Evaluation of Data Capture in the Field Using Portable Hand- Held Devices

Transcription

1 November 18, 2014 Chris Wheaton StreamNet Evaluation of Data Capture in the Field Using Portable Hand- Held Devices Survey Results

2 Survey Respondents 52 Total responses, 47 indicated affiliations Responses Where Affiliation Identified States Tribes Federal Agencies Private Non-profit Total

3 Device Types Reported

4 Data entry environment

5 What general type of data are collected?

6 Does this type of field work require or benefit from the ability to interface with peripheral equipment (PIT tag reader, scale, etc.)? No 32.7% Yes 67.3%

7 Specified Peripherals; Pit Tag Reader (25) GPS (11) Camera Printer Thermometer Ranger finder Calipers External antennas Bar code scanner (DNA, scales, Otoliths)

8 Please categorize any problems or issues you have identified during your project. Check all that apply. Top five answers; Sun glare 36.00% Screen readability 34.00% Battery life 32.00% Issues with speed of data entry 32.00% Issues with learning and using the software interface 32.00%

9 Did you ever experience data loss? Yes 40.8% No 59.2%

10 Did you ever experience a Yes 17.7% Catastrophic failure of a unit? No 82.3% Cracked screens, water damage, pen failure, too many apps? undetermined.

11 How well did data delivery and synchronization work? Very poorly 2.0% Poorly 2.0% Neutral 13.7% Well 43.1% Very well 35.3% Not applicable 3.9%

12 What was your previous approach to capturing this type of data (check all that apply)? Paper in the field; data entry directly to spreadsheet/ database Paper in the field; data entry using custom program Data entry in the field into tablet PC or similar with custom program 74.0% 48.0% 8.0% Data entry in the field into spreadsheet/database on laptop 12.0% Digital pen 2.0% Other (please specify) 14.0%

13 Was this any faster overall (data collection plus entry/qc) than paper and pencil for capturing data of this type? No 21.6% Yes 78.4%

14 Does this device adequately provide for data QA/QC? Yes No Unknown/uncertain 64.7% 9.8% 25.5%

15 Perceived ease of initial setup/programming of user interface Very difficult 2.0% Difficult 29.4% Neutral 27.5% Easy 17.7% Very easy 5.9% Not applicable/not needed 17.7%

16 Hours required for initial setup/programming of user interface Answers ranged from 1 Hour to Infinite Answers clustered: 40 hours or more: 15 responses Less than 40 hours: 14 responses

17 Data transfer method to final database ODBC via Internet 4.9% with attached spreadsheet 7.3% with attached database 4.9% Web service into destination database 51.2% Unknown/not sure 4.9% Other (please specify) 26.8%

18 Would you recommend this hardware for broader adoption within your agency? No 20.8% Yes 79.2%

19 Would you recommend this software for broader adoption within your agency? No 21.7% Yes 78.3%

20 Compared to your previous approach for capturing this type of data and considering all functions (data entry, QA, incorporation into final system, etc.), how would you compare using this device to the previous approach? Not sure 2.0% Worse 2.0% About the same 12.0% Much better 52.0% Better 32.0%

21 Please estimate how much total time (data collection, entry, and QC) using this device saves you per day of field work. Takes more time 0.0% About the same 11.8% Saves 1 hour or less 25.5% Saves 1 to 4 hours 41.2% Saves more than 4 hours 11.8% Don't know/not sure 9.8%

22 Does your agency or organization have policies that impact your use of handheld devices, software, and the electronic transfer of data? Don t know/not sure 21.6% Yes 47.1% No 31.4%

23 If you answered "Yes" to the question above, please rate the impact such policies have on your use of handheld devices and software. Prevents use 3.7% Little or no impact 14.8% Significant impact 44.4% Moderate impact 37.1%

24 If hardware and software capabilities allow, in the future data collected in the field could be delivered to a publicly accessible database in real time. For you and your organization, what would be your feelings regarding such a situation? This is unacceptable to me and/or my agency. 31.4% This would be ok, but I or my agency would prefer this not be done. Neutral This would be great it would save us time and effort! 13.7% 37.3% 17.7%

25 Questions & Discussion

26 Thank You to all who participated!

27 Respondent Comments

28 We found a disconnect between samplers and the public when using the electronic data capture device. The samplers were consistently more focused on data entry when using the device. It was a consequence of utilizing electronic data collection that we had not anticipated. The ramifications are a potential issue with public perception and increased safety risk due to the preoccupation with entry into the electronic device. In order for electronic field data collection to be successful, there must be at least one very competent troubleshooter/programmer/it person on the crew to troubleshoot issues that is readily available for questions/issues. Steep learning curve with software and synchronization. Now that we have the experience in my project, much less time is spent developing our data entry forms. Always have paper as a backup if all else fails!

29 I think it highly limiting, but warranted for some, not all, field situations. Drawings, miscellaneous observations, and thoughts can be better expressed and captured by pencil and paper. Field personnel should not be forced to be so robotic--they need to keep their eyes and minds open. Sorry, just Old School on this... Results vary by application and use of ipad. Habitat data collection has been smooth, but fish data entry is much slower than historic methods, and needs further development to be widely accepted. The biologists can learn from the programmers, and the programmers can learn from the biologists during database and application development. Development of large scale data capture applications is extremely expensive at the individual project level. I use my personal iphone for work because it is way more efficient than using a hand held GPS, a camera, and a Gazetteer or hard copy topo map. My phone allows me to take photos, record way points and wetland boundaries, and navigate to a point much more efficiently than using multiple devices.

30 Do not change electronic field data sheets in the middle of the field season. Create the final electronic data sheets before the field season starts. Greatly improved workflows for getting data from the field into a permanent system of record. Real time updating of data collection progress. All tasks revolving around data collection take place in the field; no more transcribing data from paper sheets into the database. Reduced need for QA/QC. Using a data collection system with a fully integrated map navigation can greatly decrease time lost to field teams navigating in new areas. It really helps save time wasted driving down the wrong dirt road when trying to navigate with paper maps. Also, using the camera on the ipad to directly attach photos to asset points can greatly increase the efficiency on the back end for tracking photos and correlating them to locations in your GIS system. Development of forms and interface needs to be userdriven and incremental. Flexibility on the part of the developer, and responsiveness of the developer to user needs is key to success.