Yup’ik Language Assistance Tribal Outreach: Report to the Alaska Division of Elections

The Division of Elections contracted with the Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) at the University of Alaska Anchorage to help develop a network of key tribal organization and village representatives in the Bethel census area to work with the division on their Yup’ik language assistance program. The division asked ISER to help them communicate with tribes about the division’s current programs and to document additional ways that the division can improve its language assistance program. The Alaska Division of Elections is required under the Federal Voting Rights Act (VRA) to provide language assistance to voters in areas where more than 5% of the voting age citizens are members of a single-language minority and are limited English proficient. In July 2008, a federal court ordered the division to take the following remedial actions, many of which the division had already taken prior to the court order: 1. Provide mandatory poll worker training. 2. Hire a language assistance coordinator fluent in Yup'ik. 3. Recruit bi-lingual poll workers or translators. 4. Provide sample ballots in written Yup'ik. 5. Provide pre-election publicity in Yup'ik. 6. Ensure the accuracy of translations. 7. Provide a Yup'ik glossary of election terms. 8. Submit pre-election and post-election reports. Although the division has a Yup’ik language assistance program and has been addressing the court order, interviews with Bethel census area residents show that some people are unaware of the elements in the division’s language assistance plan. In addition, some Bethel area residents said they feel the election workers and the division should interpret the meaning of the ballot measures and explain the positions of the various candidates—activities that are forbidden by state statute. ISER agreed to help the division address this lack of awareness and the misconceptions about their programs by contacting tribal organizations and inviting them to attend a meeting in Bethel, Alaska, on May 27, 2009. Part I of this report, issued in July 2009, describes ISER’s contacts with tribal organizations and summarizes the comments and feedback from the participants at the election outreach meeting in Bethel. Part II describes ISER’s post-meeting contacts with tribal organizations and meeting participants and summarizes their responses to the post-meeting survey.Alaska Division of ElectionsIntroduction / Part I: Pre-Meeting Comments and Meeting Summary / Part II: Post-Meeting Feedback / Appendix A: ISER Script for Pre-Meeting Contact / Appendix B: ISER Letter of Invitation to Tribal Organizations / Appendix C: ISER Letter of Invitation to PLaintiff Tribral Organizations / Appendix D. List of Participants - Bethel Election Outreach Meeting / Appendix E: Agenda - Bethel Election Outreach Meeting / Appendix F: Pre-Meeting Interview Responses / Appendix G: Post-Meeting Letter to Tribes / Appendix H: Post Meeting Survey / Appendix I: Post-Meeting Interview Summar

Kids Count Alaska 2006/2007

About This Year’s Book Every year the Kids Count Alaska data book reports on how the children of Alaska are doing. But we also like to tell readers a bit more about life in Alaska, to help them understand the place Alaska’s children call home. This year, we’re celebrating the wildlife that is so much a part of life in Alaska. Alaskans watch, hunt, photograph, and coexist with hundreds of large and small species of animals and birds. That coexistence is not always easy for either the wildlife or the people, but it is always interesting. An increasing number of tourists are also being drawn to Alaska for the opportunity to see wildlife that is either scarce or non-existent in other areas of the United States and the world. The whimsical wildlife illustrations on the cover and at the start of each indicator section are the work of Sebastian Amaya Garber, a talented young artist who grew up in Alaska but is now working toward a degree in industrial design at Western Washington University in Bellingham, Washington. The flip side of each illustration describes something about the specific animals and birds we’re profiling, which are: The sea otter, whose rich fur brought the Russians to Alaska • in the century before the United States bought Alaska The brown bear, one of the most respected and feared land • animals in North America The raven, which plays a big role in Alaska Native culture and • is one of the smartest, toughest birds anywhere The puffin, whose large, yellow-orange bill and orange feet • make it a stand-out in Alaska’s coastal waters The moose, which can weigh up to 1,500 pounds and is • often seen wandering neighborhoods and crossing streets in Alaska’s largest urban areas The humpback whale, whose dramatic breaches make it a • favorite of Alaskans and visitors along the southern coast of Alaska in the summertime Whahat is Kids Count Alaska? Kids Count Alaska is part of a nationwide program, sponsored by the Annie E. Casey Foundation, to collect and publicize information about children’s health, safety, and economic status. We pull together information from many sources and present it all in one place. We hope this book gives Alaskans a broad picture of how the state’s children are doing and provides parents, policymakers, and others interested in the welfare of children with information they need to improve life for children and families. Our goals are: Broadly distributing information about the status of Alaska’s • children Creating an informed public, motivated to help children• Comparing the status of children in Alaska with children • nationwide, and presenting additional Alaska indicators (including regional breakdowns) when possible Who Are Alaska’s Children? More than 206,000 children ages 18 or younger live in Alaska—just under a third of Alaska’s 2006 population of about 671,000. That’s an increase of about 15% in the number of children since 1990. During the past 15 years the age structure of Alaska children has also changed, with younger children making up a declining share and teenagers a growing share. In 1990, children ages 4 or younger made up 31% of all children; by 2006 that share had dropped to 26%. Among those 15 to 18, the 1990 share was about 16%, but it had risen to 22% by 2006. Boys outnumber girls in Alaska by close to 6%. There are more boys than girls in every age group. Even among infants, boys outnumbered girls by 8% in 2006. Alaska’s children have also grown more racially diverse in the past two decades, as illustrated by the figure showing Alaska’s school children by race. In 1988, 68% of school children were White and 32% were from minorities—primarily Alaska Natives.Wells Fargo. Annie E. Casey Foundation.Introduction / Infancy / Economic Well-Being / Education / Children In Danger / Juvenile Justic

