CHAPTER 1
Getting Started with Virtual Public Involvement

1.1 Introduction

Public involvement is an essential part of transportation planning and project development. Active participation from the public ensures that differing experiences, perspectives, and points of view are considered. This helps professionals like you to provide the best possible products to communities, whether that be transportation plans, infrastructure repairs, or road redesign. Still, no matter what public engagement strategies you deploy, there will always be people who want to participate but might be unable to do so because of scheduling conflicts, logistical challenges, disability-related concerns, childcare needs, or a lack of access to transportation.

Virtual public involvement (VPI), defined by the Federal Highway Administration as “the use of digital technology to engage individuals or to visualize projects and plans,” has become an essential component of any agencyʼs ability to increase public participation (FHWA HEP 2024). VPI has had many positive effects on participation and community engagement activities, including increasing the convenience of public involvement by using technology to remove some logistical barriers to interacting with an agency and providing feedback.

VPI was on the rise before the COVID-19 pandemic, but the pandemic accelerated its transition into the mainstream of public involvement practice. Now, virtual public engagement is not only acceptable but also expected by the public. As professionals, it is no longer adequate to hold one public meeting or event without an opportunity for participation virtually. People want the option to provide feedback or otherwise engage with content online.

At the same time, VPI tools usually require access to the Internet, a personal computer, or a smartphone. This access has expanded across the nation significantly in recent years, but some

individuals still are without any reliable Internet access. Similarly, individuals who are less familiar with technology and those with limited English proficiency (LEP) are likely to experience difficulties when engaging with VPI tools. Thus, the conventional use of these VPI tools must advance to meet the needs of all populations.

Staff capacity and knowledge are also important: Do people at your agency who are selecting virtual tools understand how the tools work, what the technology requirements and costs are, and how virtual tools can complement other public involvement activities? Public involvement and project management staff need to be skilled and confident with the functionality of any selected tools and techniques for moderating and facilitating virtual exchanges. The purpose of this guide is to help practitioners select, create, and use VPI tools and techniques for transportation plans and projects. The guidance provided is relevant for a range of professionals at state departments of transportation (DOTs) and other transportation agencies, including communications professionals; decision-makers and policymakers; and public involvement, planning, environmental, and project development staff.

1.2 Federal Policy Context for VPI

Federal policy forms the backdrop for many aspects of public involvement in transportation decision-making, from surface transportation legislation and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to the requirements of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). However, federal guidance specific to VPI is relatively limited in scope. Examples can be found in statewide and metropolitan planning regulations and guidance implementing Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.

The Council on Environmental Quality recently updated regulatory guidance on the use of virtual tools and techniques in the transportation decision-making process. State DOTs, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), rural planning organizations (RPOs), and other transportation agencies have adopted a range of virtual tools and techniques as part of their public involvement programs. This section summarizes some of the relevant published guidance that may be helpful as you explore the use of VPI tools.

VPI in Statewide and Metropolitan Planning

Statewide and metropolitan transportation planning regulations at title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) sections 450.210 and 450.316, respectively, call for making public information available electronically “to the maximum extent practicable.” The regulations also require the use of visualization techniques in long-range planning and programming. For statewide transportation planning, 23 CFR 450.210 states that the public involvement process must . . .

Similar language at 23 CFR 450.316 applies to metropolitan transportation planning.

The Bipartisan Infrastructure Law affirmed the validity of VPI in statewide and metropolitan planning by amending several relevant statutes. It amended title 23 of the United States Code (U.S.C.) § 135 (f)(3) to “allow States to use social media and other web-based tools to encourage public participation and solicit public feedback in the planning process.” This law also amended 49 U.S.C. § 5303 (Metropolitan Transportation Planning) and 49 U.S.C. § 5304 (Statewide and

Nonmetropolitan Planning) to allow for the “use of technology to encourage public participation and solicit public feedback in the planning process.”

VPI and Section 508

Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act requires that individuals with disabilities have “access to and use of information and data that is comparable” to that of persons without disabilities where federally funded programs or agencies are concerned. Section 508 guidelines have important implications for the design of public involvement websites; VPI platforms used for meetings, surveys, other forms of interaction; and virtual presentation materials such as videos. The Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 is also relevant to VPI accessibility. Chapter 4 provides an overview of accessibility considerations for VPI.

VPI in the NEPA Process

A question for many agencies is whether VPI, and specifically virtual public meetings, can be used to satisfy the public hearing requirements of NEPA and related environmental processes. During the COVID-19 pandemic, FHWA issued temporary guidance allowing agencies to hold virtual public hearings for public health reasons, with stipulations about certain conditions to be met, such as the provision of telephone options for persons with limited or no Internet access. With the end of the federal COVID-19 emergency declaration on May 11, 2023, the temporary guidance no longer applies. FHWA now instructs project sponsors to “use a combination of in-person and VPI for public hearings and meetings during the environmental review process.” The in-person component of a public hearing “can be supplemented and enhanced by other methods of public involvement, such as VPI strategies” (FHWA HEP 2024).

