Course:LFS350/Projects/2014W1/T8/Proposal

From UBC Wiki

Version Control

Version Author Changes Date
3.0 Group 8 Revised second draft based on feedback received from Kieran Findlater on Oct. 13, 2014. Incorporated changes to research project (methods, deliverables) that arose from ongoing discussions among group members and with the community partner. Completed October 31, 2014
2.0 Group 8 Revised first draft based on feedback received from Sonia Strobel on Oct. 1, 2014 (see Discussion) Completed October 4, 2014
1.0 Group 8 First draft Completed September 28, 2014; sent to Skipper Otto's on September 29

Project Background (__ / 10)

About the Community Partner:

Established in 2009 with the goal of ensuring that independent, local fishermen can continue their sustainable harvesting practices, Skipper Otto’s is a Community-Supported Fishery (CSF) that is rapidly expanding, with a current total of 1100 CSF members and 15 fishers during the 2014 fishing season (O. Dan, personal communication, September 26, 2014; Skipper Otto's, 2014). The Skipper Otto's team is transforming the way in which seafood is produced, consumed and valued by creating "a direct connection between local fishermen and thoughtful consumers" (Skipper Otto's, 2014). At the beginning of the fishing season, CSF members buy in to receive a share of sustainably caught seafood. Members can then pick up their fresh, frozen, or canned seafood products weekly, at designated locations in Vancouver, as well as locations outside of Vancouver, including other cities in British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan (Skipper Otto's, 2014). The CSF business model reflects concepts put forth in the literature which suggest that linking community-supported food systems with individuals improves the health of the entire system (McCullum, Desjardins, Kraak, Ladino, & Costello, 2005). This is seen through the CSF's capacity to provide fishers with fair prices for their catch, often above the market price. In this way, Skipper Otto’s is encouraging food sovereignty and sustainability within the Vancouver foodshed and through Western Canada.

The partnership between the LFS 350 team and the community partner has arisen from Skipper Otto's need to provide more clarification for current and prospective CSF members, which they believe could affect their customers' participation in the CSF. Specifically, our community partner has indicated that prospective members don't understand the whole CSF model, from buying shares to picking up products. Unfortunately, this knowledge barrier may prevent Skipper Otto's from growing their membership and helping more people be connected with their local fishermen. Therefore, Skipper Otto's would like the LFS 350 team to identify potential barriers to participation in the CSF so that Skipper Otto's can address these barriers, for example by creating an informational video to provide current, new, and potential members with information vital to participation in the CSF (O. Dan & S. Strobel, personal communication, September 26, 2014). By identifying barriers to participation in the CSF, the LFS team can help Skipper Otto's gain more members, which in turn will support the achievement of their goals: employing more independent fishermen, protecting our ocean resources and promoting the local food system.


Goals and objectives of Skipper Otto's that will be addressed or facilitated by the LFS research project:

  1. Learn about the barriers that are preventing potential members from joining the CSF, in order to develop strategies to improve member recruitment and retention.
  2. Gain a better understanding of how to convey information effectively about the CSF model to consumers.
  3. Develop effective methods to convey this information, such as an informational video.
  4. Protect ocean resources and increase seafood sovereignty and sustainability by recruiting and retaining CSF members.
  5. Increase a sense of community by empowering CSF members to preserve and process seafood.

Stakeholder Summary (__ /5)

Name, Role & Organization Responsibilities
UBC LFS undergraduate students:

Natalie Wong
Kelly Bogh
Allison Martin
Hazel Chu
Amy Norgaard
Shirley Phan
Carla Obando
Jakob Henz

All members:

  • Define data collection methods
  • Collect and analyze data
  • Create and manage project documents
  • Provide status reports

Kelly Bogh and Allison Martin:

  • Email communication with community partner

Amy Norgaard:

  • Communication with UBC Farm

Community Partner:

Skipper Otto's Community Supported Fishery

Representatives:

