Interpretación del Estado de Resultados

Other states that have pesticide use reporting have typically allowed for both hard copy and electronic reporting. The reporting format has implications for those reporting, systems

development cost, quality control, error checking, and the costs of continuing operation. We will consider four options for data submission:

• Hard copy on standardized forms

• Hard copy computer generated scannable reporting forms • Electronic entry via diskettes, modem or e-mail

• Electronic Entry through Web-site

Data Entry Format and Report Submission

A variety of ways exist for the preparation and submission of pesticide use reports by pesticide applicators (Figure 3). The main distinction in the methods available is between the use of traditional printed data entry forms, versus some form of electronic interface for data entry. The use of printed forms is certainly the least desirable mechanism for report submission to an ORPURS database but, at the current time, seems likely to be the predominant method. The undesirability of printed forms stems from the increased likelihood of errors being introduced into the ORPURS database through: (a) the absence of automated error checking during report preparation; and (b) the additional manual data handling (and costs) required to convert the data

Before describing the range of methods available for report preparation and submission, it is useful to first consider the likely needs of the reporting individuals or organizations.

Figure 3. Options for PUR preparation, submission and processing

Printed report preparation Online electronic report preparation Offline electronic report preparation Oregon PUR. Xxxxxx, xxxxx, xxxxxx XXX, xxxx, xxxx-xxxx XXXXXX xxxx-xxx-xxxx, Xxxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx xxx PUR software. Entry 1: Entry 2: Entry 3: Xxxxz xxx 123 Xyzwv Pesticide name Restricted? ORPURS database disk file Internet PUR. Entry 1: Entry 2: Entry 3:

Pesticide label name Restricted use? Xxxxz zzgfb hefy. xxx 123 Xyzwv < Back OK 1 2 3 Xyz tests

USPS PUR data file _e-mail

(c.s.v.)

Data processing organisation.

PUR processing and data entry staff Completed PURs

Electronic PUR form.

Entry 1: Entry 2: Entry 3: Pesticide label name

Restricted use? Xxxxz zzgfb hefy. xxx 123 Xyzwv 1 2 3 Xyz number

Save as... (file)

FTP

Users: Who Will be Submitting Data?

• Average Joe/Jane. These users are the primary data source and may be either the pesticide applicator or some other individual responsible for preparing and submitting pesticide use reports (PURs). Individually they are likely to be submitting a relatively low number of PURs (with the exception of commercial pesticide applicators), however they are also likely to have widely varying needs or preferences for the method of preparing and submitting the reports. The vast majority of such users are likely to submit printed PURs at the outset of the ORPURS (California DPR estimated that approximately 90% of their PURs were currently submitted on printed report forms7

Figures 4 and 5). Even where computer-based methods are selected, the users may need or want a range of options for filing the PUR electronically, e.g. online report preparation and submission via the Internet, computer-based (but “offline”) report preparation followed by report printing, or file upload (via “FTP”), e-mail or diskette- based submission of a data file.

• Professional data processing organizations. This group includes both commercial and state agencies that are likely to be responsible for the processing of printed PUR forms and bulk data entry into the ORPURS database. Access to database lookup tables (for report codes, pesticide trade names, etc.) and clear rules for the format of data files are more important than extensive assistance during data entry. A large amount of PUR data will be processed by this group of users but they will submit the data in a consistent manner and via a single method: most likely as files of comma-separated values (c.s.v. files), uploaded to the ORPURS server for automated processing and entry into the database.

• Just as it is necessary to estimate ODA's cost of data entry, the applicator (individual business) costs for data entry should also be evaluated. When entering use data into a standardized ODA reporting form, from company application records, it is reasonable to estimate a data entry cost (personnel time) of $0.30 to $0.40 for each application. Therefore, the data entry cost for a commercial operator that employs 5 applicators, who on an average perform 10 applications a day, is $350.00 /month.

