CDCF SS 120110 Part Brev

SUPPORTING STATEMENT
COMPREHENSIVE SOCIOECONOMIC DATA COLLECTION FROM
ALASKAN COMMUNITIES
OMB CONTROL NO. 0648-XXXX

B. COLLECTIONS OF INFORMATION EMPLOYING STATISTICAL METHODS
1. Describe (including a numerical estimate) the potential respondent universe and any
sampling or other respondent selection method to be used. Data on the number of entities
(e.g. establishments, State and local governmental units, households, or persons) in the
universe and the corresponding sample are to be provided in tabular form. The tabulation
must also include expected response rates for the collection as a whole. If the collection has
been conducted before, provide the actual response rate achieved.
The potential respondent universe includes city and tribal representatives from 250 communities,
composed of the 136 communities that were profiled in the 2005 Community Profiles for North
Pacific Fisheries – Alaska and the remaining 114 populated communities involved in
commercial fishing that were considered for inclusion in that document, but did not meet the
selection criteria (Sepez et al, 2005) for inclusion in the study. The present data collection
includes the remaining communities, based on input from fishing community representatives at a
series of community meetings held by ESSRP social scientists in August and September 2010.
Community representatives requested that ESSRP consider communities that were involved in
subsistence fishing as well as those involved in commercial fishing. By including the remaining
114 communities, subsistence fishing communities are now captured in the sample population.
Due to the low number of communities, a census of the sample population will be attempted. A
census of the population is also necessary in order to obtain the same set of unique information
about each community’s involvement in fishing for use in revising the 2005 community profiles.
Representatives of each community will be sent the survey instrument to complete on behalf of
their community. Potential respondents are identified as the mayors or city managers, and tribal
leaders or heads of non-profit corporate entities for each community. The data collected in the
survey will be supplemented from secondary data sources.
In general, a response rate of 60% is expected for mail surveys sent to the general population
(Salant and Dillman 1994, pp. 43-44; Rea and Parker 2005, pp. 9-11; Dillman et al 2009, pp. 59).
As part of the editing process for the 2005 community profiles (Sepez et al 2005), all 136
communities were sent a draft of their respective profile for review and comment. Only 15% of
community contacts returned their profile with comments. However, for that project, no advance
letter was sent and no follow up was done. Based on this experience and given proposed
methodology and the highly specialized nature of the sample population for this study and the
fact that we have received a significant amount of buy in from members of that population for
this survey, we expect a final response rate of at least 70%, leading to over 350 surveys being
returned.

1

2. Describe the procedures for the collection, including: the statistical methodology for
stratification and sample selection; the estimation procedure; the degree of accuracy
needed for the purpose described in the justification; any unusual problems requiring
specialized sampling procedures; and any use of periodic (less frequent than annual) data
collection cycles to reduce burden.
The survey instrument submitted for approval with this supporting statement was finalized in
October 2010 after significant input from survey design experts and cognitive interviews with
community representatives. Implementation of the survey will follow a modified version of the
Dillman Tailored Design Method (Dillman et al 2009), which consists of multiple contacts,
including an advance letter, telephone recruitment, initial mailing, follow-up postcard reminder,
a follow-up telephone interview, and a second full mailing, but with the addition of a telephone
recruiting contact. Representatives from numerous Alaskan fishing communities have expressed
enthusiastic support for this project and have offered to help us collect this data. Given this, we
expect the response rate for the survey to be higher than average.
The survey will be a census of 250 Alaskan communities, as described above. There is no
statistical methodology for sample selection as all 250 communities are being targeted and being
provided an equal opportunity to complete the survey.
The method of data collection will be an annual questionnaire sent by mail. The names and
addresses of respondents will be obtained from publically available information about the
municipal and tribal leadership in each community provided by the Alaska Division of
Community and Regional Affairs. Each mailed questionnaire will include a pre-paid postage
return envelope to reduce any financial burden on the participant. The mail survey will be
followed by telephone contact with communities that are not initially responsive, offering
facilitation of a response and ensuring the survey has reached the most appropriate community
representative. Where necessary, the telephone contacts will be followed by additional telephone
contact to actually conduct the survey over the phone and develop answers in collaboration with
community representatives or a new survey will be mailed to the respondent if requested.
3. Describe the methods used to maximize response rates and to deal with non-response.
The accuracy and reliability of the information collected must be shown to be adequate for
the intended uses. For collections based on sampling, a special justification must be
provided if they will not yield "reliable" data that can be generalized to the universe
studied.
Numerous steps have been, and will be, taken to maximize response rates and deal with nonresponse behavior. These efforts are described below.
Maximizing Response Rates
The first step in achieving a high response rate is to develop an appealing questionnaire that is
easy for respondents to complete. Significant effort has been spent on developing a good survey
instrument. Experts in survey design and who work with Alaskan fishing communities on a
regular basis were asked to review the draft survey instrument and provide comments on the
2