Emma Holmes
Sonia Strobel
Oana Dan
Krysta Cowling

  • Provide connections and linkages with community
  • Sign off on Proposal and Charter
  • Sign off on major changes to Proposal and Charter
  • Approve survey questions
  • Provide copy of script for informational video
  • Provide opportunities for LFS students to complete volunteer hours

Purpose and Research Questions (__ / 20)

Project Purpose:

The purpose of this project is to provide Skipper Otto’s with a report on the factors that are currently preventing potential members from joining the CSF, as well as areas of confusion that current members experienced when they first joined the CSF. This project should provide information to Skipper Otto's to help them develop strategies to improve their operations and thereby increase member recruitment and retention. This project will also recommend changes to an existing script for a short, informational "whiteboard animation" video about the CSF model and how it works; these recommendations will focus on current areas of confusion identified through the research. Because the Skipper Otto's team has such an in-depth understanding of how the CSF works, the LFS team will play an integral role by providing an outside view in assessing knowledge deficits that are important to clarify and address.

Research Question:

  • Among potential and current CSF members, what are the factors that pose barriers to their participation in the CSF?

Methods (__ / 20)

1. Survey of current CSF members

Current CSF members will be surveyed to determine what they found confusing about the CSF when they first joined or were considering joining, and what they think are potential barriers for others to join (maximum 3-4 questions).

Since Skipper Otto’s has already sent surveys to their members through emails, they do not want to risk alienating their members by sending yet another survey. Therefore, the LFS 350 team will survey existing CSF members by conducting "intercept interviews" at weekly CSF pick-ups. An intercept interview is a type of in-person interview that involves intercepting a person at a public location, such as a shopping mall, and conducting a brief survey with them (Pokela, Steblea, Steblea, Shea, & Denny, 2007). A survey involves administering a standardized procedure, such as a questionnaire or structured interview, to obtain information on 25 or more individual cases with the intention of making aggregate statements about the matters surveyed (Office of the Auditor General of Canada, 1998).

Survey delivery

Interviewers will approach individuals, identify themselves, explain the purpose of the survey and how the data will be used, and ask the individuals to participate. Interviews will be recorded using a smartphone (after permission has been obtained from the respondent) or through handwritten notes; recorded interviews will be converted to written notes at a later date.

To minimize privacy concerns, the survey will not collect personal information from respondents or information that could be used later to identify them.

To ensure the reliability of the survey and to reduce interviewer bias, the survey must be conducted consistently from individual to individual, across settings and at different times. Interviewers should all follow the same script.

Tips on how to collect high-quality data
  • do not comment on responses; go directly to reading the next question
  • do not skip any questions
  • be aware that establishing a personal connection with a respondent (telling jokes, etc.) may bias their responses
  • set up a protocol for who to approach (e.g., every 4th person)
  • discontinue the interview if someone is having difficulty speaking English or if you are having difficulty understanding them
  • if you are surveying someone in a group of people, accept answers from only one person
  • record open-ended questions as close as possible to verbatim (in the respondent’s own words); try to get at least 2 or 3 detailed ideas for each open-ended question
  • if probing is necessary to get a clear response to an open-ended question, use non-leading probes (e.g., if they say “The cost”, ask them “What about the cost?” rather than “Is it too expensive?”)

Source: Pokela et al., 2007

Data analysis

We will be using convenience sampling, which is a nonprobability sampling method; therefore, we must use caution in generalizing our findings to the entire population of current CSF members. However, convenience sampling is appropriate when aggregate statements about the matters surveyed are qualitative rather than quantitative (Office of the Auditor General of Canada, 1998). Therefore, in our analysis we will focus on identifying and describing the types of barriers that exist, rather than enumerating them or commenting on the frequency with which they are held.

Reported data will include the sample size, sampling procedures, the specific wording of questions whose results are reported, and any potentially significant limitations in survey information or procedures. Responses will be categorized to identify major themes and trends in the data.

