United States Soil P.O. Box 2890

Department of Conservation Washington, D.C.

Agriculture Service 20013

March 13, 1984

**NATIONAL SOCIAL SCIENCES MANUAL (NSSM)**

420-V

Issue 1 (Parts 500-501)

SUBJECT: SOC SCI

[Purpose]{.underline}. This transmits the National Social Sciences
Manual, which contain guidelines and procedures for conducting social
evaluations of many soil and water conservation programs and practices.

[Effective Date]{.underline}. This manual is effective when received.

# Background. This is the National Social Sciences Manual. If needed, suggestions can be forwarded to Arun C. Basu, Director, Social Sciences Division.

[Filing Instructions]{.underline}. File in a 3-ring binder. This may be
filed with other manuals in the 420-Social Sciences series.

PAUL M. HOWARD

Deputy Chief for Technology

# Enclosure

# 

# DIST: NSSM

The Soil Conservation Service WO-AS-1

Is an agency of the 10-79

Department of Agriculture

CONTENTS

PART 500 -- SOCIAL EVALUATION

[Sec.]{.underline} [Page]{.underline}

[Subpart A -- Introduction]{.underline}

500.00 Background 500-1

500.01 Rationale for social evaluation in SCS 500-1

500.02 Social evaluation and social impact assessment 500-2

[Subpart B -- The Nature of Social Evaluation]{.underline}

500.10 Definition and purpose of social evaluation 500-5

500.11 Terms associated with social evaluation 500-5

500.12 The social evaluation process 500-7

[Subpart C -- Scoping]{.underline}

500.20 Determining data needs 500-11

500.21 A guide for scoping the social evaluation 500-11

500.22 Social-impact variables 500-14

[Subpart D -- Data Collection]{.underline}

500.30 Meeting data needs for social evaluations 500-19

500.31 Types of data 500-19

500.32 Data-collection instruments or procedures 500-20

500.33 Sample selection 500-20

500.34 Data for the initial social profile 500-21

500.35 Data for the detailed social profile 500-23

[Subpart E -- Data Analysis]{.underline}

500.40 Objective and subjective data 500-25

500.41 Reliability and validity 500-25

500.42 Statistical procedures 500-25

500.43 Judgmental procedures 500-26

500.44 Sources of assistance 500-26

500.45 Projections (measures of impact) 500-27

500.46 Developing the social impacts 500-27

500.47 Describing social impacts 500-29

[Subpart F -- Evaluations of Social Impacts]{.underline}

500.50 General 500-31

51. Rating social impacts 500-31

> i

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

###  Subpart G -- Exhibits Page

60. A guide for the social profile 500-35

61. Information sources 500-41

PART 501 -- APPLICATION OF SOCIAL EVALUATION TO PROJECT ACTIVITIES

[Subpart A - Other Social Effects (OSE) Account]{.underline}

501.00 Purpose Of the OSE account 501-1

501.01 OSE categories and significant impacts 501-2

501.02 Presentations of material 501-2

501.03 Procedures pertaining to the OSE account 501-3

[Subpart B - Case-Study Examples]{.underline}

501.10 Detailed social assessment: Stewart Creek Watershed, Kentucky
501-5

501.11 Basic social assessment: Waimanalo Watershed, Hawaii 501-30

PART 502 -- APPLICATION OF SOCIAL EVALUATION TO PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT

(Reserved)

PART 503 -- APPLICATION OF SOCIAL EVALUATION TO PROGRAM EVALUATION

(Reserved)

ii

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Subpart A -- Introduction

PART 500 -- SOCIAL EVALUATION

SUBPART A -- INTRODUCTION

500.01 (a)(1)

500. Background.

\(a\) This part provides basic guidance for conducting social
evaluations for development of policies, plans, and projects concerning
soil, water, and related natural resources. Social evaluations are
conducted by the Soil Conservation Service (SCS) to meet the
requirements of law, executive orders, administrative decisions and
directives, and to meet professional standards in planning, building,
operating, and maintaining facilities for development of soil, water,
and related natural resources.

\(b\) Social evaluation is a relatively new field of applied social
science that comprises attempts to identify the effects, both positive
and negative, of specific practices and programs on quality of life and
social well-being. Social evaluation provides a basis for minimizing
adverse effects and for maximizing beneficial effects during the
planning of a project or program.

\(c\) Social evaluation of SCS of many soil and water conservation
programs and practices is required by the National Environmental Policy
Act of 1969 and is applied to planning procedures described in the U.S.
Water Resources Council's [Economic and Environmental Principles and
Guidelines for Water and Related Land Resources Implementation
Studies]{.underline}. Even when it is not required, social evaluation is
a valuable planning tool because it identifies areas of potential
conflict and options for decision-making that might not otherwise be
apparent. Most important, social evaluation demonstrates a commitment by
SCS to consider social needs as well as resource conservation needs.

500.01 Rationale for social evaluation in SCS

> \(a\) [Institutional reasons]{.underline}. Social evaluation is part
> of the SCS planning process because it is required

as a matter of regulation or policy for certain project activities.

\(1\) [National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)]{.underline}. The SCS
rule for "Compliance with NEPA" (7 CFR 650) applies to all SCS-assisted
activities. According to this rule, "A wide range of environmental

500-1

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Part 500 - Social Evaluation

500.01 (a)(1)

data together with [social]{.underline} and economic information is
considered in determining whether a proposed action is a major Federal
action significantly affecting the human environment."

\(2\) [Economic and Environmental Principles and Guidelines for Water
and Related Land Resources Implementation Studies (P&G)]{.underline}.
Plans for SCS water-resources projects are specifically covered by these
principles. The "other social effects" (OSE) account documents
nonmonetary effects that are not reflected in other accounts in P&G.

\(b\) [Noninstitutional reasons]{.underline}. Social evaluation is not
limited to SCS activities that fall within the realm of NEPA and P&G.
The broad principles of social evaluation are applicable to any SCS
programs and activities that have sociological implications.

\(1\) [Identification of beneficiaries]{.underline}. It is important to
identify potential beneficiaries of SCS plans and proposed programs.
Individuals and groups will support plans and programs that they believe
will benefit them. Conversely, conflict over a particular activity is
likely if people believe that the activity will affect them adversely.

\(2\) [Identification of client groups]{.underline}. Social evaluation
is a tool that SCS field staffs can use to identify and understand the
client groups with whom they are working. Knowledge of the
characteristics, attitudes, and values of these groups helps the SCS
professional to design program approaches that can increase acceptance
and adoption of conservation practices. It also provides the basis for
developing public participation plans.

\(3\) [Effectiveness of SCS activities]{.underline}. As a means of
determining the effectiveness of SCS program and project activities,
social evaluation supplements traditional measures such as soil loss
prevented and number of conservation practices installed. Change in
quality of life, change in attitudes toward conservation practices, and
changes in farm management styles are examples of social changes that
might take place as a result of SCS activities.

2.  Social evaluation and social impact assessment.

\(a\) Social impact assessment is a field of research that has become
formalized since the passage of NEPA in 1969. Although social impacts
alone do not require preparation of an environmental impact statement,
the legislation requires that "if social and natural or physical
environmental effects are interrelated, then the environmental impact
statement will discuss all of these effects on the human environment."
Social impact assessment is designed to provide information for
decision-making and to anticipate potentially adverse impacts of
decisions.

500-2

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Subpart A -- Introduction

500.02(b)

\(b\) "Social evaluation" is being used as a preferred synonym for
"social impact assessment" by SCS to provide for consistent use of terms
within the agency. [Social evaluation]{.underline} (social impact
assessment) is comparable to [environmental evaluation]{.underline} in
SCS terminology. This distinguishes it, as a [process]{.underline}, from
the social or environmental assessment, which is a
[document]{.underline}.

500-3

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Subpart B -- The Nature of Social Evaluation

SUBPART B -- THE NATURE OF SOCIAL EVALUATION

500.11(b)

10. Definition and purpose of social evaluation

\(a\) "Social evaluation" is defined as systematic information-gathering
and analysis necessary to describe, understand, and forecast various
social effects resulting from natural resources activities.

\(b\) A social evaluation is an analysis/synthesis of how a projected
change in the human environment will affect people, as a group or
society, and their institutions and communities. Behavior, values,
attitudes, and beliefs are among the social variables that might be
affected.

\(c\) Although the economic, cultural, demographic, and sociological
contents of an environmental evaluation usually overlap considerably,
there are unique sociological elements that must be addressed
independently. For example, demographic analysis might predict a change
in population size and composition, but social analysis should predict
what the change will mean to people's well-being, opportunities,
beliefs, etc.

\(d\) The objectives of social evaluation are- -

\(1\) To establish the nature and extent of the social effects of any
plans, policies, or programs being considered;

\(2\) To provide quantitative and qualitative data necessary for the
analysis and discussion of beneficial and adverse social consequences;
and

\(3\) To provide information on beneficial and adverse social effects as
an aid to judicious decision making.

11. Terms associated with social evaluation.

\(a\) [Social assessment]{.underline}: A formal documentation of the
social, economic, and environmental evaluation for a given proposed
action; a permanent technical record that includes relevant information
and supporting data for decision-making.

\(b\) [Social profile]{.underline}: A description of the objective and
subjective social characteristics of the study population, and, to the
extent possible, a comparison of these characteristics with the same
characteristics in other groups. It does not make judgments about
positive or negative effects.

500-5

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Part 500 -- Social Evaluation

500.11(c)

\(c\) [Scoping]{.underline}: An open, early, and continuing process for
identifying the likely significant social variables, the range of such
variables to be addressed, and the size of the study area. In planning,
scoping is used to determine the significant issues to be analyzed and
to eliminate from detailed study any issues that are not significant or
that have been adequately covered by prior study. The process should be
used to combine or reduce the number of social variables to provide
meaningful and efficient evaluation of and choice among alternative
plans. Scoping for the social evaluation is undertaken as part of total
project scoping, not as a separate step.

\(d\) [Social variable]{.underline}: A social characteristic common to a
number of individuals or groups that has different degrees of magnitude
or different categories. (A list of common social variables is given in
500.22.)

\(e\) [Social appraisal]{.underline}: The process of assigning social
values to the technical information gathered as part of the evaluation
process, according to P&G.

\(f\) [Social impacts]{.underline}: Changes predicted to occur in social
structures, systems, or behaviors as a direct or indirect result of
implementing a plan or carrying out a program. One could be a change in
the population characteristics of a community or region.

\(g\) [Beneficial and adverse social effects]{.underline}: Values
assigned to an impact in terms of its relative "goodness" or "badness"
for the study area; e.g., the social value of a predicted change in
population characteristics to a community and its residents. More than
one effect can be assigned to any impact if it means different things
for different people in the study area.

\(h\) [OSE Account]{.underline}: The "other social effects" account for
P&G that describes the beneficial and adverse social effects of
alternative plans for water-resource development in narrative form,
tabular form, or both.

\(i\) [Study area]{.underline}: The geographic location identified in
the scoping process as the area most likely to experience social impacts
and for which social data will be collected.

\(j\) [Key informants]{.underline}: Community residents and others in a
position to know the study area and its inhabitants well. May include
district conservationists, public officials, longtime residents,
business managers, administrators, church leaders, and persons
representing a variety of lifestyles, ages, viewpoints, ethnic
backgrounds, or other minority groups.

500-6

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Subpart B -- The Nature of Social Evaluation

500.12

12. The social evaluation process.

The social evaluation process is usually an integral part of the total
planning process. The person responsible for social evaluation should be
a member of the interdisciplinary team that is formed at the start of
planning and should represent the social perspective throughout
planning. Table 500-1 shows how the steps in social evaluation fit into
SCS planning and provides guidance on activities and products relevant
to the evaluation.

500-7

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

500 -- Social Evaluation

500.12

Table 500-1 -- Framework for Social Evaluation

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

OTHER

### PLANNING STEP ACTIVITY PRODUCT INFORMATION \_ 

1\. Specification of problem

-   Collect historic data Initial social profile 500.30-

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Collect basic social (Becomes part of 500.34

> and socioeconomic planning support file)
>
> data

-   Make field examination

-   Determine scope of

> analysis

-   Identify key infor-

> mants and other data
>
> sources

2\. Inventory, forecast,

and analysis

-   Collect additional Detailed social profile 500.20-500.22,

> social data as iden- (Significant social 500.35
>
> tified in the scoping variables are included 500.46
>
> process in the formal planning 500.47

-   Interview key in- document. Other 500.11(b)(1)

> formants, including social variables may
>
> members of minority be noted in the
>
> groups Investigation and

-   Develop comparative Analysis Report)

> statistics

-   Identify possible

> social impacts

3\. Formulation of

alternatives

-   Work with interdisci- Description of social 500.47

> plinary team to impacts of each
>
> formulate alternatives alternative
>
> and estimate social (Becomes part of
>
> impacts of each planning support file)
>
> alternative

4\. Evaluation and

comparison of

alternatives

-   Describe differences Summary and display of 500.50-500.51

> among alternatives social effects of each
>
> from social perspective alternative

-   Review public comments (Included in formal 501.11(b)(2)

-   Identify significant planning document)

> social variables
>
> (420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Subpart B -- The Nature of Social Evaluation

> 500.12(5)

5\. Selection of Display of adverse

recommended and beneficial effects

plan of recommended plan 501.11(b)(3)

> (Included in formal
>
> planning document)
>
> 500-9
>
> (420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)
>
> Subpart C -- Scoping
>
> SUBPART C -- SCOPING
>
> 500.21(b)

500.20 Determining data needs

\(a\) Social evaluation depends on the types of data that can be
collected for use. Scoping provides the system for identifying
significant social variables that pertain to the activity and
determining the availability of data. Some variables may have to be
discarded simply because the data are unavailable, or because the cost
of collecting them would be too high for the magnitude of the planning
effort.