Analysis of ISER 2008-2009 Survey Data

In September 2008, the superintendent of the Anchorage School District and the mayor of Anchorage sent a letter to the governor of Alaska, reporting what they thought might be an influx of students into Anchorage from rural communities. Enrollment in the school district was higher than expected, and it coincided with the largest-ever Alaska Permanent Fund dividend and with a one-time payment of $1,200 the state made per person, to help offset high energy costs. Researchers at the Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) at UAA have a longstanding interest in migration patterns in Alaska and the Arctic, and they saw the increased enrollment in Anchorage schools as a potential opportunity to better understand: • If rural Alaskans are moving to Anchorage • Where they are coming from • Why they are moving So with the cooperation of the Anchorage School District, ISER conducted a survey of the parents or guardians of students who had enrolled in Anchorage in the 2007-2008 or 2008-2009 school years and who had transferred in from other Alaska school districts. Besides finding out where students were coming from—and why—another purpose of the study was to provide the Anchorage School District and the Municipality of Anchorage with information about what they could do to help students and families who are new to the city. To our knowledge, this may be the first survey ever conducted to find out why people move to Anchorage from other areas of Alaska.University of Alaska Foundation. BP-Conoco Phillips Charter AgreementExecutive Summary / Introduction / Methods / Where are Alaskan's Moving From? / Organization of Survey Findings / Migration Patterns / Who is Moving? / Challenges and Transitions / Conclusions and Recommendations / References / Appendix A. Survey For

Kids Count Alaska 2008

We’re pleased to announce that Kids Count Alaska is part of a new site, the Kids Count Data Center (datacenter.kidscount.org). Developed by the KIDS COUNT national program, the site gives easy access to data on children and teenagers for every state and hundreds of cities and counties across the country. For Alaska, you can select indicators for each of the state’s seven regions and create your own maps, trend lines, and charts. There are also maps and graphs you can put on your Web site or blog. You can go directly to that national site, or you can link from our Web site (www.kidscount.alaska.edu). We hope you’ll find the new data and features helpful. This book and all previous data books are available on our Web site, and each data book is divided into sections for faster downloading. Also on our site is a link to the most recent national KIDS COUNT data book, as well as to other publications and reports. About This Year’s Book Alaska is celebrating 50 years as a state in 2009—and as part of the celebration, we decided to illustrate this year’s data book with historic photos of Alaska’s children before statehood. We also used information from the U.S. Census Bureau to take a broad look at how conditions have changed for Alaska’s children since statehood. In the Highlights at the end of this section (pages 7 to 10) you’ll find some comparisons of the social and economic wellbeing of children in Alaska in 1959 and today. What is Kids Count Alaska? Kids Count Alaska is part of a nationwide program, sponsored by the Annie E. Casey Foundation, to collect and publicize information about children’s health, safety, and economic status. We pull together information from many sources and present it all in one place. We hope this book gives Alaskans a broad picture of how the state’s children are doing and provides parents, policymakers, and others interested in the welfare of children with information they need to improve life for children and families. Our goals are: • Distributing information about the status of Alaska’s children • Creating an informed public, motivated to help children • Comparing the status of children in Alaska with children nationwide, and presenting additional Alaska indicators (including regional breakdowns) when possibleAnnie E. Casey FoundationIntroduction / Infancy / Economic Well-Being / Education / Children in Danger / Juvenile Justic