Advantages and disadvantages

Using in-person surveys, we can reach people that we could not otherwise reach through email, telephone, or other means. In-person surveys provide opportunities for interviewers to assess the respondent’s understanding and interpretation of questions and clarify any confusion that may arise about the meaning of a question or the response (Office of the Auditor General of Canada, 1998). Also, where less is known about the issue being investigated, in-person surveys provide an opportunity for interviewers to ask supplementary questions to obtain more information. A disadvantage of this survey method is the potential for the interviewer to unintentionally influence the results of the survey, since respondents may be sensitive to verbal and non-verbal cues given by the interviewer. Also, in data analysis, categorizing information from open-ended questions involves considerable judgement and can lead to errors; this error can be reduced by having more than one person do the categorization (Office of the Auditor General of Canada, 1998). Another disadvantage is that more time is required to conduct the surveys, meaning that fewer individuals can be surveyed.


2. Survey of potential CSF members

Potential CSF members will be surveyed to determine factors that pose a barrier to their participation in a CSF. Skipper Otto’s suggested we conduct both an online survey and intercept interviews of potential CSF members at farmers’ markets and at wild salmon and seafood events. However, we have decided to forgo the intercept interviews, for the following reasons: (i) we have substantially expanded the sample population for our online survey by obtaining access to the UBC Farm mailing list and (ii) intercept interviews are much more time-consuming than online surveys (in terms of both data collection and analysis), and the time remaining to work on the project is very limited.

Survey delivery

Living Oceans Society has a list of email addresses for 35 people that expressed interest in joining a CSF (collected at 2013 Spot Prawn Fest and False Creek Fishermen’s Wharf). The society also has their own mailing list, consisting of more than 1400 email addresses. The society is willing to send the online survey to the list of 35 people and will also share the survey through their social media channels. They may also send the survey to their larger list, depending on the scope of the survey (TBD).

The UBC Farm has also agreed to include our online survey in one of their weekly newsletters (which is sent to 2200 people).

Data analysis

Data will be analyzed to identify the main factors that are preventing individuals from participating in the CSF. Our findings will be included in the final report to Skipper Otto's and used to inform our recommendations for changes to the script for the informational video. Data analysis may involve categorization of responses to open-ended questions.

Advantages and disadvantages

An online survey is an inexpensive and convenient way to survey a large number of people. Online surveys may be more reliable and less biased than in-person interviews because there is no variation introduced by different interviewers (Office of the Auditor General of Canada, 1998). However, a disadvantage of online surveys is that respondents cannot ask for clarification if they do not understand the survey questions. Therefore, we must ensure that the survey is clear and logically structured. Another potential drawback of online surveys is that the response rate may be low, resulting in non-response bias (i.e., the respondents are not representative of the population). Some of the best practices described below are aimed at maximizing the response rate.


3. General survey strategies

Steps in survey design

(i) Identify goals for the survey (what information do we need to get from the survey?); focus on the most important points For example:

  • determine level of awareness/understanding of CSF model
  • determine areas of confusion about the CSF model
  • determine reasons why individuals have not joined a CSF
  • gather relevant demographic information, such as geographic location, participation in a CSA, etc.

(ii) Organize the goals in a logical order and write questions for each goal

  • request only the information needed to address the survey objectives
  • to ensure the validity of the survey (i.e., that the survey actually measures what we want to measure), ensure that questions are clearly related to the survey objectives

(iii) Test the survey before finalizing survey questions

  • interview a small number of people to identify problems with the survey (e.g., too long, unclear questions, survey doesn’t get at the information we want, etc.)
  • revise as needed