\(b\) Significant social variables are those that describe the social
environment of the study area and contribute to decision-making, policy
analysis, or both. They may include characteristics of the study area
such as geographic size, the number of people potentially affected and
the anticipated degree of impact, and the presence of low-income,
unemployed, minority, Native American, or other groups of special
concern in the study area. Variables that describe the social
environment provide basic data for the social profile. Variables that
contribute to decisionmaking, policy analysis, or both make up the
social evaluation.

\(c\) Scoping is an activity that continues throughout all aspects of
project planning. As more information becomes available, the
significance of some social variables may change. Emphasis must then be
changed: some social variables may be added; others, deleted. Variables
no longer considered significant should be so identified in the basic
data so that no further work will be done on them.

500.21 A guide for scoping the social evaluation

\(a\) Although scoping is considered a continuous activity throughout
planning, there is usually a major scoping session after initial data
have been collected and before detailed data are obtained.

\(b\) Table 500-2 is a guide for scoping the social evaluation on the
basis of initial social data. When the answer to the scoping question is
"yes," additional information is obtained for the detailed social
profile. When the answer is "no," no further data are collected, and the
decision is noted in the planning support file.

500-11

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Table 500-2 -- Scoping for Social Evaluation

500-12

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Initial If Yes,

Social Profile Scoping Questions Detailed Social Profile

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

1\. Population characteristics 1. Are people likely to be affected 1.
Obtain detailed information

by the activity? on special population group or

Are there special population groups.

groups (e.g., low-income, elderly, Talk to key informants and

minority)? review public comments to deter-

Are the affected groups likely to mine likely impacts and responses.

feel negative toward the activity? Document specific impacts on life,

Will there be an effect on life, health, and safety.

health, and safety? Provide detailed information on

Will anyone be relocated? magnitude of relocation.

2\. Farm characteristics 2. Are there farms in the study area? 2. Obtain
detailed information on

Are farm residents likely to be farm and farmer characteristics

affected by the activity? that are considered significant.

Are they likely to feel negative Talk to key informants and re-

toward the activity? view public comments to deter-\
Are there typical or unique charac- mine likely impacts and respon-

teristics of farms that may have ses.

relevance to the activity (e.g., high

proportion of absentee landowners)?

3\. Housing characteristics 3. Is housing affected by circumstances 3.
Obtain detailed information on

that would be addressed by the activity housing in the study area.

(urban flooding)? Document specific impacts on

Is the housing crowded or substandard? housing.

500-13

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Initial

Social Profile Scoping Questions Detailed Social Profile

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

4\. Community Characteristics 4. Are there communities in the study 4.
Collect detailed information on

area that would be affected by the community structure and organi-

proposed activity? zations. Talk to key informants and

Are there minority communities in the review public documents and

study area that would be affected? comment. Determine likely impact

Are there community organizations, and responses. Identify organiza-
church groups, etc.? tions and groups that should be

Are they likely to be affected by included in implementing activity.

the activity?

Are there potential areas of conflict?

Will community cohesion be affected?

Will community stability be affected?

Will public participation and support

for the activity be important to its

success?

5\. Historical background 5. Has there been a history of flooding? 5.
Collect detailed information on

Has there been loss of life and flood trauma experienced by

property? residents, magnitude of losses,

Are there historical factors that and threat to life, health, and

are likely to be relevant to the safety.

activity?---(e.g., changes in land Include relevant historical

use, farm management techniques, factors in formal planning

economic and social conditions). document.

6\. Values and attitudes 6. Is soil stewardship practiced? 6. Review
local publications

Do people have a land use ethic? and district records to determine

Are farmer attitudes toward certain the level of interest and activity

conservation practices likely to in conservation. affect the success of
the project? Interview key informants.

Part 500 -- Social Evaluation

500.22

22. Social-impact variables.

The scoping process, as previously described, provides the means of
selecting the variables for which data for the study area will be
collected. Table 500-3 includes numerous social-impact variables,
[some]{.underline} of which may be selected for a specific social
evaluation. The list is incomplete and the format shown is not required.
The list is intended as a guide only.

Table 500-3 -- Social Impact Variables

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Social-Impact Categories Social-Impact Variables

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

A. [Population Dynamics]{.underline} a. Population size

(growth, stability, decline)

> b\. Population density

c\. Population structure and trends

(age and sex)

> d\. Displacement of people
>
> e\. Net migration, internal migration

f\. Population distribution

(racial ethnic composition)

B. [Economic Base]{.underline} a. Number of business
establishments/farms

b\. Change in establishments

(past 10 years)

> c\. Size of local tax base
>
> d\. Value of industrial production
>
> e\. Value of agricultural production
>
> f\. Revenues from public ownership
>
> (military, national forests, parks)

C. [Income]{.underline} a. Income levels of low-income

households

b\. Income levels of minority families

c\. Income dispersion and per capita

income

d\. Income stability

e\. Sources of income

D. [Labor and Employment]{.underline} a. Economic activity

b\. Labor-force characteristics

(ages 18-64)

500-14

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

c\. Total employed as percentage of

population

d.  Total minorities employed

e.  Skilled/unskilled labor force

f.  Total employers classified by number of employees

> -small (1-19)
>
> -medium (20-99)
>
> -large (100 or more)
>
> g\. Labor/job stability

h.  Accessibility of work

i.  Unemployment, by race and ethnic background

E. [Social Service and Public]{.underline} a. Population percentage
under

[Assistance (Welfare)]{.underline} poverty level

b.  Social services personnel

c.  Recipients vs. non-recipients of public assistance

d.  Funds to counties (social services)

F. [Educational Opportunities]{.underline}

a\. Availability of educational services

b\. Enrollment information

c.  Diversity of educational programs

d.  Education "users" (students/employees)

e.  Educational characteristics of population

f.  Educational achievement

g.  Satisfaction with educational opportunities

G. [Industrial Data]{.underline} a. Market value of agricultural

land/acre

b.  Acres of land in production

c.  Acres of fish production

d.  Acres of agricultural land lost to other uses (last 5-10 years)

e.  Industries relocated or closed (last 5-10 years)

f.  Number of industrial sites available

g.  Number and features of industrial development programs underway

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Part 500 -- Social Evaluation

500.12

H. [Transportation]{.underline} a. Transportation facilities

(roads, water, airstrips, railroads)

b\. Commercial freight carried

in and out of area (type)

c\. Seasonality of access

d\. Travel route difficulty

e\. Automobile ownership

f\. Adequacy of public transportation

I. [Local Government and]{.underline} a. Local annual tax base

[Community Services]{.underline} b. Revenue spent annually for

community services

c\. Revenue spent annually for

rebuilding after natural disasters

d\. Total local government employees

e\. Local government employees

providing community services

f\. Urban renewal activities

g\. Percentage of families served and

not served by community services

J. [Health, Life Protection,]{.underline} a. Mortality

[and Safety]{.underline} b. Major health problems/morbidity

in the area

c\. Risk of life (safety)

d\. Risk of property damage

e\. Effects of risk on population

and quality of life

f\. Adequacy of medical facilities

and personnel

g\. Quality of medical care

h\. Adequacy of emergency protection

i\. Potential for natural disaster

j\. Potential food reserve

K. [Housing]{.underline} a. Housing supply system

(construction/sales)

b\. Housing quality (age and condition)

c\. Median value of dwelling units;

high and low values

d\. Potential for new buildings/dwellings

500-16

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

L. [Recreational Opportunities]{.underline} a. Adequacy of recreation
facilities

(capacity, type, quality)

b\. Recreational participation

c\. Key recreation programs (annual)

d\. Satisfaction with recreational

opportunities

e\. Access to recreation outside the

community

f\. Special-group access (elderly,

handicapped, minority poor, transit-

dependent)

g\. Security (unpredictability and the

unknown)

h\. Open space

i\. Annual revenue generated

M. [Community Organizations and]{.underline} a. Religious system
resources

[Local Leadership]{.underline} b. Social/fraternal organizations

c\. Major voluntary community

activities

d\. Attitude and value cohesion

e\. Active community leaders

(professional and lay leaders)

f\. Civic organizations

g\. Farm cooperatives

h\. Farm bureau and conservation

districts

i\. Minority organizations

N. [Communications and Media]{.underline} a. Media market (population
size

and structure)

b\. Media available locally (newspapers, radio, television)

O. [Social, Cultural, and]{.underline} a. Strength of community
identification

[Psychological Characteristics]{.underline} b. Basic values
(orientations

dimensions, and rankings)

c.  Satisfaction with life quality

d.  Community participation practices

e.  Responses to proposed action

> (cohesion and conflict)

f.  Historical and archeological sites

g.  Attitude toward cultural resources

h.  Attitudes toward conservation,

> selected conservation practices

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

500-17

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Subpart D -- Data Collection

SUBPART D -- DATA COLLECTION

500.31(a)(3)

30. Meeting data needs for social evaluations.

\(a\) Many basic data needed for social evaluations are similar or
identical to data needed for economic and other environmental
evaluations. Coordination of data collection early in the planning
process can minimize the amount of special data collection required for
social evaluation and prevent duplication of effort.

\(b\) Existing SCS data-collection instruments may provide useful
information for the social evaluation. For example, the "Flood
Damage-Residential Properties" questionnaire (SCS-WS-2) can be used to
provide information on flood experiences and flood losses.

31. Types of data

\(a\) [Primary data]{.underline} are collected firsthand by the planning
team. These data can be difficult, time consuming, and expensive to
obtain, but often provide the most reliable information when the study
area is small or does not conform to U.S. census units and when the
needed information (e.g. attitudes and beliefs) is not ordinarily
collected by the census. Primary data are obtained through
questionnaires, interviews, and observations.

(1) [Questionnaire]{.underline} (survey by mail, by telephone, or in
    person). Well-designed, -prepared,

and -executed public surveys can provide excellent firsthand knowledge
of local beliefs, attitudes, desires, etc. The collection of primary
data by use of a structured questionnaire with 10 or more respondents
requires the form and the procedure to be cleared by the Office of
Management and Budget (OMB). Securing OMB clearance can be a lengthy
process; to avoid undue delays, planning for it should be begun early in
the development of the social evaluation. In addition, to ensure that
the results of the survey techniques are valid, the SCS Director of
Social Sciences should review the questionnaires, interview schedules,
and survey and data-analysis plans. This review is the first step in the
clearance process.

\(2\) [Interview]{.underline}. Certain types of interview data are
important to the successful completion of a social evaluation.
Structured interview series in which the same questions are asked of 10
or more individuals are subject to the OMB clearance procedures.
However, data may be obtained from informal discussions with key
informants or knowledgeable local leaders without OMB clearance.

(3) [Observation]{.underline}. This data source includes systematic
    observations of use or conditions, reports of

500-19

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Part 500 -- Social Evaluation

500.31(a)(3)

behavior, field observations, and other techniques that record human
reactions or activities. District conservationists, who often are
residents of study areas, are good sources of observational data.

\(b\) [Secondary data]{.underline} are collected from other data sources
such as the [U.S. Census of Population]{.underline}, [U.S. Census of
Agriculture]{.underline}, and [City and County Data Book]{.underline}.
Secondary data are often available at the local level from planning
agencies, libraries, and newspaper files. Because of the relative
availability, low cost, and generally high statistical reliability of
certain nationally consistent data sources (e.g., [U.S. Census of
Population]{.underline}, [Census of Housing]{.underline}, and [Special
Reports]{.underline}), these should be used as extensively as possible
in each planning setting. Frequently, information that is not compiled
or published is available on request from the collecting source.
Therefore, other forms of secondary data should be sought out and used
at the planning team's discretion with appropriate justification.

\(c\) Written material includes published historical material, research
reports, newspaper articles, written testimony, leaflets, letters, and
bi-linlgual publications. Written data are probably the most widely
available sources of information about people and what they feel and
think. [Content analysis]{.underline} is a technique used to obtain
information about predominant opinions, values, or actions. It is a
means of categorizing and recording information in a manner appropriate
for the purposes of the research.

30. Data-collection instruments or procedures.

A data-collection instrument (such as a questionnaire) or procedure
should [always]{.underline} be pretested before it is used to collect
data for the actual study. To pretest:

\(a\) Ask people who are knowledgeable about the subject area and about
research methods to evaluate the instrument or procedure.

\(b\) Ask people who are similar to, but not part of, the sample
population to respond to questionnaire items and suggest revision.

\(c\) If secondary data or content analysis is used, pretest the system
of recording data and make adjustments as indicated by any problems
encountered in the pretest.

500.33 Sample selection

\(a\) [Definition of the population and unit of analysis]{.underline}.
Social scientists frequently obtain data from a sample of the population
and estimate the characteristics of the total population from the sample
data. The members or units of the population are the units of analysis.
The population and unit of analysis must be defined very specifically.
For example, if the population is farmers, does this include part-time

500-20

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Subpart D -- Data Collection

500.34

farmers or only those whose sole occupation is farming? Does it include
tenant farmers or only farm owners?

\(b\) [Sampling frame]{.underline}. To select a sample, it is necessary
to have a sampling frame: a list (as complete and accurate as possible)
of all the units in the population as defined. Units not on the list
have no chance of being selected for the sample; units on the list but
no longer actually in the population may be selected but cannot be
included in the study. These factors help to determine the size of the
sample.