Kids Count Alaska 2009-2010

For information on children across America, visit the Kids Count Data Center (www.datacenter.kidscount.org). Developed by the national KIDS COUNT program, the site provides data on children and teenagers for every state and hundreds of cities and counties. For Alaska, you can select indicators for each of the state’s seven regions and create your own maps, trend lines, and charts. There are also maps and graphs you can put on your website or blog. You can go directly to that national site or link from our website (kidscount.alaska.edu). This book and all previous data books are available on our website, with each book divided into sections for faster downloading. Also on our site is a link to the most recent national KIDS COUNT data book, as well as other publications and reports.Annie E. Casey FoundationIntroduction / Infancy / Economic Well-Being / Education / Children in Danger / Juvenile Justic

Potential Supplies and Costs of Waste Wood and Paper in Southcentral Alaska

During the last three years, the Alaska Center for Appropriate Technology has developed a manufacturing process that would use wood and paper waste to produce a high-quality medium-density fiberboard. The developers of the manufacturing process have determined that a fiberboard plant would require 30,000 to 60,000 tons of wood and paper waste annually to make it feasible. The Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation asked the Institute of Social and Economic Research to determine if there is a sufficient supply of wood and paper waste available in Southcentral Alaska to make a fiberboard plant practical. This study focuses on identifying available sources of wood and paper waste in the Anchorage area because we found it is the only area in Southcentral Alaska where there are adequate supplies. The costs of obtaining these materials for a manufacturing plant depend on the cost of purchasing, collecting, hauling, and sorting waste from many different sources. These costs also vary for many reasons; and to reflect these variations, we have developed low and high estimates of the cost per ton of obtaining each source of wastes. Section III presents these low and high cost estimates.Alaska Department of Environmental Conservatio

University of Alaska Engineering Programs: A Community View

The University of Alaska is developing a strategic plan for using its engineering resources to meet the needs of the engineering community. The goal of the university is to graduate enough engineers to meet the current and anticipated employment needs in engineering, as well as to provide appropriate professional development courses. Working from a list provided by the UAF and UAA engineering deans, we conducted 35 interviews with representatives of 30 private companies and government agencies. This report summarizes what we learned in those interviews. We start with a description of our methodology (including a summary of the limited information we were able to collect on the numbers and types of engineers employed by organizations we surveyed). In the main part of the report we present a qualitative analysis of respondents’ answers, grouped under four headings—current and future needs for engineers; ability of the University of Alaska engineering programs to meet the employment needs of the engineering community; recommended changes and initiatives for the university’s engineering programs; and observations to share. We then summarize our conclusions. Appendixes A and B present our letter to respondents and our telephone interview script.MARK HAMILTON, PRESIDENT, UNIVERSITY OF ALASKA; UA STATEWIDE ACADEMIC COUNCIL (SAC); ENGINEERING DEANS, UAA AND UA

2009 Alaska Health Workforce Vacancy Study

Alaska continues to experience health professional shortages. The state has long had a deficient “supply side” characterized by insufficient numbers of key health workers whose recruitment, retention, and training have been impeded by Alaska’s remoteness, harsh climate, rural isolation, low population density, and scarce training resources. Alaska is the only state without a pharmacy school and lacks its own dental and physical therapy schools as well. Health professional shortages can be decreased through the start of new training programs, the expansion of existing programs, and the improvement of the effectiveness of recruitment and retention efforts. However, strategic planning and the execution of such programs require valid and accurate data. To this end, stakeholders such as the Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority (AMHTA) and Alaskan's For Access to Health Care (ACCESS), along with schools and departments within the University of Alaska Anchorage (UAA), funded the Alaska Center for Rural Health-Alaska’s AHEC (ACRH) and the Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) to conduct a comprehensive health workforce study during winter and spring of 2009. This report highlights employers’ needs for employees to fill budgeted positions. This is different from a needs assessment that would take into account population demographics and disease incidence and prevalence. This health workforce study is an assessment of health manpower shortage based on budgeted staff positions and their vacancies in organizations throughout the state. Respondents included part-time positions, which resulted in our counting full-time equivalent (FTE) rather than individuals (“bodies”). In situations where a position was divided among more than one occupation (e.g., Dental Assistant and Billing Clerk), we asked the respondent to count the position under which they considered the position’s “primary occupation.” This was a point-in-time cross-sectional study. Recently filled vacancies or imminent vacancies were not counted. Positions filled by relief/temporary/locum/contract health workers were counted as vacancies only if these workers were temporarily filling a currently vacant, budgeted position. Due to budget and time constraints, we were not able to conduct a trend analysis that is a comparison of this study’s findings and the prior 2007 study. The key questions this study sought to answer were (1) How many budgeted positions, either full- or part-time, existed in organizations providing health services in Alaska? (2) How many of these budgeted positions were currently vacant? (3) What was the vacancy rate? (4) How many of the organizations that employ these occupations hired new graduates of training programs? (5) How many of the currently vacant budgeted positions (#2) could be filled by new graduates of training programs? (6) What were the mean and maximum length of time, expressed in months, that the vacancies have existed? (7) What were the principal, underlying causes of vacancies? The study was designed in consultation with an advisory group that included AMHTA, ACCESS, and UAA. The study targeted 93 health occupations. The unit of analysis was the employment site by organization type, which allowed for the allocation of positions and vacancies by geographic region. For each employer, we identified the staff person most knowledgeable about hiring and vacancies. In large organizations this meant that one employer might provide information about multiple sites and organization types; smaller employers were responsible for only a single site.Alaska Mental Health Trust Authority. Alaskan's for Access to Health Care. University of Alaska Fairbanks, Tanana Valley campus Telemedicine program. University of Alaska Anchorage, Community and Technical College. University of Alaska Anchorage, School of Nursing.Acknowledgements / Executive Summary / Table of Contents / Problem and Rationale / Methodology / Limitations of Study / Findings / Appendix A. List of Health Occupations / Appendix B. Health Workforce Surveys / Appendix C. Cover Letter Accompanying Survey Forms / Appendix D. Confidence Intervals for Positions, Vacancies, Number of Vacancies Filled with New Graduates, and Length of Longest Vacancy in Months / Appendix E. Tables of Samples and Estimates of Positions, Vacancies, Vacancy Rates, Number of Vacancies Filled with New Graduates, Mean and Maximum Length of Longest Vacancy in Months / Appendix F. Tables of Occupations Sorted By Estimates of Positions, Vacancies, Vacancy Rates, Number of Vacancies Filled with New Graduates, Mean and Maximum Length of Longest Vacancy in Month