Best practices for survey design

  • include a description of the purpose of the survey and indicate how respondents’ privacy will be respected
  • include introductory “screening” questions to eliminate respondents who are not members of the target population (e.g., respondents to the online survey who are members of a CSF)
  • questions should be non-sexist and respectful of minorities
  • use plain, simple language
  • work on a “need to know” rather than a “would be nice to know” basis (only include questions that are absolutely necessary and highly relevant to the purposes of the survey)
  • place easier, more important questions at the beginning of the survey; group questions together according to common themes; keep questions on demographics near the end of the survey
  • questions should be concise
  • questions should be precise and unambiguous, so that two different respondents can be expected to interpret them in the same way (ask only one thing; avoid double negatives)
  • questions should be unbiased (avoid leading questions; do not express opinions in the questions)
  • use both closed-ended and open-ended questions, as appropriate (keeping in mind that open-ended questions require more time and effort to answer and analyze)
  • closed-ended questions should include all possible responses (i.e., every individual should feel that there is an option that is appropriate for them, even if this option is “none of the above”)
  • ensure an appealing aesthetic design and professional presentation
  • include an incentive to answer the survey, if possible/appropriate (e.g., be entered in a draw to win a prize)
  • to maximize the response rate, send a reminder email to members who have not completed the survey a few days before the completion deadline (if possible/appropriate)

Sources: Pokela et al., 2007; Office of the Auditor General of Canada, 1998; Jones, Baxter, & Khanduga, 2013

Deliverables (__ / 5)

1) Report that summarizes suggested changes to Skipper Otto's current script for a video to educate potential and existing CSF members about the CSF (its purpose and procedures)

2) Final report of our findings from the in-person and online surveys

  • The report should provide Skipper Otto's with reliable information that will help the organization to effectively target potential CSF members. The findings should make it easier for Skipper Otto's to develop market strategies and a more competitive business plan.

Success Factors/Criteria (__ / 10)

The success of the project will be based on the applicability of the survey data for the community partner. If successful, the project will:

  • Provide Skipper Otto’s with new knowledge regarding the barriers preventing people from joining the CSF, including specific parts of the CSF that the general population might lack knowledge about
  • Provide a clear and concise document that will outline the results of our survey (including not only the barriers to joining the CSF but also the prevalence of each factor)
  • Give feedback that will help Skipper Otto's develop new informational resources for prospective members (this will not include feedback on how the CSF model can be changed)
  • Form a bridge between consumers and Skipper Otto’s

We will know that we have achieved these objectives when:

  • We submit a final report to Skipper Otto's as described above
  • We receive feedback from Skipper Otto’s affirming that we have provided them with:
  • New knowledge
  • Information that facilitates their creation of new resources

Scope Change

Scope changes requested by any stakeholder of the project must be agreed upon, approved and signed by all stakeholders. The agreed format is to revise this charter with version controls. Because this is critical to keep track of, the version control is displayed at the beginning of the charter.

Communication Plan (__ / 5)

The communication plan outlines how, when, and why communication will happen. For each element of the plan, the following information should be identified: what information will be communicated, how it will be communicated, how frequently it will be communicated, and who will be involved.

Action Item Deliverables Dates Accountable
Weekly in-person meetings
  • Discuss progress with project
  • Discuss progress with survey development
  • Create timelines for the upcoming week
  • Assign tasks to be completed by next meeting
Every Friday (1pm-3pm) All group members are expected to attend; to complete any assigned tasks from previous meetings; and to let other members know if they are unable to attend meetings, with reasonable notice. Meeting minutes will be kept on Google docs or in Weekly Updates in the Discussion section.
Information sharing with Community Partner, via email
  • Share project-specific information
  • Obtain approvals for survey or proposal
  • Gain clarification on any issues/questions that arise
Every 2 weeks or when major approvals are needed All stakeholders should provide information in a timely manner and provide prior and reasonable notice of dates when they will be unavailable.
Project updates, via email
  • Share any information pertinent to the project
  • Set up times for meetings
  • Provide progress reports on weekly in-person surveys
  • Share any new information obtained from community partner
Weekly or when information becomes available All group members should respond to emails. They should provide constructive feedback or approvals.