\(c\) [Knowledge of population]{.underline}. Obtain as much information
about the population as possible. This step is important in deciding on
sample size, whom to include in the study, and the type of sampling
procedures to be used.

\(d\) [Probability sampling]{.underline}. Probability sampling
compensates for what is not known about the population and, therefore,
minimizes unintentional bias in selecting sample units. According to the
theory of probability, each unit in the population should have an
independent and equal, or known, chance of being selected for the
sample. Hence, a complete, accurate sampling frame is essential. There
are many types of probability samples. It is recommended that the Social
Sciences staff be asked to help select an appropriate sampling
technique.

500.34 Data for the initial social profile.

\(a\) Enough data should be obtained for the initial social profile
(Table 500-4) to give an overview of the social environment of the study
area as a guide to scoping for the detailed social profile. These data
can be obtained from existing sources, such as the U.S. census, and from
the initial contacts with key informants during the field examination.

500-21

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Part 500 -- Social Evaluation

500.34

#### Table 500-4-DATA FOR AN INITIAL SOCIAL PROFILE

[Type of Information]{.underline} [Source]{.underline}

GENERAL POPULATION DATA

Total population U.S. census

\% population change in last 10 or 20 years Local planning agency

Population over 65 years of age

Minority population

\% minority population

Median income

No. of families below poverty level

\% families below the poverty level

\% unemployed

Attitudes, beliefs, values of locals Interviews

Public participation

Local newspaper(s)

HOUSING DATA

Total number of housing units U.S. census

Persons per housing unit Local planning agency

No. of housing units without complete

plumbing facilities

\% of housing units without complete

plumbing facilities

No. of owner-occupied housing units

Median rent

Median value of owner-occupied units

FARM DATA

Size of farm population U.S. census

Number of farms Personal interviews and

Type of farms (e.g., dairy, cattle) observations

Size of farms

Type of farm ownership

Proportion of absentee owners

Characteristics of farm owners (e.g.,

absentee, female)

Farm life style

Values, attitudes of farmers

COMMUNITY DATA

Community organizations and institutions Local newspaper(s)

including minority organizations Local library

Community cohesion (degree of coopera- Personal interviews and

tion and support among residents) observation

Community values and attitudes

\(b\) Data collected for the initial social profile become significant
in the larger social context---for example, when the data for the study
are compared with similar statistics for the county,

500-22

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Subpart D -- Data Collection

500.35(b)

State, and Nation. These comparisons are useful in scoping, when social
factors will be chosen for closer examination in the detailed social
profile.

35. Data for the detailed social profile

\(a\) Once the data for an initial social profile have been collected
and comparisons have been made, significant social variables can be
identified for further investigation. Scoping questions listed in Table
500-2 can guide in identifying these significant variables.

\(b\) Scoping and developing the detailed social profile are iterative
processes: new variables that were not considered in the initial social
profile may appear, and other variables may be dropped. The planner
should remain open to these changes as new information becomes available
throughout planning.

500-23

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Subpart E -- Data Analysis

SUBPART E -- DATA ANALYSIS

500.42(b)

500.40 Objective and subjective data

\(a\) Data gathered in social evaluation generally fall into two
categories: objective or "hard" data that are usually expressed
quantitatively and subjective or "soft" data that usually cannot be
quantified. Objective data include population data such as median
income, median age, and migration rate. Subjective data include
information on attitudes, values, and beliefs.

\(b\) Both objective and subjective data can make important
contributions to a social evaluation. Since social evaluation explores a
variety of areas of social impacts, it in fact requires both
quantitative and nonquantitative information. While appropriate
statistical treatments of objective or "hard" data are generally known,
it is somewhat less well known that scientific procedures exist for
collecting, analyzing, and interpreting subjective data. Omitting "soft"
data would be denying access to useful, frequently reliable information
that is critical in gaining a social perspective.

\(c\) While nonquantitative data present problems of nonuniform measures
across the components, there is no absolute virtue in being able to "add
everything up" and there is clear value in being able to consider a
variety of social impacts. It is important to remember that the overall
purpose is to evaluate the various impacts, whether or not they are
easily quantifiable.

41. Reliability and validity.

Because of the diversity of types, amounts, and quality of social data
required in social evaluations, as well as the frequent sensitivity of
such information, questions of reliability and validity often become
extremely significant. These issues are technically complex and require
careful professional analysis. Hence, the assistance and advice of
social scientists, skilled in qualitative and quantitative methods, is
necessary on a case-by-case basis.

42. Statistical procedures

\(a\) The nature and magnitude of most SCS activities do not usually
require the use of sophisticated statistical procedures for social
evaluation. The first stage of data analysis will normally be to
determine the distributional characteristics of the data: frequency
distribution as well as such measure of central tendency as mean and
median.

500-25

(420-V-SSm, Feb. 1984)

Part 500 -- Social Evaluation

500.42(b)

If census data are used, these descriptive values are usually available
without further calculation.

\(b\) A second stage of data analysis might be to determine
relationships among two or more variables. The most commonly used
analytic method in the social sciences is
[crosstabulation]{.underline}---a joint frequency distribution of cases
according to two or more variables. For example, the relationship
between household income and location in the flood plain can be examined
through the use of a crosstabulation. Statistical significance can then
be determined through the use of a number of tests, the most common
being the chi-square statistic (X²)(if the data are normally
distributed).

\(c\) In a few cases, social evaluation may require the use of [multiple
regression]{.underline}---a statistical technique that measures and
evaluates the overall dependence of a variable on a set of other
variables. For this method of analysis, as well as for less complex
statistical procedures, computer-based statistical programs are
available that are especially designed for use with social science data.
The two most commonly used are the Statistical Package for the Social
Sciences (SPSS) and the Statistical Analysis System (SAS).

43. Judgmental procedures.

The procedures used to estimate social impacts can come from systematic
professional judgment based on the individual's professional knowledge
in conjunction with the estimates of other experienced and knowledgeable
persons (long-time employees, specialists, local experts, etc.) and
responses obtained in the public participation process. Given the
mixture of objective and subjective data necessary for social
evaluation, a judgmental analysis is probably the only practical
approach currently available. As experience in its use is accumulated,
the process will be refined. Following the procedures outlined in 500.12
will allow for the documentation of the data, assumptions, and premises
necessary to develop the logical sequence that indicates how decisions
were made. This documentation will encourage both public and
professional confidence in the appropriateness of the analyses and
interpretations.

44. Sources of assistance.

\(a\) Not all SCS personnel have the expertise to conduct detailed
social evaluations. Assistance should be requested from the Director,
Social Sciences.

\(b\) Social data specific to a State or region can often be obtained
form the department of rural sociology at the State land-grant
university. (In some State universities, rural sociology and
agricultural economics are in the same department.)

500-26

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Subpart E -- Data Analysis

500.46(c)

45. Projections (measures of impact).

\(a\) Many uncertainties are associated with projections of future
social conditions. There must, however, be some means of comparing the
future conditions (impacts) of the various alternative plans. This can
be done by selecting applicable social variables when beginning the
analysis and using them consistently throughout the social evaluation.
These variables can be compared in narrative, tabular, or matrix form,
as appropriate.

\(b\) The projections deemed most probable should be analyzed if it
appears that they would appreciably affect plan design. This analysis
should include examining opinions and assumptions about the future of
the planning area and designating what are considered the "most likely
future" conditions.

\(c\) In the OSE account of P&G, project impacts are viewed as the
difference between the future with and without plan conditions.

46. Developing the social profile.

\(a\) When data on social variables are collected, organized, and
displayed in either tabular or narrative form (or both), the result is a
social profile of the study area. The social profile does not include
judgments about positive or negative effects. It simply describes the
objective and subjective social characteristics of the study population,
and, in as many instances as possible, compares these characteristics to
the same characteristics in other groups. In this way the social
characteristics of the study group can be described as above average,
average, or below average in comparison to another group (in comparison,
for example, to the United States as a whole, to all U.S.
nonmetropolitan areas, or to other States.) This profile provides a
meaningful image of the social character of the study group that can
then form the basis for the social evaluation.

\(b\) Exhibit 500.60 in Subpart G is a guide for developing the social
profile. Many social variables have been listed, but only those
identified as significant by the scoping process should be used. Data
are collected, evaluated, and recorded in this form, which then becomes
the basic worksheet for social assessment.

\(c\) Social profile data can and should be included in a social
assessment if they provide information that is significant to the
planning process and illustrate a point. For example, the planner might
wish to make the point that renters in the area of a flood plain are
more willing to move than owners in the area. This information can be
clearly expressed in tabular form (Table 500-5).

500-27

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Part 500 -- Social Evaluation

500.46(d)

Table 500-5 -- Willingness to Move by Tenure Status

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

No

### Tenure Status Yes No Response Total 

Own 115 74 2 191 Number

(60.2) (38.7) (1.0) (99.9) Percent

Rent 59 14 0 73 Number

(80.8) (19.2) (0) (100.0) Percent

Other 10 3 1 14 Number

[(71.4) (21.4) (7.1) (99.9) Percent]{.underline}

Total 184 91 3 278 Number

(66.2) (32.7) (1.1) (100.0) Percent

Source: Survey of flood-plain residents (1979)

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

\(d\) Significant information that cannot be expressed in tabular form
may be included in the assessment as part of the narrative.

\(e\) The following general suggestions are made for including
socio-economic data in social assessments.

(1) [Identify the population]{.underline}.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(i) Is it the total population of a county, town, etc.?

(ii) Is it the total population of a project area?

(iii) Is it a statistical sample of some population?

(iv) Is it a group of respondents to a questionnaire?

\(2\) [Use units of measure that have specific meaning]{.underline}. For
example, number of occupied units lacking complete plumbing facilities
is a better indicator of housing quality than the statement, "Condition
of houses is good to excellent."

\(3\) [Use statistics that can be compared to those of other
populations]{.underline}. For example, median family income in the study
area can be compared to median family income in the county, State, or
all nonmetropolitan areas. Percentage of population 65 years of age and
older can also be compared at several levels. (Census variables are a
good choice for this reason.)

\(4\) [Identify variables carefully]{.underline}. For example, [median
income]{.underline} must be identified as to whether it is for families,
nonfamilies or individuals.

500-28

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Subpart E -- Data Analysis

500.46(d)(5)

> \(5\) [Document sources of statistics and dates]{.underline}.

\(6\) [Display data that have significance to the activity]{.underline}.
Avoid including data that have no relevance or significance in
evaluating the project. Data should be displayed to illustrate a
point---for example, that housing in the study area is substandard (by
virtue of lack of plumbing facilities) compared with that in other
areas, or that the proportion of elderly in the area is unusually high.
(For example, the proportion of elderly in the total U.S. population is
about 11 percent. More than 15 percent elderly would be considered
unusually high.)

\(f\) Social data not considered significant to the evaluation process
can be noted in the planning support file and summarized in the I and A
Report.

47. Describing social impacts.

\(a\) Social impacts are described in terms of the changes in the social
environment that may take place as a result of the proposed activity.
For example, the following questions may be asked.

(1) Will there be a change in the composition of the population (age,
    occupations, etc.)?

(2) Will there be a change in the level of threat to life, health, and
    safety?

(3) Will there be a change in quality of life?

(4) Will there be a change in community structure or organization?

(5) Will there be a change in lifestyles?

(6) Will there be changes in attitudes, behavior?

(7) Will there be changes in socioeconomic status?

(8) Will these changes affect everyone or just some individuals or
    groups?

(9) Will these changes create inequities among individuals or groups?

\(b\) Social impacts can be described in narrative terms. If
quantifiable, they can also be displayed as tables and graphs.

500-29

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Subpart F -- Evaluation on Social Impacts

SUBPART F -- EVALUATION OF SOCIAL IMPACTS

500.51(a)

50. General.

Once the social profile of a study area has been developed, these data
and characterizations can be used to make judgments about the social
impacts of a particular project or activity on the people involved.
Although the responsibility for documenting these judgments eventually
falls on the interdisciplinary planning team, there are some sources of
assistance in making these evaluations.

\(a\) [Research]{.underline}. In recent years, considerable research has
been done on assessing social impact. Researchers have documented the
impacts of such activities as relocation from flood plains, dam
construction, irrigation, and resource development. In some cases, the
planner will know the results of these studies; in other cases, the
planner may need to review relevant research literature. A list of
references is given in Subpart G, 500.61.

\(b\) [Public participation]{.underline}. Potential adverse or
beneficial effects may also be identified as part of the public
participation process. Individuals and groups who attend public meetings
or respond to requests for information often call attention to impacts
that would otherwise have been overlooked in planning. In the same way,
potential areas of conflict become visible during the public
participation process.

\(c\) [Key informants]{.underline}. Community leaders and local
officials in the project area can also be good sources of information
for identifying impacts. Care must be taken, however, that these leaders
represent a broad spectrum of the community (not just project sponsors)
and that information is sought from a wide range of community groups so
that minority groups are not overlooked.

51. Rating social impacts.

\(a\) Each of the variables listed in Table 500-6 can have a variety of
social impacts. Impacts may vary in whether they are beneficial or
adverse, and also in intensity, in who is affected, in where they are
located, etc. For example, an increase in population might be beneficial
in one area and adverse in another, depending on the availability of
employment and housing and the size of the community infrastructure.