Evaluation of the Alaska Native Health Board Sanitation Facility Operation and Maintenance Program: Final Report on Phase III Projects and Extended Phase II Projects

Nina Miller, project manager at the Alaska Native Health Board, and Joe Sarcone, rural sanitation coordinator at EPA’s Alaska Regional Office, were also invaluable members of the team, providing all the field notes, project documents, and implementation information for this report. We gratefully acknowledge the cooperation of personnel in the demonstration communities, as well as review and consultation by members of the project's coordinating committee.The Alaska Native Health Board (ANHB) has a multi-year project funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Office of Wastewater Management, to administer sanitation facilities operations and maintenance (O&M) demonstration grants in rural Alaska. Nine projects were funded in the first wave, beginning in April 1996. Nineteen projects, including two carry- overs from the first wave, were funded in the second wave, which started in April 1997. The third and last wave, with seven projects, started in April 1998. The Institute of Social and Economic Research (ISER) at the University of Alaska Anchorage is monitoring and evaluating the individual sanitation facility O&M projects and the program overall. EPA initially funded this work; it is now funded by ANHB. The research design and the underlying program design differ somewhat across the three phases. The innovation in the Phase III design was the addition of mentor communities to assist project communities. This report comprises the final evaluation for the seven Phase III community projects and four Phase II projects that extended beyond the deadline for the Phase II report.Alaska Native Health Board Office of Wastewater Management (EPA

Effects of the 2002 Chignik Cooperative: A Survey of Chignik Salmon Permit Holders

This report presents the results of a survey of Chignik Salmon Purse Seine permit holders about management changes in the Chignik salmon fishery and the effects of the 2002 Chignik salmon cooperative. In January 2002, the Alaska Board of Fisheries passed regulations that established criteria and management measures for a cooperative fishery in the Chignik purse seine salmon fishery. Under the regulations, if 51 or more Chignik permit holders chose to join a cooperative, the cooperative would receive an allocation of a percentage of the Chignik sockeye salmon harvest. The purpose of the regulations was to allow permit holders the opportunity to fish cooperatively to reduce costs, improve quality and increase value by reducing the number of vessels fishing and slowing down the fishery. Permit holders who chose not to join the cooperative could fish in an “open” or “independent” fishery with a separate allocation. Subsequently the Chignik Seafood Producers Alliance (CSPA) formed as a cooperative in accordance with the new regulations. In 2002, 77 Chignik permit holders joined the Co-op, 22 permit holders chose to fish independently in the open fishery, and 1 permit holder did not join the cooperative and also did not fish. This report is based on the 89 survey responses that we received by January 15, 2003. (An earlier report was based on the 80 responses received by December 3, 2002.)Funding for the survey and the study was provided by University of Alaska Foundation funds made available to ISER by University of Alaska President Hamilton for a series of Alaska economic studies