wording of questions, additional questions to include, question order effects, question structure
and response categories. The current survey instrument has also benefited from input on earlier
versions from cognitive interviews. Cognitive (one-on-one) interviews were used to ensure the
survey instrument used words and terms people could understand, and was a comfortable length
and easy to complete. The result is a high-quality and professional-looking survey instrument.
The implementation techniques that will be employed are consistent with methods that maximize
response rates. Implementation of the mail survey will follow a modified version of the Dillman
Tailored Design Method (2009), which consists of multiple contacts. The specific set of contacts
that will be employed is the following:
1. An advance letter notifying respondents a few days prior to the questionnaire arriving.
This will be the first contact with the sample.
2. A telephone recruitment call 2-5 days after the advance letter to encourage response to
the initial mailing.
3. An initial mailing sent a few days after the advance letter. Each mailing will contain a
personalized cover letter, questionnaire, and a pre-addressed stamped return envelope.
4. A postcard follow-up reminder to be mailed 5-7 days following the initial mailing.
5. A follow-up telephone call 5 days after the postcard reminder to further encourage
response and to collect information to address non-response bias in case not all of those
contacted complete the survey. Individuals needing an additional copy of the survey will
be sent one with another cover letter and return envelope.
6. A second full mailing will be mailed to all non-respondents immediately after the
follow-up telephone call.
The importance and benefits of this data collection project to the respondents will be emphasized
in the advance letter, initial mailing cover letter, and telephone contacts. In these letters and
phone contacts, the investigators clearly state that with the help of the respondents, the important
role that fishing has in each community can be explicitly reported in each community’s profile
and that the information they provide will be used to enhance the fisheries management practices
of NMFS. Making a clear link between the survey, their participation, and the importance of
fishing to their communities is expected to help increase the response rate even further.
AFSC social scientists have also been working with representatives of Alaskan fishing
communities, non-profit municipal representation organizations (e.g., Southwest Alaska
Municipal Conference, Gulf of Alaska Coastal, Communities Coalition, Southeast Conference),
Community Development Quota entities, the North Pacific Fisheries Management Council,
Alaska Department of Fish and Game, and Alaska Sea Grant to make communities aware that
this survey is important for each to complete. Pre-survey informational presentations were
conducted at community gatherings to inform community representatives in attendance of the
study and answer any questions.
Non-respondents
To better understand why non-respondents did not return the survey and to determine if there are
systematic differences between respondent communities and non-respondent communities, those
3

contacted in the follow-up telephone call and identified as non-respondents i.e. they state that
they will not complete a survey) will be asked a few questions to gauge their reasons for not
responding to the mail survey. These questions will include the capacity of the respondent to
complete the survey, if they can recommend a more suitable respondent, and answer any
questions they might have. Additionally, non-responding communities will be compared to
publically available fisheries and Census data to determine the demographics of such
communities and whether there is a significant pattern in the non-response.
4. Describe any tests of procedures or methods to be undertaken. Tests are encouraged as
effective means to refine collections, but if ten or more test respondents are involved OMB
must give prior approval.
A formal pretest of procedures and methods was not undertaken for this project given the small
number of respondents in the population and that a census of the population will be undertaken
in the full survey implementation. However, the survey instrument was evaluated and revised
using input from cognitive interviews conducted with a total of 9 potential respondents selected
from Anchorage, Dutch Harbor, Nome and Petersburg. Both verbal protocol (talk aloud) and
self-administered interviews were conducted, both with follow-up debriefing by team members.
Moreover, the survey design and implementation plan have benefited from review by individuals
with expertise in socio-economic survey design and implementation in fishing communities.

4

5. Provide the name and telephone number of individuals consulted on the statistical
aspects of the design, and the name of the agency unit, contractor(s), grantee(s), or other
person(s) who will actually collect and/or analyze the information for the agency.
An internal peer review of the survey instruments was conducted which included grammatical,
clarity, design, and statistical review. NMFS federal staff that reviewed the survey instruments
include:
Dr. Dan Lew
Economist - Alaska Fisheries Science Center
(530) 752-1746
[email protected]
Dr. Scott Miller
Economist - Alaska Regional Office
(907) 586-7416
[email protected]
Dr. Ron Felthoven
Economist - Alaska Fisheries Science Center
(206) 526-4114
[email protected]
Dr. Amber Himes-Cornell
Social Scientist - Alaska Fisheries Science Center
(206) 526-4221
Dr. Jennifer Sepez
Anthropologist - Alaska Fisheries Science Center
(206) 526-6546
Christina Package
Contractor at Alaska Fisheries Science Center
Pacific States Marine Fisheries Commission (PSMFC)
(206) 526-6683
The individuals who will actually collect and analyze the information are Amber Himes-Cornell,
social scientist at the Alaska Fisheries Science Center, and Christina Package, PSMFC
Contractor.

5

References
Dillman, D.A., J.D. Smyth, and L.M. Christian (2009). Internet, mail, and mixed-mode surveys:
The tailored design method. 2nd ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Lew, D.K., D.F. Layton, and R.D. Rowe (2010). Valuing Enhancements to Endangered Species
Protection under Alternative Baseline Futures: The Case of the Steller Sea Lion. Marine
Resource Economics 25: 133-154.
Rea, L. and R. (2005). Designing and Conducting Survey Research: A comprehensive guide. 3rd
ed. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Parker Salant, P. and D. Dillman (1994). How to conduct your own survey. New York: John
Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Sepez, J. A., B. D. Tilt, C. L. Package, H. M. Lazrus, and I. Vaccaro. 2005. Community profiles
for North Pacific fisheries - Alaska. U. S. Dep. Commerce, NOAA Tech. Memo. NMFS-AFSC160, 552 p.

6