500-31

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Part 500 - Social Evaluation

Table 500-6- [Examples of Negative and Positive Social
Effects]{.underline} \* [1]{.underline}/

[Variable]{.underline} [Negative Effect]{.underline} [Positive
Effect]{.underline}

[Institutional]{.underline} ° Influx of construction ° Government
technical

workers places extreme assistance provides

demand on local services the capacity for the

and institutions, creating local government to

a \"boom-to-bust\" situation. implement projects.

[Demographic]{.underline} ° Increased population ° Population growth is

strains capacity of usually viewed

local services. favorably only if

> ° Population growth may accompanied by

be contrary to expressed economic development

controlled or \"no-growth\" ([balanced]{.underline} population

policies of certain communities. and economic growth

[Displacement and]{.underline} ° Forced migration creates ° Voluntary
relocation

[Relocation]{.underline} severe social strains: is less likely to be

loss of neighborliness; stressful.

> feelings of confusion and ° Relocation may result
>
> despondency; in freedom from
>
> uncertainty about the flooding and
>
> actual time of moving; improved housing
>
> high costs of relocating. quality.
>
> ° Impacts are felt more by the
>
> poor, elderly, and poorly
>
> educated.

[Community Cohesion]{.underline}

° Drastic population changes ° Community cohesion

(location, number, or both) may be enhanced if

may shatter community relocation is avoided

cohesion. or planned to maintain

° Community identity may community structure.

be altered.

\*[1]{.underline}/ Adapted from Shields, Mark A. \"Social Impact
Studies: An Exposition,

Analysis.\" [Environment and Behavior]{.underline} Vol. 7, No. 3
(September 1975).

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

500-32

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

[Economic]{.underline} ° Economic benefits of the ° Economic benefits

project may be inequitably may include increases

distributed. in employment ° Costs to residents of displacement
opportunities, land and

and relocation may be high. property values, retail

º A \"boom-to-bust\" syndrome business sales, and

may result. opportunities.

[Life Styles]{.underline} ° Increased stress on rural ° Increased
diversity of

families occurs when population provides

populations with differing opportunities for more

> life styles move into varied recreational,

community. educational, and social

activities.

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(b) Impacts can be rated by using a simple 5-point scale and, carrying
    the rating system one step further, quantitative values can be
    assigned to the five levels on the scale (Table 500.7).

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

Table 500-7 - Rating Social Impacts

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

[Symbol]{.underline} [Impact]{.underline} [Value]{.underline}

++ = very positive or beneficial +1

\+ = positive or beneficial 0.5

0 = none 0

\- = negative or adverse -0.5

\-- = very negative or adverse -1

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(c) Planners are encouraged to develop their own methods of quantifying
    and rating project impacts to assess and compare social effects.

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984) 500-33

Sub part G - Exhibits

SUBPART G - EXHIBITS

500.60

§500.60 A guide for the social profile.

The exhibit on the following pages shows a format for recording data
collected for the social profile. Significant data can then be selected
from this outline to be used in the social assessment.

500-35

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

SUBPART F - EXHIBITS

EXHIBIT 500.60 - A GUIDE FOR THE SOCIAL PROFILE

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

MEASURE

Social - Impact Variables Potential Data Source

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

A.  [Population Dynamics]{.underline}

Population size (growth, stability, - U.S. census of

decline) population, housing

Population density transportation

Population structure (age and sex) - Special studies

Displacement of people

Net migration, internal migration

Population distribution (racial-ethnic

composition)

B.  [Economic Base]{.underline}

> Number of business establishments/farms - U.S. census
>
> Change in establishments (past 10 years) - Special studies
>
> Local tax base - County government
>
> Value of industrial production - Chamber of commerce
>
> Value of agricultural production - Local planning bodies

C.  [Income]{.underline}

> Overall real income for the area - U.S. census
>
> Share of real income earned by - Special studies
>
> low-income households - County government
>
> Share of real income earned by minority - Survey
>
> families
>
> Income dispersion and per capital income
>
> Income stability
>
> Sources of income
>
> 500-36
>
> (420-V-SSM, FEB. 1984)
>
> [Variable]{.underline} [Data Source]{.underline}

D.  [Labor and Employment]{.underline}:

> Economic activity - U.S. Bureau of Labor
>
> Labor-force diversity (ages statistics
>
> 18 - 64) - Special reports
>
> Total employed as percentage of - Local planning
>
> population districts
>
> Total minorities employed - Local employment-
>
> Skilled/unskilled labor force service office
>
> Total employers by size
>
> Small (1 - 19)
>
> Medium (20 - 99)
>
> Large (100 or more)
>
> Labor/job stability
>
> Accessibility of work

E.  [Social Service and Public Assistance (Welfare)]{.underline}

> Population percentage under poverty level - County social-service
>
> Social services personnel agency
>
> Recipients of public assistance - State social-service
>
> Funds to counties (social services) agency

F. [Education Opportunities]{.underline}

Adequacy of educational services - Local school-district

Enrollment information office

Diversity of educational programs - School census

Education \"users\" (students/employees) - U.S. census

Educational characteristics of population - Survey

Educational achievement

Satisfaction with educational opportunities

500-37

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

[Variable]{.underline} [Data Source]{.underline}

G.  [Industrial Data]{.underline}

> Market value of agricultural land/acre - Census of Agriculture
>
> Acres of land underproduction - U.S. census
>
> Acres for fish production - Special studies and
>
> Acres of agricultural land or percentage of reports
>
> important farmland lost to other uses - Chamber of commerce
>
> (last 5 -- 10 years) - Local employment office
>
> Industries left or closed (last 5 -- 10 years) - City and county data
> book
>
> Number of industrial sites available
>
> Number of industrial development programs underway

H.  [Transportation]{.underline}

> Transportation facilities (roads, water,
>
> airstrips, railroads) - U.S. census
>
> Commercial freight carried in and out - Chamber of commerce
>
> of area - Local planning agency
>
> Seasonality of access - County road department
>
> Travel route difficulty - Survey
>
> Experience type (travel-through
>
> vs. destination)
>
> Automobile ownership
>
> Adequacy of public transportation

I.  [Local Government and Community Services]{.underline}

> Local annual tax base - Local government agencies
>
> Revenue spent annually for community services - Special studies
>
> Revenue spent annually for - Regional office of
>
> rebuilding after natural disasters Department of Housing
>
> and Urban Development
>
> (HUD)
>
> Total local government employees - Regional office of Federal
>
> Local government employees providing community Emergency Management
>
> services Agency (FEMA)
>
> Urban renewal activities
>
> Percentage of families served by community services
>
> Percentage of families without community services
>
> 500-38
>
> (420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)
>
> [Variable]{.underline} [Data Source]{.underline}

J.  [Health, Life Protection, and Safety]{.underline}

Mortality - Bureau of Vital

Major health problems in the area Statistics

Risk of life (safety) - Local department of social

Risk of property damage services

Effects of risk on population and quality of life - Local disaster
agency

Adequacy of medical facilities and personnel - Local newspaper files

Quality of medical care

Adequacy of emergency protection

Potential for natural disasters

Potential food reserve

##### Housing

Housing supply system - U.S. Census of Housing

Housing quality - Local planning agency

Median value of dwelling units - Local housing agency

Potential for a new buildings/dwellings - State housing agency

Total dwellings with plumbing and sewer - Regional office of HUD

Housing-related economic factors

Public land-related housing potentials

K.  [Recreational Opportunities]{.underline}

Adequacy of recreational facilities - Local planning bodies

Recreational participation - County government

Key recreation programs (annual) - Chamber of commerce

Satisfaction with recreational opportunities - Survey

Access to recreation outside community

Special-group access (elderly, handicapped

minority, poor, transit-dependent)

Security (unpredictability and the unknown)

Open space

Annual revenue generated

500-39

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

[Variable]{.underline} [Data Source]{.underline}

##### Community Organizations and Local Leadership

Religious system resources - Key informants

Social/fraternal organizations - Local newspaper files

Major voluntary community activities - Local library

Attitude and value cohesion - Yellow pages of local

Active community leaders telephone book

(professional and lay leaders)

Civic organizations

Minority organizations

##### Communications and Media

Media market (population size and structure) - Key informants

Medial available locally (newspapers, radio, - Local newspaper(s)

television) - Yellow pages of local

Impacts on media advertisers telephone book

Minority media

##### Social, Cultural, and Physiological Characteristics

Strength of community identification - Local planning bodies

Basic values (orientations, - Local chamber of commerce

dimensions, and rankings) - Community leaders

Satisfaction with life quality - Survey

Community participation practices - Local newspaper(s)

Proposed action activities (cohesion and conflict) - Correspondence and
public-

Historical and archeological sites meeting records

Attitude toward cultural resources

500-40

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

§500.61 [REFERENCES IN SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT]{.underline}

[Books]{.underline}:

Bowles, Roy T. [Social Impact Assessment in Small
Communities]{.underline}

Toronto, Canada: Butterworth\'s (1981)

Butler, Lorna Michael and Robert E. Howell [Coping With Growth:
Community Needs Assessment Techniques]{.underline} Western Rural
Development Center, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon (October
1980)

Fitzsimmons, Stephen J., Lorrie I. Stuart, and Peter C. Wolff [Social
Assessment Manual: A Guide to the Preparation of the Social Well-Being
Account for Planning Water Resource Projects]{.underline} Boulder,
Colorado: Westview Press (1977)

Finsterbusch, Kurt and C. P. Wolf [Methodology of Social Impact
Assessment]{.underline} Stroudsburg, Penna.: Dowden, Hutchinson and
Ross, Inc. (1977)

Tester, Frank J. and William Mykes (eds.) [Social Impact Assessment:
Theory, Method and Practice]{.underline} Calgary, Alberta: Detselig
Enterprises, Ltd. (1981)

[Periodicals:]{.underline}

[Social Impact Assessment]{.underline} Bimonthly newsletter.
Individuals: \$5 per year. Make checks payable to C. P. Wolf, Editor,
Social Impact Assessment, Box 587, Canal Street Station, New York, N.Y.
10013

500-41

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

DISTRIBUTION AND CHECK LIST NO-ADS-4 7-81

+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| STATE           |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| AL-01           | 8  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| AK-02           | 10 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| AZ-04           | 5  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| AR-05           | 5  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| CA-06           | 26 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| CO-08           | 10 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| CT-09           | 10 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| DE-10           | 2  |                                    |         |
|                 | (1 |                                    |         |
|                 | -S |                                    |         |
|                 | O, |                                    |         |
|                 | 1  |                                    |         |
|                 | -T |                                    |         |
|                 | ri |                                    |         |
|                 | -s |                                    |         |
|                 | ta |                                    |         |
|                 | te |                                    |         |
|                 | WR |                                    |         |
|                 | St |                                    |         |
|                 | af |                                    |         |
|                 | f) |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| FL-12           | 20 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| GA-13           | 6  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| HI-15           | 15 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| ID-16           | 6  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| IL-17           | 20 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| IN-18           | 1  |                                    |         |
|                 | 00 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| IA-19           | 9  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| KS-20           | 20 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| KY-21           | 1  |                                    |         |
|                 | 40 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| LA-22           | 70 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| ME-23           | 5  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| MD-24           | 5  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| MA-25           | 3  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| MI-26           | 37 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| MN-27           | 60 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| MS-28           | 4  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| MO-29           | 15 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| MT-30           | 70 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| NE-31           | 18 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| NV-32           | 15 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| NH-33           | 3  |                                    |         |
|                 | NE |                                    |         |
|                 | WR |                                    |         |
|                 | PS |                                    |         |
|                 | -2 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| NJ-34           | 25 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| NM-35           | 15 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| NY-36           | 8  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| NC-37           | 1  |                                    |         |
|                 | 30 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| ND-38           | 5  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| OH-39           | 7  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| OK-40           | 15 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| OR-41           | 60 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| PA-42           | 12 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| PR-72           | 3  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| RI-44           | 1  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| SC-45           | 75 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| SD-46           | 1  |                                    |         |
|                 | 00 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| TN-47           | 20 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| TX-48           | 6  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| UT-49           | 3  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| VT-50           | 20 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| VA-51           | 10 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| WA-53           | 4  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| WV-54           | 2  |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| WI-55           | 14 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| WY-56           | 40 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| All States      | 12 |                                    |         |
|                 | 94 |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| TSC\'S          |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| MTSC-63         |    | 25                                 |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| WTSC-64         |    | 30                                 |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| NETSC-61        |    | 15                                 |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| STSC-62         |    | 12                                 |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| Total TSC Staff |    | 67                                 |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| DC-75           |    | BAP - 3 P&E - 3                    |         |
|                 |    |                                    |         |
|                 |    | IRM - 2 (Helen Gilbert CPA -1)     |         |
|                 |    |                                    |         |
|                 |    | NRA - 2 SSC - 50                   |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| Total SCS       |    | 1422                               |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| OTHER           |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
|                 |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| Grand Total SCS |    | 1422                               |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+
| REMARKS         |    |                                    |         |
+-----------------+----+------------------------------------+---------+

+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
| U.S.      |       |                                          |       |
| D         |       |                                          |       |
| EPARTMENT |       |                                          |       |
| OF        |       |                                          |       |
| AG        |       |                                          |       |
| RICULTURE |       |                                          |       |
| **        |       |                                          |       |
| DIRECTIVE |       |                                          |       |
| T         |       |                                          |       |
| ABULATION |       |                                          |       |
| SHEET**   |       |                                          |       |
| SCS-ADS-1 |       |                                          |       |
|           |       |                                          |       |
| SOIL      |       |                                          |       |
| CON       |       |                                          |       |
| SERVATION |       |                                          |       |
| SERVICE   |       |                                          |       |
| 12-80     |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
| **TITLE   |       |                                          |       |
| NO.**     |       |                                          |       |
| [420]{.u  |       |                                          |       |
| nderline} |       |                                          |       |
| **        |       |                                          |       |
| DIRECTIVE |       |                                          |       |
| NA        |       |                                          |       |
| ME/TYPE** |       |                                          |       |
| [National |       |                                          |       |
| Social    |       |                                          |       |
| Sciences  |       |                                          |       |
| M         |       |                                          |       |
| anual]{.u |       |                                          |       |
| nderline} |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
| **        | **    | **PART, SUBPART, PAGES, ETC., OR         | **    |
| DIRECTIVE | ISSUE | BULLETIN SUBJECT**                       | FILED |
| NUMBER    | D     |                                          | BY**  |
| 1**       | ATE** |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
| Issue 1   | Feb.  | Parts 500-501                            |       |
|           | 84    |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+
|           |       |                                          |       |
+-----------+-------+------------------------------------------+-------+

**PERMANENT DIRECTIVES: INSERT THE ISSUE, EDITION, OR AMENDMENT NUMBER**

**BULLETINS: INSERT THE SEQUENCE NUMBER (S), OMIT TITLE AND FY**

Subpart A - Other Social Effects (OSE) Account

PART 501 - APPLICATION OF SOCIAL EVALUATION TO PROJECT ACTIVITIES

501.01(a)(1)

SUBPART A - OTHER SOCIAL EFFECTS (OSE) ACCOUNT

§501.00 Purpose of the OSE account.

