACo, U.S. Conference of Mayors, etc.). Additionally, training modules should make a distinction between climate change adaptation and disaster mitigation. At the same time, it is important to include climate change and adaptation strategies into local hazard mitigation plans/strategies. - First to trainings, really useful. Would be useful if each community selects an individual to work with all these others. What if you made first two modules as trainer-to-trainer? Get planners all day, then they go back to their communities. Some people are already well informed about this (sea level rise and climate change). Hit planners with modules 1 and 2 but also assume they have expertise in planning. Module 3 is more of a resource than a training. Add 1 and 2 to 4. - Make sure you re not duplicating past (failures, try something new). Narrowing audience will help. Do something new but effective. Avoid trainings that are too broad. - If CSC s going to use an independent study format, it can be costly to start up without a system in place. EMI has a robust system set up and previously worked to help CDC and DHS set up their independent training programs. Independent study is good for knowledge-based training and folks who aren t capable of traveling. - All of these issues depend on public support, so a separate training related to that will allow future trainings to focus more on the content suggested here. - Fastest way to reach a lot of people is a well-organized webinar. Depends on outreach to muster audience. - Great first step. Very interested to see what comes of them. Timeframe? Excited to host!! Continue to help offering feedback. Happy to be of assistance and to give input on CSC ideas. 39