5 applicators * 10 applications/day * 20 days/month * $0.35 per application entry

7

It should be remembered however, that the California PUR system has existed for some time. Also, it is widely recognized that there is an increasingly rapid adoption of electronic information systems

Printed forms

The use of printed forms is the traditional approach for pesticide use reporting compliance and makes no technological demands on the reporting individuals. The burden of report form distribution and subsequent processing of completed PURs, for entry into a database, is placed upon state agencies. Unfortunately, use of printed PUR forms is the least desirable option from the perspective of database error management (as outlined above). It should also be noted that, for some individuals and/or organizations, filing of a printed PUR may even increase the

reporting burden (as compared with electronic options), if they are already using electronic data management systems. For the majority of users, however, the more noticeable drawback is perhaps the problem of correctly preparing the PUR without assistance to avoid errors or misunderstandings - which they may later be asked to resolve. Individuals or organizations who regularly file PURs may be less susceptible to such errors, and careful form design can clearly assist users to some extent, but extensive instructions and lists of data codes, etc., may also need to be distributed (depending on the data requested)

Printed PUR forms will therefore involve traditional costs associated with the initial form design, printing, pre-distribution storage (and recycling when forms change), distribution via postal system, handling and archiving of submitted reports. Once printed PUR forms are completed and submitted, they must then be processed in order to enter the information into the ORPURS database. If PUR processing is undertaken by a state agency, the design and development of a data entry interface will be necessary. Data entry software can be difficult and time consuming to develop, owing to the incorporation of numerous essential error-checks and assistance for users. Professional data processing organizations should not, however, require development of a highly “user-friendly” interface to the extent that is essential for data entry by untrained users, but will require an efficient system for high throughput data entry. Commercial organizations may prefer to develop their own “in-house” software for data entry.

Development of data entry interface software for state agency use, can be expected to require 0.5 to 1.0 FTE for 6 months for a computer programmer familiar with high throughput data entry applications. This should be followed by 0.25 to 0.5 FTE during the pilot program

implementation and for the first year of operation. Some programming time (0.05 to 0.1 FTE annually) will also be needed for longer-term maintenance and improvement. Interaction with the ORPURS database administrator will also be essential during system development.

Alternatives to wholly manual processing of completed (printed) PURs include: the use of scannable forms, and/or use of optical/intelligent character recognition (OCR/ICR) systems. Scannable forms are common in situations such as multiple-choice testing, where the

information requests can be represented in simplified form using checkboxes or other visual means. Handwritten entries can also be included, usually with the letters carefully spaced out within input boxes. OCR/ICR technology is generally a combination of processes whereby completed forms (usually specially designed but not necessarily of the scannable type described

above) are first scanned to produce a digital image of the form. These images are then processed using sophisticated software which attempts to recognize the handwritten information. Captured data are then submitted directly to a database or other file destination. Error checking routines are incorporated in the OCR process and captured data may also be subjected to comparison with database “lookup” tables for matching to acceptable values. An example of OCR/ICR

technology includes the ICR3™ system of Associated Solutions Inc., (http://www.icr3.com 8

) which is to be used for the US Census 2000. Although specific percentage estimates of OCR/ICR accuracy appear to be conspicuously absent from most company information, the ICR3

™ product

example suggests that an appropriate investment in the technology can result in a 6.5-fold reduction of the form processing and data entry personnel needed – although this figure is likely to be situation dependent.

The use of scannable forms, as described above, would appear to be limited for PURs given the widely varying nature of the information to be requested. This may be more effectively

evaluated, however, once the data requirements are decided upon. Regardless of this, the use of OCR/ICR systems is clearly a viable option. Equipment costs indicated as $100,000 for the ICR3

™ product example, $75,000 for each scanner, along with $10,000 for each server dedicated

to form processing (actual number of scanners and servers required is dependent upon required form processing throughput and form data complexity), can be offset by the reduction in personnel costs. The previously indicated costs for developing a data entry interface would, however, remain because of the need for some manual data entry even with an OCR/ICR system. In addition, the costs of programming to submit data into the ORPURS database (indicated as option 1 of the electronic methods, below) must also be included.