(a) The basic purpose of the OSE account is to forecast the impacts
    likely to result from implementing a given water-resources
    development plan or from not implementing any such plan, and then to
    assess the beneficial and adverse social effects on people and their
    communities.

(b) This statement of purpose highlights certain features of the OSE
    account: A distinction is made between changes, referred to as
    \"impacts,\" and their social meaning, referred to as \"beneficial
    and adverse social [effects]{.underline}.\" The impacts of direct
    concern are [social]{.underline}; these are rated as to their
    beneficial and adverse social effects.

(c) Impacts of concern are those that will occur in the
    [future]{.underline} as a result of implementing or not implementing
    a plan. The major concern is the comparison of alternative
    \"futures,\" with and without the plans, not with present vs.
    future. The OSE account does not deal with future social changes
    that are not associated, directly or indirectly, with a plan or with
    the \"future without\" alternative, other than the extent to which
    such \"trends\" may interact with plan implementation. In short, the
    OSE account does not look at mankind\'s social futures in general.

(d) The ultimate purpose of the OSE account in a planning document is to
    enable comparison of the overall social effects of alternative plans
    with the economic, environmental, and physical effects assessed in
    other accounts.

§501.01 OSE categories and significant impacts.

(a) The OSE account includes five general categories of effects: urban
    and community impacts; impacts on life, health, and safety;
    displacement; and impacts on long-term productivity. The following
    is a list of impacts that are considered significant.

501-1

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

> Part 501 - Application of Social Evaluation to Project Activities
>
> 501.01(a)(1)(i)

(1) [Urban and community impacts include changes in\--]{.underline}

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(i) Income distribution;

(ii) Employment distribution, especially the share to minorities;

(iii) Population distribution and composition;

(iv) Fiscal condition of the State and local government; and

(v) Quality of community life.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(2) [Impacts on life, health, and safety include\--]{.underline}

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(i) Risk of flood, drought, or other disaster;

(ii) Potential loss of human life, property, and essential public
     services as a result of structural failure; and

(iii) Other environmental effects not reported in the national economic
      development and environmental quality accounts.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(3) [Displacement can apply to people, businesses, and
    farms.]{.underline}

(4) [Impacts on long-term productivity]{.underline} affect maintenance
    and enhancement of the productivity of resources, such as
    agricultural land, for use by future generations.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(b) Certain categories will be more relevant to some planning settings
    than to others. The unique characteristics of communities in the
    planning area may require that categories be added, dropped, or
    modified.

§501.02 Presentation of material.

(a) Since the OSE account is essentially a social evaluation, it is
    developed by use of the same process as that described in §500.13.
    Data are presented according to the instructions for documenting the
    OSE account found in the [National Watersheds Manual]{.underline},
    390-508.37.

(b) Effects on income, employment and population distribution, fiscal
    condition, energy requirements, and energy conservation may be
    reported on a [positive]{.underline} or [negative]{.underline}
    basis. Effects on life, health, and safety may be reported as
    [beneficial]{.underline} or [adverse]{.underline}. Other effects may
    be reported on either a positive/negative basis or a
    beneficial/adverse basis.

> (420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984) 501-2

Subpart A - Other Social Effects (OSE) Account

501.03(b)

(c) OSE may be expressed in monetary units, other numeric units, or
    nonnumeric terms.

(d) Effects that cannot be quantified or described with available
    methods, data, and information, or that have no material bearing on
    the decision making process, may be excluded from the OSE account.

§501.03 Procedures pertaining to the OSE account.

(a) SCS policy on the format for the Watershed Plan-Environmental Impact
    Statement (plan-EIS) is contained in the [National Watersheds
    Manual]{.underline}, 390-511.15. The OSE account forms one part of
    the plan-EIS, but social data are not limited to the display of
    accounts.

(b) Data from the social evaluation can be inserted in the plan-EIS
    under Project Setting (Section 508.34 of the [National Watersheds
    Manual]{.underline}), Problem and Opportunity Identification
    (§508.35), Inventory and Forecasting (§508.36), and Effects of
    Recommended Plan (§508.39).

501-3

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

SUBPART B - CASE-STUDY EXAMPLES

501.10(b)

§501.10 Detailed social assessment: Stewart Creek Watershed, Kentucky.

(a) The Stewart Creek social assessment is one example of how a social
    evaluation can be done for a watershed project. It should be noted
    that the Stewart Creek reported is written in the form of an
    addendum. Typically, this information should be dispersed throughout
    the planning document in the format recommended in the [National
    Watersheds Manual]{.underline}, Part 508, Development and
    Preparation of Watershed Plan-Environmental Impact Statement.

(b) This case study is included to provide an example of the
    [kinds]{.underline} of information that might be presented in a
    social assessment document, not as an example of
    [format]{.underline} to be followed. The format of the total
    planning or evaluation document should provide the framework into
    which the various elements of the social evaluation are integrated.

501-5

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

**SOCIAL ASSESSMENT**

**OF THE**

**STEWART CREEK WATERSHED**

**HOPKINS COUNTY, KENTUCKY**

JUNE 1981

ADDENDUM TO: [WATERSHED PLAN AND ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STATEMENT FOR
STEWART CREEK WATERSHED]{.underline}, SOIL CONSERVATION SERVICE, USDA
(1978).

501-6

[EXECUTIVE SUMMARY]{.underline}

SOCIAL ASSESSMENT OF STEWART CREEK WATERSHED

[MAJOR PROBLEM]{.underline}: Flood water damage to 115 properties and
threat to loss of lie for people in Earlington, Kentucky (230 people in
a 500-year event; 199 in a 100-year event).

[SOCIAL EFFECTS OF FREQUENT AND SEVERE FLODING:]{.underline}

-   Sixty (60) elderly people suffer from anxiety and a high risk of
    loss of life from flood waters from 2 to 6 times per year.

-   Local children suffer risk of loss of life, poor health conditions,
    and anxiety because of flooding.

-   Sixteen (16) black families face a constant and increasing threat of
    loss of life or illness resulting not only from flooding but also
    from continuous wet conditions that provide an environment for
    disease-producing mosquitoes and aggravate chronic conditions such
    as arthritis and bronchitis.

-   Twenty-six (26) low-income families are forced to accept the
    cumulative effects of frequent flooding on quality of life, since
    they do not have the money to repair damages, replace losses, or
    move to a better environment.

-   Life, health, and safety of the people of Earlington and neighboring
    communities is threatened by disruption of emergency services
    (ambulance, fire, and police protection), the risk of drinking water
    contamination, sewage overflow, etc.

-   Housing quality is diminished and housing values are lower than they
    would be in comparable flood-free areas.

-   Property damages can reach \$380,000 or more in a 100-year flood
    event.

-   Many residents cannot afford the cost of clean-up following floods
    and must sacrifice other purchases or suffer a downward spiral in
    living conditions.

[SOCIAL BENEFITS OF PROPOSED PROJECT:]{.underline}

-   Benefits most significantly affect:

> 38 elderly households

501-7

16 black households

26 low-income households (including some black and elderly households)

-   Eliminates threat to loss of life for:

> 144 people in 500-year event
>
> 173 people in 100-year event

-   Creates 87 temporary jobs for local residents, many of whom are poor
    or near-poor and in need of work.

-   Eliminates severe property damages and enhances quality-of-life for
    115 households.

-   Leads to increases in housing quality and value.

-   Eliminates threat of drinking-water contamination for 2,011 people
    of Earlington.

-   Increases school revenues with reduction in student absenteeism,
    resulting in a better opportunity for quality education.

-   Maintains accessibility of emergency services; prevents disruption
    of travel patterns.

-   Halts invasion of the downstream community by swamp conditions with
    the associated threats to human life, health, and safety.

-   Eliminates frequent low-level flooding that occurs several times a
    year.

501-8

##### HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The 4,760-acre Stewart Creek Watershed is located entirely within
Hopkins County in southwestern Kentucky. The City of Earlington is the
only community in the Stewart Creek Watershed, with a population of
approximately 2,011. (1980 Census).

Earlington was named for John Baylis Earle, who is credited with having
struck the first pick into the hillside at the opening of the first
commercial mine in Hopkins County\--the No. 11 Mine of the St. Bernard
Coal Company\--in 1869. In 1924, this mine, along with several other in
the Earlington area, was acquired by the West Kentucky Coal Company.
Island Creek Coal Company (now known as Island Creek Coal
Company\--Western Division) purchased the West Kentucky Coal Company in
1963.

Coal has performed a major role in the history of Earlington. Much of
the housing was constructed by the coal companies, many residents are
miners or retired miners, and the town of Earlington still has a
\"company store.\" The Trover Clinic, Earlington\'s medical facility,
originated in a room over this store.

Soon after its founding in 1870, Earlington became a \"boom town\" with
9 mines in operation and 150 coke ovens running day and night. With the
decline of employment in the coal mining industry, Earlington has lost
its boom town atmosphere, but civic pride is high and the community has
many active churches and civic organizations. Community members point
with pride to their expert volunteer Emergency Squad that serves not
only Earlington but surrounding communities, a recently dedicated
\"minipark\" and community clean-up and beautification activities.

II. [THE EARLINGTON STUDY AREA]{.underline}

In order to obtain social data for the Stewart Creek Watershed Project,
a special study was done under contract with the Soil Conservation
Service by Booker Associates, Inc., Lexington Kentucky, in December
1977. A \"Study Area\" was defined consisting of a 12-block area near
the center of Earlington on each side of Stewart Creek. The study area
is bound by the Louisville and Nashville railroad tracks to the East,
McEwen Avenue to the West, Thompson Avenue to the South, and Loch Mary
Reservoir to the North. It is predominantly residential, and located
almost entirely within the Stewart Creek flood plain.

Residents of the study area were surveyed by mail questionnaire and
personal interview in the 1977 study. Data were compiled and analyzed,
and are presented as part of this report. Additional sociological data
were collected in April 1981 through key informant interviews, newspaper
analysis and other local sources. These data are also presented in the
report. Census data, survey data, and other types of information have
been integrated to provide a broad perspective on the social status of
the Stewart Creek area, the social effects of frequent residential
flooding, and the potential social benefits of the proposed watershed
project.

501-9

III. [POPULATION CHARACTERISTICS]{.underline}

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
A.  [POPULATION TRENDS]{.underline}

Although Earlington has experienced a steadily declining population
since 1940, projections indicate that the population will stabilize at
about the 1975 level of 2,100 and remain at that point through the year
2000 (Figure1). The city\'s declining population has been attributed to
improved mechanization in the coal mining industry that has resulted in
decreased needs for manpower. Many low-skilled people have found
themselves unemployed, and have been forced to move elsewhere for
employment.

Figure 1: POPULATION CHANGE IN EARLINGTON, KENTUCKY

1960 - 1980

  ----------------------------------------------- --------- --------------
  1960 Population = 2,786                                   

  1970 Population = 2,321                                   

  1980 Population = 2,011                                   
  ----------------------------------------------- --------- --------------

0 500 1,000 1,500 2,000 2,500

Source: U.S. Census; 1960, 1970, 1980

On the basis of 1960, 1970, and 1980 population data, the rate of
population decline has decreased from 16.7 percent between 1960 and 1970
to 13.4 percent between 1970 and 1980. This may be an indication of a
trend toward the predicted stabilization of population.

B.  [RACIAL CHARACTERISTICS]{.underline}

Even with the declining population, the racial composition of Earlington
has remained at approximately 70 percent white and 30 percent black for
the past 20 years (Figure 2). This is a considerably higher proportion

501-10

of black population than in Hopkins County, or in the state of Kentucky.
Hopkins County\'s black population has remained a stable 8 percent;
Kentucky\'s at 7 percent.

Figure 2: POPULATION BY RACE FOR EARLINGTON, HOPKINS COUNTY, AND
KENTUCKY; 1960 - 1980

Population Percentages of Whites in Earlington, Hopkins Co., and
Kentucky (Remaining Percentage is Black)

![](media/image1.wmf)

Source: U.S. Census - 1960, 1970, 1980 501-11

In the Stewart Creek study area, black families comprise about 7 percent
of the total, but in the high risk section of the study area, they make
up 23 percent of the total families surveyed, or 17 households.

