A Public Awareness Plan is Just Another Form of Governance

Public Awareness Requires Management of the Program, the Communications and Effectiveness Measurement

The Plan, Do, Check, Act methodology has proven to be quite valuable in the management of Public Awareness. Recent audits and PHMSA presentations are clearly sending the message that Public Awareness Programs are more than just “mailing”… Audits are demonstrating that operators need to manage the program requirements, the communications and the determination of effectiveness “WITH Mechanisms to Document and Improve”.

Communications Management

Did you communicate as required by your plan?

ICAM for Public Awareness is 100% configurable, allowing for the management, scheduling, tracking, documenting and reporting of communications associated with compliance. Each operator may determine the level of detail to be managed within the system.

Audiences – Schedule processes for each stakeholder audience to document the fact that you communicated as your
plan said you would.

Languages – 
Document the languages used for all stakeholders, and if there were any new languages that needed to
be used to make adjustments to the plan.

Messages – 
Document the primary and any supplemental messages sent to each stakeholder. 

Methods – Document what method was used for each communication, then review which method worked or did not
and adjust the plan accordingly. 

Frequencies – 
Keep track of the frequency of each communication with scheduling to make sure the plan is followed
as it states.

To learn more about how the ICAM platform may be implemented to support your Quality Management approach to Public Awareness, please contact us.

To learn more about how the ICAM platform may be implemented to support your Quality Management approach to Public Awareness, please contact us.



Regardless of the message effectiveness, if it is not delivered to the target audience, does it really matter? The first step in demonstrating how effective your Public Awareness communication is, you need to be able to show that your message is reaching its intended target.

Effectiveness begins with having communications directed at the “Right Target” i.e. the affected public within the pipeline corridor.

1. Gauging effectiveness based on the number of non-deliverable mailings does not reflect an accurate picture of whether or not a Public Awareness mailing has reached all addressed structures within the PIR.

2. Delivery measurement based on returns may provide a false sense of “effectiveness”.

3. Current effectiveness measurements are based on the number of pieces of mail returned as non-deliverable; however, these measurements should be based on the percentage of structures within the designated corridor that actually received the communication.

The statistics associated with a typical “Shotgun” mailing for a 273 mile segment demonstrate the ineffectiveness of this approach:

  • 1733 residential structures identified inside the PIR
  • 1351 deliveries to the residents inside the PIR
  • 382 residential dwellings within the PIR who DID NOT receive the PA mailing
  • 8463 Number of mailings sent to addresses OUTSIDE THE TARGET AREA

Although 99% of these mailings were delivered, typically up to 20% of the residents in the corridor were NOT reached.