Milestones (__ / 5)

Milestone Event or Deliverable Target Date Responsibility
Milestone 1 First Draft of Systems Model Friday, Sept. 19 All group members
Milestone 2 First Meeting with Community Partner Friday, Sept. 26 Allison, Amy, and Kelly

Oana and Sonia

Milestone 3 Revised Systems Model Friday, Sept. 26 All group members

Oana (provide feedback)

Milestone 4 First Draft of Project Charter & Proposal Sunday, Sept. 28 All group members
Milestone 5 Proposal Presentation Wednesday, Oct. 1 Amy, Kelly, Shirley, Carla, Natalie, and Hazel
Milestone 6 Second Draft of Project Charter & Proposal Saturday, Oct. 4 All group members

Oana, Sonia, or Emma (approve or suggest changes)

Milestone 7 Finalize in-person survey questions and select survey locations Monday, Oct. 20 All group members

Oana, Sonia, or Emma (approve or suggest changes)

Milestone 8 Finalize online survey questions Wednesday, Oct. 29 All group members

Oana, Sonia, or Emma (approve or suggest changes)

Milestone 9 Conduct in-person surveys Oct. 23 to Nov. 13 Amy, Kelly, Carla, Hazel, and Shirley
Milestone 10 Conduct online surveys Nov. 6 to Nov. 13 All group members
Milestone 11 Final Draft of Project Charter & Proposal Saturday, Nov. 1 All group members
Milestone 12 Complete CSL hours Thursday, Nov. 13 All group members
Milestone 13 Complete data analysis Thursday, Nov. 20 All group members
Milestone 14 Report summarizing recommended changes to video script TBD
Milestone 15 Final presentation Wednesday, Nov. 26 All group members
Milestone 16 Final draft of systems model Tuesday, Dec. 2
Milestone 17 Final report (for UBC) Wednesday, Dec. 3 All group members

Approvals (__ / 5)

The following individuals hereby approve this Project Charter:
Third draft of Project Charter & Proposal:

Role or Title Name Date
  Team member Jakob Henz Oct 31
  Team member Amy Norgaard Oct 31
  Team member Shirley Phan Oct 31
  Team member Hazel Chu Oct 31
  Team member Natalie Wong Oct 31
  Team member Kelly Bogh Oct 31
  Team member Carla Obando Oct 31
  Team member Allison Martin Oct 31
  TA Kieran Findlater
  Community Partner Emma Holmes Oct 29


Second draft of Project Charter & Proposal:

Role or Title Name Date
  Team member Jakob Henz Oct 4
  Team member Amy Norgaard Oct 4
  Team member Shirley Phan Oct 4
  Team member Hazel Chu Oct 4
  Team member Natalie Wong Oct 4
  Team member Kelly Bogh Oct 4
  Team member Carla Obando Oct 4
  Team member Allison Martin Oct 4
  TA Kieran Findlater Oct 13
  Community Partner Emma Holmes; Sonia Strobel Oct 7; Oct 8


First Draft of Project Charter & Proposal:

Role or Title Name Date
  Team member Jakob Henz Sept 28
  Team member Amy Norgaard Sept 28
  Team member Shirley Phan Sept 28
  Team member Hazel Chu Sept 28
  Team member Natalie Wong Sept 28
  Team member Kelly Bogh Sept 28
  Team member Carla Obando Sept 28
  Team member Allison Martin Sept 28

References (__ / 5)

Jones, T. L., Baxter, M. A. J., & Khanduja, V. (2013). A quick guide to survey research. Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 95, 5-7.

McCullum, C., Desjardins, E., Kraak, V., Ladino, P., & Costello, H. (2005). Evidence-based strategies to build food security. Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 105(2), 278-283.

Office of the Auditor General of Canada. (1998). Conducting surveys. Retrieved from www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/docs/conducting_surveys.pdf

Pokela, J., Steblea, I., Steblea, J., Shea, L., & Denny, E. (2007). Workbook G: Conducting in-person interviews. Retrieved from The Wallace Foundation website: http://www.wallacefoundation.org/knowledge-center/after-school/collecting-and-using-data/Pages/Market-Research-for-Out-of-School-Time-Planning-Resource-Guide.aspx

Skipper Otto's Community Supported Fishery. (2014). Retrieved from http://www.skipperotto.com

Writing Quality (__ / 10)

For a proposal report to receive full writing quality marks, it should be well organized and easy to read. It should address all of the topics articulated in the assignment details above, and it should be free of grammar, punctuation, and spelling mistakes.