C.  [AGE DISTRIBUTION]{.underline}

A survey of the Stewart Creek study area shows that a very high
proportion of the people living there are elderly, with an especially
high proportion of elderly females. (Elderly is defined as the number of
residents 65 years of age and older.) Elderly people comprise about 22
percent of the study area population. This contrasts sharply with
Hopkins County, where the proportion of elderly is about 14 percent, and
with the U.S. population as a whole, where the proportion of elderly is
around 10 percent.

This high proportion of elderly people is a significant factor in the
assessment of social impacts of flooding. Elderly people are likely to
suffer disproportionately from the flood experience because they lack
the physical abilities to cope with the flooding situation. When elderly
are also low-income, the social impacts are even more traumatic.

D.  [INCOME DISTRIBUTION]{.underline}

![](media/image2.wmf)In 1979, the poverty level for a family of 4 was
\$7,412. Taking \$5,000 as poverty level for all households and \$10,000
as the \"near-poverty: level, data from the Stewart Creek study area
indicate that 46 percent of the households can be categorized as either
\"poor\" or \"near-poor\" (Figure 3). Thirty-one percent of the
households are in the \"poor\" category; 15 percent are in the
\"near-poor\" category.

Figure 3: FAMILY INCOME IN THE EARLINTON STUDY AREA (1977)

**Income**

501-12

Poverty status of the people involved is a significant factor in the
social effects of flooding. Low-income families have less money and
fewer resources to help in recovery from flood damages. When low-income
families experience damages or property losses as the result of
flooding, they often must use money that would have been used for other
essentials, or simply live with the damage and loss, in which case their
quality of life spirals downward with each damaging flood.

E.  [HOUSEHOLD TYPE]{.underline}

Household type was determined for 74 homes in the high risk section of
the Stewart Creek study area. These households essentially fall into two
neighborhoods: one neighborhood, almost entirely white, in the Upper
Stewart Creek area and one neighborhood, entirely black, in the Lower
Stewart Creek area (including the area known locally as \"Pump Row\").
Both neighborhoods include a high proportion of households with elderly
people\--many of which are single women\--and households headed by young
mothers with dependent children. (Table 1.)

[TABLE 1: ELDERLY HOUSEHOLDS IN THE HIGH RISK SECTION OF THE STEWART
CREEK STUDY AREA AS A PROPORTION OF TOTAL HOUSEHOLDS]{.underline}

[HOUSEHOLD TYPE UPPER STEWART CREEK LOWER STEWART CREEK NUMBER PERCENT
NUMBER PERCENT]{.underline}

HUSBAND/WIFE 17 29 6 38 SINGLE FEMALE 12 21 1 6 OTHER [1 2 1
6]{.underline} TOTAL ELDERLY 30 52 8 50

The Upper Stewart Creek area has an unusually high proportion of elderly
couples and single elderly women, while the Lower Stewart Creek area has
an unusually high proportion of elderly households and households headed
by single women. (Table 2.)

At least half of the households in both neighborhoods consist of elderly
couples or single elderly.

[TABLE 2: TYPE OF HOUSEHOLD IN HIGH RISK SECTIONS OF STEWART CREEK STUDY
AREA (NUMBER AND PROPORTION)]{.underline}

[HOUSEHOLD TYPE UPPER STEWART CREEK LOWER STEWART CREEK NUMBER PERCENT
NUMBER PERCENT]{.underline}

ELDERLY HUSB./WIFE 17 29 6 38 SINGLE ELD. WOMAN 12 21 1 6 OTHER ELDERLY
1 2 1 6 H/W/CHILDREN 11 19 2 13 FEMALE HD/CHILDREN 7 12 5 21 H/W (NOT
ELDERLY) 6 10 1 6 SINGLE (NOT ELDERLY) [4 7 0 \--]{.underline}

TOTAL 58 100 16 100

501-13

Elderly households and households headed by women are subject to other
hardships in addition to flood risk. Many of them are low-income;
elderly households in particular subsist on either Social Security or
miners\' pensions. Health also tends to be poor. At least five of these
households include a miner retired on disability, and at least four
other elderly persons suffer from chronic heart conditions.

IV\. [HOUSING CHARACTERISTICS]{.underline}

Eighty-five percent of the housing units in the Stewart Creek study area
are owner-occupied. This compares with homeownership in Kentucky as a
whole of 77 percent, and in the Western Region of Kentucky of 81 percent
(1979). Most renters are in the 20 to 40-year-old group, although a few
are elderly women. More than half of the residents have lived in their
homes for more than 15 years, and another 25 percent have been residents
for 5 to 15 years.

The high levels of home ownership and length of residence are reflected
in the strong commitment to neighborhood on the part of residents and
the large proportion of well-maintained, albeit modest, homes. Home
ownership and long-term residency have also led to the development of
strong support networks among the residents, which undoubtedly have
helped to reduce personal injuries and even deaths by providing an
informal but extremely effective flood warning system.

Housing values are lower in the Stewart Creek study area than they would
be for comparable housing in other areas because of the flood risk and
the cumulative effect of past flood damages. Values range from \$10,000
to \$35,000 with a median value of \$27,985. This compares with a median
value of owner-occupied housing in the State of Kentucky of \$36,200 and
in the western region of Kentucky of \$29,600. (1979).

V.  [ATTITUDES AND PERCEPTIONS]{.underline}

A strong sense of community spirit exists in the Stewart Creek study
area that provides a good support network, especially for elderly
residents. This support network serves to alleviate some of the anxiety
associated with the flood risk by providing an informal flood warning
system when heavy rains occur. Residents report watching for lights in
neighboring homes and checking with each other by telephone during
\"night watches\" of rising flood waters. Because the community is
small, emergency personnel know the residents who need assistance, and
check on them when water levels become dangerously high.

The neighborhood support network also helps to mitigate some of the
adverse effects of constant flooding and property damage. Residents
assist each other with repair and clean-up chores and have worked
together for several years to promote a flood control project.

In spite of strong community ties, resident perceive some risks from
flooding. The Booker survey (1977) measured perceptions of flood risk on
a scale of one to five; one being no risk and five being potential loss
of life.

501-14

The degree of risk perceived generally depended on the location of the
residence and the age of the individual respondent. Residents in the
high risk flood zone indicated that they felt the risk to be moderate to
severe, with an average response of 3.33. Residents over 65 years of age
in the high risk zone felt the risk to be moderate to severe, while
resident under 65 felt the risk to be slight to moderate (Figure 4).
Seven percent of all respondents viewed the flooding as having the
potential to take lives.

Anxiety of residents is reflected in some of their comments in response
to interview questions:

\"To wake up in the middle of the night and all you can see is
water...imagine the horror.\"

\"It\'s bad for your nervous system....\"

> \"What anxiety that must be\--to know that your garden and farm will
> be flooded, at least once a year?\"
>
> \"Why everyone on this creek isn\'t dead of diseases is a mystery to
> all who live here. Can\'t something be done to help us?\"

VI\. [FLOOD EXPERIENCE AND IMPACTS OF FLOODING]{.underline}

A.  [FLOOD HISTORY]{.underline}

Although a detailed history of flooding in Stewart Creek is not
available, newspaper reports provide insight into some of the major
flood events of the past. In addition to numerous small floods that were
unreported, significant floods occurred on the following dates:

[DATE]{.underline} [FLOOD CHARACTERISICS]{.underline}

March 1971 Approached a 100-year event. Approximately \$380,000 in
damages to 88 properties.

March 1975 Flooding reported in the area where Main Street and Sebree
Avenue intersect.

February 1976 Water was 26 inches deep on Sebree Avenue. Four families
were evacuated. Property damage estimated at \$65,000. Water filter
plant was flooded and rendered inoperative.

April 1979 Flood waters interrupted Sunday morning services at the
Baptist Church.

April 1981 Series of 3 floods in 2-1/2 weeks disrupted the community,
damaged gardens, necessitated evacuation of two families.

501-15

**FIGURE 4**

**PERCEPTION OF FLOOD RISK**

**EARLINGTON STUDY AREA**

![](media/image3.wmf)

**[AREA 1 - HIGH RISK ZONE]{.underline}**

![](media/image4.wmf)

Large, infrequent floods are most damaging in terms of property loss,
but small, frequent floods are also a problem. According to the Booker
survey, 59 percent of the residents of the study area had experienced
some flooding every 1-1/2 years; 40 percent of the residents had
experienced damage to foundations and interiors of homes every 1-1/2
years. This frequent and severe flooding has resulted in a number of
serious effects on the population of Stewart Creek, many of whom are
elderly and low-income households.

B.  [RISK FACTORS]{.underline}

Flood risk is frequently defined either in terms of the combined
velocity and depth of flood water or simply in terms of depth. In
Stewart Creek velocity is a factor; but although flood waters flow
swiftly in and adjacent to the main channel, there is no danger of flash
flooding at the present time. In most cases, residents have sufficient
time to evacuate their homes when the creek waters begin to rise. A more
critical factor is maximum depth of flood waters.

One criterion for threat to loss of life that is commonly used is a
flood water depth of 3 feet or more around the residential unit. Under
present conditions, it is estimated that a 100-year flood in Stewart
Creek would result in water 3 feet deep or more and threat to loss of
life around 83 dwelling units. A 500-year event would threaten loss of
life in 96 units. At a household density of 2.4 persons per household in
the Stewart Creek area, this would mean a threat to 199 lives in a
100-year event and 230 lives in a 500-year event.

[TABLE 3: THREAT TO LOSS OF LIFE IN STEWART CREEK FLOOD
ZONE]{.underline} DWELLING UNIT AT RISK LIVES AT RISK (2.4 PERSONS
[EVENT (WATER 3\' DEEP OR MORE) PER DWELLING UNIT)]{.underline} 500-YEAR
96 230 100-YEAR 83 199 50-YEAR 78 187 10-YEAR 52 125 2-YEAR 14 34

Another factor in the Stewart Creek flood plain increases the risk even
further. Because of differences in elevations, water can reach a depth
of 1 foot around many of the houses on Main Street and Sebree Avenue,
and at the same time reach a depth of 2 to 3 feet in the street. The
street becomes a flowing river long before water enters the houses,
trapping cars and making escape even more difficult. The tendency for
many floods to occur during the night increases the threat.
Approximately 15 houses along Sebree Avenue and Main Street are in this
unique situation.

501-17

Many of them are occupied by elderly people who would have great
difficulty wading through flowing water only 1 foot deep.

C.  [EFFECTS ON PERSONAL HEALTH AND SAFETY]{.underline}

> 1\. [Elderly:]{.underline} Elderly residents in a high risk flood area
> tend to suffer more than other segments of the population. They are
> less able to cope with the physical aspects of the flood\--both in
> terms of the flood itself and in terms of the after-effects\--and seem
> to suffer more from the anxiety of anticipating a potential flood.
> (One elderly resident commented that her \"stomach did flip-flops\"
> every time there was a heavy rainfall.)
>
> Flood waters in Stewart Creek can frequently reach a depth of several
> feet and move with considerable velocity, so that evacuation of homes
> is extremely dangerous for elderly people. There is an increased risk
> of loss of life for these people, especially if they try to leave
> their homes after the water starts to rise and become confused and
> frightened.
>
> Anxiety of anticipating a potential flood is particularly difficult
> for the elderly. At the time of the most recent flood (April 22,
> 1981), when heavy rains occurred during the evening, elderly residents
> stayed up more of the night to watch the advancing flood waters. This
> was the third floor event in a period of 2-1/2 weeks, and their
> anxiety was evident to outside observers.
>
> Clean-up activities after the flood water have subsided are also
> particularly difficult for the elderly. They are unable to make many
> repairs themselves, and must hire outside help or wait for assistance
> to clear away mud and debris, take up water-logged carpets and
> furnishings, and replace damaged equipment. Since many elderly are
> also low-income, costs of clean-up and replacement become prohibitive
> and housing quality deteriorates. Money spent for clean-up reduces
> purchasing power for food, clothing, and other necessities.
>
> At least four elderly residents in the Stewart Creek area suffer from
> heart conditions and other chronic health problems. Several households
> include miners retired on disability. The mental and physical stress
> of frequent flooding is a constant threat to health and well-being.
> This situation is compounded by the fact that many of these households
> are cut off from emergency services when Main Street and Sebree Avenue
> are flooded. In at least one instance, an elderly resident with a
> heart condition died before the emergency until could reach him\--the
> Emergency Squad truck having to take a lengthy detour around flooded
> street. In most severe floods, no reasonable detour is available.
>
> *It is evident that more than 60 elderly residents in the Stewart
> Creek flood zone suffer from a high risk of loss of life from flood
> waters from two to six times per year.*
>
> 2\. [Children:]{.underline} Young children in the Stewart Creek area
> are also suffering disproportionately from the effects of frequent
> flooding.
>
> 501-18
>
> They, too, are in danger of loss of life from flood waters that can be
> 3-4 feet deep or more, and that move with flood water, are often soggy
> and water-logged, so that they must be kept indoors or play
> out-of-doors on ground that causes them to be constantly wet and
> muddy.
>
> When roads are impassable due to flooding, between 30 and 40 children
> are unable to get to school\--and when a flood appears imminent, they
> do not attend school or must be sent home early to avoid danger.
> School routines are disrupted several times a year, and revenues are
> lost on absentee days. School officials report that children become
> anxious and inattentive when floods threaten.
>
> *Stewart Creek children also suffer the risk of loss of life, poor
> health conditions, and anxiety because of flooding.*
>
> 3\. [Minorities:]{.underline} The problems of constant flooding and
> threat of flooding seem to have an especially severe impact on the
> black resident of the Stewart Creek area. With the exception of one
> black household, all of the blacks live in the Lower Stewart Creek
> area, which encompasses a neighborhood know locally as \"Pump Row.\"
> This area suffers not only from the effects of Stewart Creek flooding
> but also from the overflow from Loch Mary Reservoir and other local
> drainage. This situation has become more severe in recent years as
> outlet conditions for Stewart Creek continue to deteriorate.
>
> Much of the land around the homes of the black families stays
> constantly wet and muddy. An area that once was used as a playing
> field and picnic area is now a wetland\--a breeding place for
> mosquitoes and, some residents believe, and environment that harbors
> snakes. (There are unconfirmed reports that water moccasins have been
> found there.)
>
> Homeowners are unable to use their yards during the summer because of
> wet conditions. A black couple with young children cite the
> impossibility of having a picnic table or swing set in their yard
> because of the mud, abundant salt marsh mosquitoes, and the threat of
> poisonous snakes. There are 15 children in this area who experience
> similar effects.
>
> *Blacks in the Stewart Creek area suffer a constant and increasing
> threat to loss of life or illness resulting not only from flooding but
> also from continuous wet conditions that provide an environment for
> disease-producing mosquitoes and aggravate chronic conditions such as
> arthritis and bronchitis.*
>
> 4\. [Low-Income Residents:]{.underline} There is an especially severe
> impact of flooding on low-income people; many Stewart Creek
> flood-plain residents qualify as poor or near-poor. Some of these
> low-income residents are elderly or black; others are younger families
> with children.

a.  Low-income people have no financial reserve to overcome flood
    losses. They must make special sacrifices to recover from property
    losses, or encumber themselves with debt.

