The study sought a detailed description of the public involvement techniques embraced in the public hearing strategy of each of the nation's state transportation agencies. In addition, it examined the status of the public hearing as a principal technique within the citizen participation process of each agency to determine how strong or weak a role the public hearing is playing within the transportation decision making process nationwide. Presented is an evaluation of the pre-hearing and post-hearing procedures being utilized by transportation agencies. Information for the study was obtained through interviews with the public hearing officer, or his equivalent in each highway and/or transportation department. Each officer was also asked to submit to the researcher written copies of his agency's public hearing strategy along with any other pertinent material regarding public hearings or citizen participation. The document most often received was the Action Plan. The study found that basically the nation's state transportation agencies utilize either one of two administrative operations for conducting public hearings. In 29 agencies the programs have centralized administrations whereby the majority of mandates emanate from the central office. In the remaining 21 agencies the responsibility for hearing administration is delegated to district or regional offices. The study also showed the existence of a growing trend for agencies to utilize independent moderators at public hearings, especially if the hearings are likely to produce controversy. Also it was found that the most efficient and widely used pre-hearing technique is the informal pre-hearing meeting. The specifics of hearing/meeting notification and hearing structure and content are discussed in the report. The information gathered suggests that the nation's state transportation agencies are continuously striving to achieve meaningful public participation in transportation decision making through countless innovations and much experimentation.

Building community support, overcoming opposition, and getting approval for real estate developments are challenging, time-consuming and costly endeavors. Developers can overcome these challenges with the hands-on strategies and tactics covered in Yes Vote: The Public Hearing Plan for Developers. Real estate developers must get approval for their real estate developments at a public hearing so that they don’t lose money, lose face, and alienate their investors – or worse. They already know that the public hearing has its own pitfalls. They may even lie awake at night worrying about them. For 25 years, Consultant Katie Coates has been helping her clients get approval at their public hearings, even on projects that have been deemed lost causes or hopeless. In Yes Vote, Katie shares her special blend of analysis, strategy and real-world experience with readers so they can get their approval, too. In Yes Vote, readers learn how to: Overcome opposition. Find supporters, even in a hostile environment. Formulate a plan so they have a greater sense of control over their project's destiny. Get elected officials to listen to them instead of only listening to their opponents. Prevail at the public hearing and get approval for their project.

The National Energy Board considers major regulatory matters through the public hearing process. This bulletin describes that process and the procedures currently used at hearings. It includes information on types of hearings, interventions, the composition of the panels that hold the hearings, the role of Board counsel and staff, the hearing process, decisions and reviews, intervenor costs, and appeals. The appendix includes a step-by-step summary of the hearing process.

Health care for the elderly American is among our nation's more pressing social issues. Our society wishes to ensure quality health care for all older people, but there is growing concern about our ability to maintain and improve quality in the face of efforts to contain health care costs. Medicare: A Strategy for Quality Assurance answers the U.S. Congress' call for the Institute of Medicine to design a strategic plan for assessing and assuring the quality of medical care for the elderly. This book presents a proposed strategic plan for improving quality assurance in the Medicare program, along with steps and timetables for implementing the plan by the year 2000 and the 10 recommendations for action by Congress. The book explores quality of careâ€"how it is defined, measured, and improvedâ€"and reviews different types of quality problems. Major issues that affect approaches to assessing and assuring quality are examined. Medicare: A Strategy for Quality Assurance will be immediately useful to a wide audience, including policymakers, health administrators, individual providers, specialists in issues of the older American, researchers, educators, and students.