APPENDIX C. Survey Methodology, ctd. In designing the survey, we conducted background research and pretests. We worked with substantive methodological experts who provided ideas and feedback on the content of the survey. This included staff of the Ella Baker Center, mixed-methods faculty researchers at UCLA, and San Quentin’s civic engagement group of currently incarcerated individuals. Inside Policy Fellows also facilitated pretests and review for the final survey. Each survey was sent with a cover letter explaining our research and a pre-stamped envelope to use to return the survey. Completed surveys were mailed to EBC and then scanned for manual data entry and quantitative analysis using Qualtrics. Data from the free response questions were drawn out using a coding schema across particular themes. See Table 1 & 2 for the codebook for these questions. Unlike the coding process for interviews, we trained volunteers who helped with the data entry of surveys to carry out the coding of the qualitative data gathered from the survey. Our training included a walk-through on the purpose of coding, coding themes, and their definitions, as well as the process to assign codes through excel. These coding assignments were then added to Dedoose for further theme analysis.
TABLE 1. Codebook for Survey Long Answer Question 17, Climate Hazard Experiences. Parent Code
Child Code
Grandchild Code
Definition Captures steps taken to prepare for an emergency that were not captured below (under respondent or CDCR).
Emergency Preparedness
Steps the respondent took to prepare for a climate hazard that were not captured below (ex: having knowledge of an emergency plan)
Respondent
Training
CDCR
Respondent talks about receiving training related to emergency preparedness. Steps CDCR takes to prepare for or mitigate effects of a climate hazard. (ex: brush clearing)
93