> 501-19

b.  When the cost of recovery is too great to be absorbed by the
    low-income household, they must accept deteriorating quality of life
    when damages are unrepaired and losses are not replaced.

c.  Low-income households often cannot afford flood insurance, so that
    even this kind of flood loss protection is unattainable for them.

d.  Low-income households depend on small garden plots to meet food
    needs. These plots are frequently destroyed in flooding.

*Low-income households in the flood plain are often forced to accept the
cumulative effects of frequent flooding on quality-of-life, since they
lack the resources to repair damages and replace losses.*

5.  [Flood Zone Residents]{.underline}: A number of conditions
    associated with Stewart Creek flooding threaten the health and
    safety of all residents of the Stewart Creek flood zone.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
a.  Commodes back up and overflow into houses at the time of flooding
    and cannot be used until flood waters subside.

b.  Sewers become overloaded with flood water and overflow, spilling raw
    sewage into streets and yards for several hours after flooding has
    subsided. (This was observed 6 hours after a recent flood returned
    to in-bank flow.)

c.  Constant dampness in houses and yards aggravates chronic conditions
    such as bronchitis and arthritis.

d.  Accumulation of mud on streets and sidewalks is slippery, has caused
    falls which are particularly risky for the elderly.

e.  Much of the electrical wiring in houses is in poor condition and
    lacks safety grounding. Potential for electrical shock fatality is
    high in houses that experience interior flooding.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
6.  [Total Community]{.underline}: Some of the risks to life, health,
    and safety created by Stewart Creek flooding extend beyond the flood
    zone to the entire community of Earlington and even to other
    communities in the watershed. This is at least partially due to the
    fact that flooding of Main Street at Sebree Avenue effectively
    divides Earlington in half, with one side inaccessible to the other
    except via a lengthy detour. Since Main Street is a primary
    thoroughfare through Earlington, this also limits access of other
    communities west of Earlington to Route 41A, which is east of
    Stewart Creek, and is a primary north-south route to employment,
    health services, and shopping. Detours are necessary for about 8 to
    10 hours.

> 501-20

a.  Emergency vehicles, such as fire engines, emergency squad, and
    police vehicles are housed east of Stewart Creek. When flood waters
    block Main Street and Sebree Avenue, they cannot reach households
    west of Stewart Creek within minimum response time. At least one
    elderly resident has died because of delayed response by emergency
    vehicles.

b.  Pools of standing water that are left under houses and in yards
    after a flood provide breeding places for mosquitoes. Cases of
    encephalitis have been reported in the area, and seem to be
    increasing.

c.  Increased intensity of flooding in recent years threatens purity of
    drinking water. (Flood water contaminated the clear well in the
    water filter plant during the February 1976 flood. Since then, some
    flood-proofing has been done on the filter plant, but protection is
    minimal.)

*The life, health, and safety of not only flood plain residents but also
residents of all of Earlington and neighboring communities is threatened
by the persistent flood problem in Stewart Creek.*

D. [EFFECTS ON PROPERTY]{.underline}

Property effects include not only economic loss but also social effect.
Property damages lead to a diminished quality of life, attitudes of
frustration and despair, and feelings of loss. Much property that is
lost in floods (such as family mementos, pets, etc.) has greater
personal value than economic value. As such, it is not incorporated into
the calculation of economic costs, although its psychic cost to the
people affected can be considerable.

1.  [Housing]{.underline}: Persistent and frequent flooding in the
    Stewart Creek area has damaged many homes, necessitating expensive
    repairs and replacement for tenants and homeowners.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
a.  Flooded furnaces must be cleaned or replaced, and heat is often
    inoperative during flooding. This is an additional hardship, since
    flooding occurs most often during the winter and spring months.

b.  Foundations are damaged, so that houses sink or porches pull away.

c.  Carpeting is often damaged, so that some residents cannot invest in
    quality carpeting\--must use rugs that can be easily rolled up and
    stored above flood level.

d.  Insulation becomes waterlogged and useless.

> 501-21

e.  Painted surfaces below the floodline, such as steps and foundations,
    crack and peel.

f.  Damaged floors must be repaired or replaced.

g.  Termite risk increases with dampness under houses.

Some residents have been so discouraged by the persistent damage that
they have delayed repairs or decided against any further home
improvement. Others are unable to bear the cost of further rejuvenation.
As a result, housing quality in some units has slowly deteriorated. On
the other hand, many residents, in anticipation of the proposed SCS
flood project; have undertaken extensive upgrading of houses such as the
application of aluminum siding, the addition of carpets, foundation
repairs, etc.

Eighty-five percent of the homes in the Stewart Creek area are
owner-occupied. Pride of ownership is evident in the many
well-maintained but modest homes in the area. Existing housing quality
is evidence of the perseverance of Stewart Creek residents to maintain
the quality of their housing environment in spite of adverse conditions.

The flood threat in Stewart Creek has undoubtedly had an effect on
housing market conditions. Turnover is slow, and real estate agents warn
prospective buyers about the risks of locating there. Housing values are
lower than they would be in comparable, high-flood free areas.

2.  [Automobiles]{.underline}: Over the history of Stewart Creek
    flooding, numerous automobiles have been damaged beyond repair.
    Flood waters are heavily laden with runoff-borne pyrites and
    sulfates that are converted to acids when they contact air and
    water, and are highly corrosive. A recent test during moderate
    flooding conditions revealed a highly-acidic pH of 4.3.\*
    .Automobiles that survive the flood often require extensive repairs:
    new starters, muffler and exhaust systems, etc. In the lower Stewart
    Creek area, mud must be washed from automobiles daily to prevent
    deterioration.

> Acid flood water is also extremely damaging to other metal equipment
> such as appliances, lawn mowers, swing sets, etc.

3.  [Gardens]{.underline}: Many Stewart Creek area residents are
    gardeners, and depend on small vegetable gardens to supplement their
    food budgets. Gardens are extremely vulnerable to flooding and are
    often washed away or destroyed by a spring flood. In the lower
    Stewart Creek area where the soil remains almost constantly
    waterlogged, it is extremely difficult to establish and maintain
    either a garden or a lawn.

4.  [Pets]{.underline}: There are numerous reports from residents of
    loss or threatened losses of pets (kittens, rabbits, dogs). While
    this may not be a significant impact from a larger perspective it is
    another factor in the diminished quality of life that must be
    endured by flood plain residents, contributing to their sense of
    anxiety and frustration.

> Source: Stormwater test, May 27, 1981, performed by the Kentucky
> Division of
>
> Water.
>
> 501-22

5.  [Other Property Damage]{.underline}: Since most of the property is
    residential in the Stewart Creek area, property damage is primarily
    associated with houses, home furnishings, and household equipment.
    However, Kentucky Utilities has an office building and storage lot
    in the flood-risk zone. To date, water has not entered the building,
    although it has risen as high as the entrance walk. However, water
    has reached a depth of several inches in the storage lot where
    equipment, including transformers, is stored. The possibility
    exists, in the case of a severe flood, for these transformers to be
    damaged and leak PCB\'s into flood waters, adding another serious
    pollution risk to the flood area.

> Earlington officials state that it has cost them approximately
> \$160,000 to repair damage to the water filter plant resulting from
> flooding over a period of several years.
>
> VII\. [COMPARISON OF ALTERNATIVES ON THE BASIS OF SOCIAL
> WELL-BEING]{.underline}
>
> Four alternatives have been examined in terms of their effect on the
> social well-being of the residents of Earlington and, particularly,
> the residents of the Stewart Creek flood zone:

-   [Alternative #1]{.underline} - [Present Condition]{.underline}

-   [Alternative #4]{.underline} - [NED Plan]{.underline}

> Two floodwater retarding structures

-   [Alternative #5]{.underline} - [Selected Plan]{.underline}

> Channel Work
>
> Two floodwater retarding structures

Table 4 compares alternatives on the basis of threat to loss of life.
Measurement of threat to loss of life is based on the criterion of 3
feet or more of water around the home.

Table 5 compares these alternatives on the basis of factors in the
Social Well-Being Account. (This project falls under the jurisdiction of
the 1973 version of [Principles]{.underline} [and]{.underline}
[Standards]{.underline}. Therefore, social effects are outlined
according to the Social Well-Being Account rather than the Other Social
Effects Account.)

501-23

[TABLE 4: COMPARISON OF THREAT TO LOSS OF LIFE FOR FOUR ALTERNATIVE
PLANS, STEWART CREEK WATERSHED PROJECT]{.underline}

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

> DWELLING UNITS LIVES AT RISK (2.4

AT RISK (WATER PERSONS PER [ALTERNATIVE EVENT 3 FT. DEEP OR MORE)
DWELLING UNIT)\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

#1-PRESENT 500-YEAR 96 230

CONDITION 100-YEAR 83 199

> 50-YEAR 78 187
>
> 10-YEAR 52 125
>
> 2-YEAR 14 34

#4-NED PLAN 500-YEAR 69 166

(TWO 100-YEAR 42 101

STRUCTURES) 50-YEAR 34 82

> 10-YEAR 19 46
>
> 2-YEAR 7 17

#5-SELECTED 500-YEAR 36 86

PLAN (CHANNEL 100-YEAR 11\* 26

AND TWO 50-YEAR 6 14

STRUCTURES) 10-YEAR 0 0

> 2-YEAR 0 0

\* Only 8 of these houses will have interior flooding

501-24

[TABLE 5: COMPARISON OF IMPACTS OF ALTERNATIVES ON THE SOCIAL
ENVIRONMENT: SOCIAL WELL-BEING ACCOUNT]{.underline}

[\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_]{.underline}

[SOCIAL WELL-BEING FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 1 - PRESENT CONDITION ALTERNATIVE
5 - SELECTED PLAN ALTERNATIVE 4 - NED PLAN]{.underline}

Life, Health, and Safety 199 lives at risk, 83 dwelling units 26 lives
at risk, 11 dwelling units 101 lives at risk, 42 dwelling

surrounded by 3 feet of water in a surrounded by 3 feet of water in a
units surrounded by 3 feet of

100-year event. 100 year event. Reduces threat of water in a 100-year
event.

loss of life over present condition

by 173 lives.

230 lives at risk, 96 dwelling units 86 lives at risk, 36 dwelling units
166 lives at risk, 69 dwelling

surrounded by 3 feet of water in a surrounded by 3 feet of water in a
units surrounded by 3 feet of

500-year event. 500-year event. water in a 500-year event.

Risk of contamination of purified No risk of drinking water Minimal
reduction in risk of

water in water filter plant. contamination. drinking water
contamination.

Health threatened by sewage leaks, Elimination of sewage leaks. Health
will continue to be

breeding of mosquitoes, damp threatened by sewage leaks,

conditions that irritate arthritis, Reduction in magnitude of breeding
of mosquitoes, damp

bronchitis, etc. damp conditions. conditions, that irritate arthritis,

bronchitis, etc., but not as

severely as at present.

Emergency services (ambulance, No loss of emergency services. Emergency
services

fire, police, etc.) unavailable to (ambulance, fire, police, etc.)

one-half of the community during will continue to be unavailable

the duration of the flood. to one-half of the community

during the peak discharge of

the flood, but less often than at

present.

501-25

501-26 SOCIAL WELL-BEING ACCOUNT (continued)

\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

[SOCIAL WELL-BEING FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 1 - PRESENT CONDITION ALTERNATIVE
5 - SELECTED PLAN ALTERNATIVE 4 - NED PLAN]{.underline}

Eliminates frequent low-level Little effect in reduction in

flooding that occurs several times threat to loss of life over

a year. present condition, or in

reduction of frequent, low-

level flooding.