Broader Public Involvement Requirements Apply to VPI

In developing public involvement programs that include VPI, consideration should be given to broader federal policies that cover public involvement in general. These include the requirement to establish early and continuous public involvement opportunities in planning, to hold public meetings at convenient and accessible locations and times, and to provide public notice of NEPA-related hearings. More information on the applicable regulations and guidance is on the U.S. DOT website.

1.3 Methodology and Development of Content

The content for this guide was developed by a research team with extensive experience and expertise in public involvement in transportation. The team conducted extensive research that informed the development of the guidelines in this report. A few highlights of the research teamʼs work follow:

• Survey research with DOTs and RPOs. The team conducted a nationwide online survey of DOTs and regional planning organizations (MPOs and RPOs) to capture their experience using VPI during the COVID-19 pandemic, as these agencies transitioned suddenly to relying (almost exclusively) on VPI to interact with the public.
• Focus groups with practitioners and subject matter experts (SMEs) on deploying VPI. Focus groups provided in-depth discovery and discussion on issues, challenges, and best practices for VPI. Participants in the focus groups represented a wide range of agency types and geographic places in the United States.

• Extensive literature review and desktop research on best practices. Agencies, researchers, and consultant teams have been actively researching and documenting experiences with VPI for more than a decade. The research team conducted an extensive review of the existing literature to make sure this guide leverages the best of the knowledge-building that had already taken place. Central to this effort was a thorough review of the FHWAʼs Every Day Counts VPI initiative (2024a), which includes a resource website with fact sheets, informational videos, recorded webinars, and peer-exchange reports covering eight different tools.
• Original user testing with members of the general public. The project team conducted original user testing and user experience research with members of the public to learn first-hand how a variety of virtual engagement tools and techniques performed with participants who provided real-time reactions to and feedback on the experience. This research helped garner insights into preferences and perspectives on VPI tools, with a focus on self-guided or asynchronous engagement experiences.

1.4 Whatʼs Inside: How to Use the Guide

The content of this guide is divided into five chapters after this getting started chapter. The material is organized to facilitate easy navigation and skimming. Most readers might not be reading this guide cover to cover but will instead be referencing it as needed to find information and guidelines. Where appropriate, content is cross-referenced between chapters.

• Chapter 2: Exploring the Toolkit. This chapter introduces many of the VPI tools in use. It is organized in five sections, each representing a different tool category: Virtual Meetings and Events; Interactive, Web-Based Engagement Tools; Information/Presentation Tools to Support Engagement; Promotional Tools; and Comprehensive Engagement Platforms. Each of these sections includes an introductory paragraph, descriptions of the tools included, and a brief discussion of critical points to keep in mind. Sidebars provide examples and additional explanatory notes on cross-cutting topics such as website accessibility and the use of incentives in public participation.
• Chapter 3: Preparing for VPI: A Co-Creation Strategy. This chapter provides general guidelines to assist agencies with planning for VPI and developing tools and materials. The concept and development strategy of co-creation has been incorporated within each section. The chapter walks the reader through a sequential process of planning for VPI, beginning with defining engagement goals, identifying target audiences, and developing an understanding of the affected communities. It moves through a discussion of tool selection, with an overview of factors to consider.
• Chapter 4: Addressing Access Considerations During VPI Use. This chapter provides a central discussion of issues and strategies for improving accessibility of VPI. The chapter strikes a balance between understanding the real barriers of VPI and appreciating the benefits VPI can provide in reaching those individuals who are well-connected online.
• Chapter 5: Strategies for Effective Virtual Meetings. This chapter will help practitioners design and implement effective and meaningful virtual meetings. It examines selecting the most appropriate format and platform; addressing meeting logistics such as equipment requirements, setup, staffing needs; discusses considerations for making virtual meetings accessible; and gives guidance for virtual meeting facilitation, issue mitigation, and post-meeting follow-up. Last, it provides guidance for conducting hybrid meetings.
• Chapter 6: Measuring Success: Gauging Effectiveness and Efficiency in VPI. This chapter discusses different approaches to evaluating the effectiveness and efficiency of VPI as part of a public involvement program. It describes a range of formal and informal approaches, including after-action reviews and mid-course evaluations, plus the variety of quantitative and qualitative performance indicators available for evaluation. Also discussed are related issues in using virtual public input, from analyzing results to storing and safeguarding data.

1.5 Who Is This Guide For?

The material provided in this guide is meant to be used by a wide range of professionals and local officials who engage with the public on planning, policy, and transportation issues. Though the examples provided are from the field of transportation planning, the principles and the recommendations in this guide can be applied to a wide range of fields, including land use planning, public health, education, and community development.

Further, this guide is not limited to public involvement professionals. Anyone who engages with the public has a role in ensuring meaningful interaction from your agency. This includes communications staff, project managers, government affairs specialists, subject matter experts, and even interns. If you are wondering if this guide is for you, the probable answer is “Yes!”