Real Income Distribution Low-income families experiencing Elimination of
property damages Reduction in number of low-

decreasing resources and diminished and enhanced quality of life for
income families experiencing

quality of life due to frequent and all families, including low-income
decreasing resources and

recurring flood damages. families. diminished quality of life due

to frequent and recurring flood

damages.

Population Growth Increased out-migration and lack of Alleviation of
flood threat may Continued out-migration and

growth due partially to flood conditions. stabilize population and
reduce lack of growth due partially to

out-migration. flood conditions.

Housing and Neighborhood Continued deterioration of housing and
Improvement in housing quality Reduction in deterioration of

neighborhood quality due to flood and value\--residents anxious to
housing and neighborhood

damages. make improvements once flood quality due to flood damages.

threat is eliminated.

Education 30-40 children miss school several No loss of school days due
to 30-40 children miss school

days a year because flood conditions flooding. No loss of revenues
several days a year. Student

block transportation. Student funding because of student absence due to
funding reduced.

is reduced. flood.

Community Cohesion Community cohesion is strong in Community cohesion
maintained Community cohesion is strong

anticipation of project. No project and enhanced by retaining but may
eventually erode as

may result in disillusionment and neighborhood patterns and flood
damages continue.

disorganization. eliminating flood risk.

VIII\. [JUSTIFICATION FOR SELECTED PLAN]{.underline}

The selected plan for Stewart Creek Watershed consists of 9,100 linear
feet of channel work and two floodwater retarding structures. This
combination will provide the best solution to the existing problem with
a minimum of adverse social effects and maximum beneficial social
effects. Table 6 displays adverse and beneficial effects on social
well-being for the selected plan.

[TABLE 6: ADVERSE AND BENEFICIAL SOCIAL EFFECTS FOR THE STEWART CREKK
WATERSHED RECOMMENDED PLAN]{.underline}

SOCIAL WELL-

[BEING FACTOR BENEFICIAL EFFECTS ADVERSE EFFECTS]{.underline}

Life, Health and Safety Prevents risk to loss of 173 lives Temporary
increase in air and

in a 100-year event, 144 lives in water pollution during

a 500-year event. construction. Some disruption of

normal life patterns during

Elimination of threat to channel work construction.

drinking water quality.

Eliminates frequent low-level

flooding that occurs several times

a year.

Real Income Distribution Elimination of severe property None.

damages and enhanced quality of

life for all families, including low-

income families.

Create 87 temporary jobs for area

residents, many of whom are poor

or near-poor.

Population Growth Alleviation of flood threat may None.

help to stabilize population and

reduce out-migration.

Housing and Improvement in housing quality Temporary disruption of
travel

Neighborhood and value\--residents anxious to patterns and yards during

make improvements once flood completion of channel work.

threat is eliminated.

501-27

Education School revenues increased None.

because pupil-days are not lost

due to flooding.

Population-Segment Benefits most significantly affect: None.

Differences 38 elderly households

16 black households

26 low-income households

(that include some black and

elderly.)

Community Cohesion Community cohesion is maintained

and enhanced by retaining

neighborhood patterns and

eliminating flood risk.

501-28

[Information Sources]{.underline}

1.  Booker Associates, Inc. [Report of Nonstructural Flood Plain
    Management Alternatives: Stewart Creek Watershed, Hopkins County,
    Kentucky.]{.underline} Lexington, Kentucky (December 1977)

2.  Earlington Centennial Commission. [Earlington]{.underline}:
    [1870-1970]{.underline}. Earlington, Kentucky (July 1970)

3.  Koebel, C. Theodore (ed.) [Housing Needs and Opportunities in
    Kentucky: A Summary Report]{.underline} Frankfort: Kentucky Housing
    Corporation (December 14, 1979)

4.  Newspaper files: [The Madisonville Messenger]{.underline}.
    Madisonville, Kentucky.

5.  [U.S]{.underline}. [Census]{.underline} [of]{.underline}
    [Population]{.underline} - 1960, 1970, 1980.

6.  Personal interviews with community leaders and local residents.

7\. Correspondence from community leaders and local residents to the
Soil Conservation Service.

501-29

501.11 Basic social assessment: Waimanalo Watershed, Hawaii.

(a) The Waimanalo Watershed Plan-Environmental Impact Statement
    (plan-EIS) is a more typical example of social evaluation in project
    planning. Elements of the social evaluation are integrated into the
    total plan, rather than being presented as a separate report.

(b) Excerpts from the plan-EIS are displayed here to show how the social
    aspects of this particular project have been documented. Ideally,
    social evaluation is considered as part of the planning process from
    its inception and, therefore, is an integral part of it.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
(1) Project setting

> [SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC CHARACTERISTICS]{.underline}

The population of Waimanalo Valley increased 13 percent from 6,777 in
1970 to 7,674 in l980, according to the U.S. Census. The valley has one
of the highest proportions of native Hawaiians and part Hawaiians of any
community on Oahu. Residents of the valley generally have larger and
younger families and lower per capita income than prevails for the rest
of Oahu. Housing in Waimanalo is primarily single family, privately
owned or being purchased\--67 percent as compared to 44.3 percent for
Oahu.

Many residents in Waimanalo Valley have a common goal\--they have
expressed a strong determination to retain the rural character of this
valley, and they have an appreciation for the importance of a viable
diversified agriculture in achieving their goal (Ref. 5).

Only 2.6 percent of the work force are employed in agriculture\--nearly
all of these in Waimanalo Valley. Honolulu is the source of most
employment. There is very little commercial or service development in
the valley, and most of the shopping is done either in neighboring
Kailua or in Honolulu. Income from service and sales to tourists is
relatively insignificant in the valley. Current annual gross value of
agricultural production in the valley is estimated to exceed
\$12,000,000 (Ref. 4).

Hawaii has a goal of greater production of its consumed fruit and
vegetables. At present over two-thirds of this fresh produce is imported
(Ref. 23 and 27).

\(2\) Formulation of alternatives. (See Table D.)

\(3\) Project effects. (See Table 4.)

[Other Social Effects]{.underline}

[Beneficial]{.underline} effects (to urban and community impacts)
include the creation of 100 new jobs in agriculture that probably would
be filled from the Waimanalo community. The regional gross income
benefits of \$4,089.000 would largely be distributed among family income
classes in proportion to those involved in agriculture. Though Waimanalo
farms are small, family net income level is often quite good because of
high-value crops and family labor in highly intensive cropping. Over
half of the benefits from irrigation will accrue to families with
incomes of \$20,000 per year.

501-30

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

Benefits to life, health, and safety include an important reduction of
safety hazards by replacing unsafe antiquated wooden flumes with buried
pipe siphons, and replacing open ditches with closed pipe systems,
eliminating the need for continual herbicide application. Kailua
Reservoir will no longer be a part of the irrigation system, and the
remote threat of damage to 21 houses by the flood from a structural
failure would be reduced. Health hazards will be reduced by improved
solid-waste collection sites that encourage more orderly garbage
disposal.

Benefits to long-term productivity will accrue from the project
encouraging the maintenance of 1,199 acres of prime and important
farmland in agricultural use. This occurs because profitable irrigated
farming is better able to compete against urbanization for the use of
land than is marginal farming or dry pasture.

Benefits from energy conservation will be realized by replacing onfarm
sprinkler pumps with gravity pressures for most lands now irrigated.
Booster pump energy to irrigate some of the additional acres at higher
elevations and pump energy to use the sewage effluent will be required.

[Adverse]{.underline} effects to the community include the annualized
local costs of the project which will be borne by local residents in
proportion to the user fees and income taxes paid. This concentrates the
payment of the local costs on families with higher incomes.

Adverse effects to life, health, and safety include the hazard to 77
houses from the remote threat of a sudden failure of the
60-million-gallon reservoir on the mauka end of Mahailua Street. Massive
earth-quake damage would be the most likely event that might create such
failure.

Adverse effects to long-term productivity would occur from the
commitment of approximately 13.6 acres for the reservoirs and
approximately 0.2 acre for solid-waste collection sites.

Adverse energy effects include the consumption of 660 billion BTU\'s to
fabricate and install the project measures and 150,000 kWh/yr for
operation.

(420-V-SSM, Feb. 1984)

501-31

TABLE D - SUMMARY COMPARISON OF CANDIDATE PLANS

Waimanalo Watershed, Hawaii

ALTERNATIVES [ALTERNATIVE 1 -]{.underline} [ALTERNATIVE 2-]{.underline}
[ALTERNATIVE 3-]{.underline} [ALTERNATIVE 4-]{.underline}

COMPARISON NATIONAL ECONOMIC ENVIRONMENTAL NONSTRUCTURAL RECOMMENDED

[FACTORS DEVELOPMENT (NED) QUALITY (EQ)]{.underline}

[OSE ACCOUNT]{.underline}

Beneficial

Preserve the Rural Will add 62 farming units. Will add 40 farming units.
No change in number of Will add 40 farming units.

Character of Waimanalo farming units.

Population Estimates for 9,450 and 12,000 - Ag. Park 9,450 and 12,000 -
Ag. Park 9,450 and 12,000 - No Ag. 9,450 and 12,000 - Ag. Park

Year 2000 and Year 2020 Plan may encourage 10,000 Plan may encourage
10,000 Park Plan. Plan may encourage 10,000

for Year 2020. for Year 2020. for Year 2020.

Adverse

Low-Probability Hazard New reservoir - 77 New reservoir - 77 Existing
reservoirs - 21 New reservoir - 77

from Structural Failure residences could be residences could be
residences could be residences could be

of Embankment inundated. inundated. inundated. inundated.

Energy Required to 150,000 kWh/yr 135,000 kWh/yr Minor 150,000 kWh/yr

Operate the System

(Pumping)

Energy Required to 700 billion BTU\'s. 668 billion BTU\'s. 29 billion
BTU\'s. 660 billion BTU\'s

the System.

501-32

TABLE 4 - PROJECT EFFECTS

Waimanalo Watershed, Hawaii

[OTHER SOCIAL EFFECTS]{.underline}

[Beneficial Effects]{.underline} [Adverse Effects]{.underline}

[Components]{.underline} [Measure of Effects]{.underline}
[Components]{.underline} [Measure of Effects]{.underline}

A. Urban and Community Impacts 1. Create 100 low- to A. Urban and
Community Impacts 1. Annualized local costs of

medium-income jobs in project total \$714,000. These

agriculture costs are borne by family

income classes as follows:

2\. Create regional income

benefits of \$4,089,000

distributed by family income

costs as follows:

Family Percent of Estimated Percent Family Percent of Estimated Percent

[Income Class Population in Class of Benefits to Class Income Class
Population in Class of Benefits to Class]{.underline}

Less than \$10,000 36.6% 20% Less than \$10,000 36.6% 5%

\$10,000-\$20,000 37.3% 25% \$10,000-\$20,000 37.3% 20%

More than \$20,000 26.1% 55% More than \$20,000 26.1% 75%

B. Life, Health, and Safety 1. Reduces safety hazards to B. Life,
Health, and Safety 1. Creates flood hazard to 77

WIS maintenance employees. houses and about 350 people

from sudden failure of off-

2\. Reduces flood hazard to stream reservoir.

21 houses and about 95 people

from sudden failure of Kailua

Reservoir.

3\. Reduces potential health

hazards by improved facilities

for solid waste.

501-33

C. Long-Term Productivity 1. Encourages maintenance C. Long-term
productivity 1. Commits 13.6 acres to the two

of 1,199 acres of important reservoirs.

farmland in ag. use.

2\. Commits 0.2 acre to solid waste

collection sites.

D. Energy Requirements 1. Makes use of gravity D. Energy Requirements 1.
Installation:

pressures to save pumping 660 billion BTU\'s.

energy.

2\. Operation:

150,000 kWh/yr.

501-34

SOCIAL CONSIDERATIONS IN WATERSHED PROTECTION PLANS

[Project Setting]{.underline}

Describe the farms and the farm community, such as:

Number and size of farms.

Types of farms and crops grown.

Number and percent of absentee owners.

Number and percent of part-time farmers.

Number and percent of female, minority, limited resource farmers.

Significant ethnic groups.

[Problem and Opportunity Identification]{.underline}

Describe any social factors that may present particular problems or
opportunities relative to conservation. For example, is there a cultural
attitude about conservation tillage as \"trash farming\" that makes
selling that practice difficult? Do farmers lack economic resources or
management capabilities to implement certain recommended practices?

[Inventory and Forecasting]{.underline}

Describe the population that will be targeted for promoting the adoption
of conservation practices such as:

Number and percent or cooperators.

2

Number and percent of active conservation plans.

Individual and community attitudes toward conservation.

Response to proposed watershed protection plan.

Likely participation rates (should be supported in I&A Report with
qualitative or

quantitative data.)

[Formulation of Alternatives]{.underline}

Note any aspects of different alternatives that may impact participation
rates. For example, does one alternative propose a practice that is more
likely to be adopted than other practices (and why?)

[Recommended Plan]{.underline}

Provide justification for the establishment of land treatment goals. If
the plan states that 80 percent of problem land will be treated, what is
the justification for making this statement? (The fact that the Soil and
Water Conservation District Board agrees to this goal is usually not a
sufficient indication that the goal can be attained.)

Describe special measures that will be taken to assure increased
adoption of practices.

[Effects of Recommended Plan]{.underline}

Include social impacts of erosion control such as:

Preservation of productivity of the land.

Improved quality of life.

3

Reduction in offsite impacts.

Displacement.

Alleviation of flood risk.

[Consultation and Public Participation]{.underline}

Note activities that have taken place to document likely participation
rates for various alternatives.