Electronic PUR filing

Several options are available for electronic methods of PUR preparation, submission and processing. The options, detailed below, can mostly interact with each other and all (except 3) are dependent upon effective implementation of option 1, in which pre-formatted data files are automatically processed and the data submitted to the ORPURS database.

Electronic options:

1. Online uploading (via FTP) of pre-formatted data files. This is a very “open” approach,

where the only requirement is for a clear and unambiguous set of rules for the format of data files containing comma-separated values (c.s.v. files). The actual data files can be generated by many means, including the option of software development by commercial vendors. This approach is good for large volume report processors and is primarily aimed at commercial (or state) agencies which may be involved in the manual processing of printed PUR forms,

possibly using their own data entry systems. It is also useful, however, for smaller volume submission of PUR data (e.g. via commercial software such as the “LadyBug” Chemical Application Manager, from http://www.ladybugproducts.com 9). Occasional Internet access (or similar) is essential for the uploading of data files. Programming tasks involve the

automated processing of uploaded files: they must be “parsed”, checked for possible errors or anomalies, valid data passed through to the database tables, invalid data returned (via e-mail) for correction to the appropriate source of the original data file. The lack of user-interface programming will considerably reduce the time needed for implementation, although careful error-checking it still necessary – depending on the quality controls provided by the

commercial software vendor or data entry organization. This option will require provision of, or user-access to, various regularly updated database “lookup” tables to reduce errors (via an FTP or similar site, or possibly direct to commercial data entry organizations).

Costs: estimate 0.5 FTE for 3 to 4 months for initial design by 1 programmer familiar with both text-file processing and database manipulation via SQL, followed by 0.1 to 0.2 FTE during pilot program and ideally for first year of operation. Probably only 0.05 to 0.1 FTE thereafter. Some interaction with the database administrator is needed. May also need to liaise with commercial/external software developers.

2. Diskette-based submission of c.s.v. file via mail. A better option than use of printed forms,

this requires a computer but no Internet connection. The data files could be generated by commercially developed software (see example, option 1). Disk-based file submission may therefore be a popular option for people already using a computer but without Internet access (see also: item 4, below). Would actually work as a variant of option 1, indicated above, but with the submitted data files needing to be manually copied from the diskettes to the server.

Costs: would require only moderate additional programming effort (i.e. additional to that of option 1), such that error reports could be automatically printed for mailing via the postal service back to their origin (i.e. +0.1 FTE for design and +0.05 subsequently). More significantly: require personnel for diskette handling (“processing” the mail, checking diskettes for viruses, transferring files from diskettes to file-upload area on server). The disk handling issue may be further complicated by problems with accessibility of PC vs. Mac. diskettes and the potential for computer viruses.

3. Online, forms-based data entry via the World Wide Web. This option is especially good

for individual users, with a relatively low number of PURs to file, and where lots of assistance may be desirable. It requires an active Internet connection during report

preparation (e.g. “LadyBug(INTER)NET©” Pesticide Use Reporting Service [for California] from http://www.ladybugproducts.com). The initial design and follow-up improvement of an

9

Mailing address: LadyBug Products, Athol, ID * Castro Valley, CA. Telephone: (800) 456-6371. E-mail

online interface is difficult but crucial to user adoption of such a system. In the long term this interface may become the predominant method for PUR compliance by all but professional data processing organizations. This option is the most direct route of data entry into the ORPURS database and provides some of the best opportunities for error checking/reduction. It is possible to provide a wide range of “popup” lists from which users can select appropriate values (which reduces typing and also ensures entry of valid data), along with checkboxes and other rapid data input mechanisms.

The interactive nature of web-based data entry forms means that it is also possible to provide access to large reference tables, such as a list of pesticide product label names, recommended application rates and other information. These reference tables can be interactively searched using various keywords or partial words, in order to easily locate or confirm information needed for the PUR – information which can then be automatically inserted where

appropriate. In particular, users of the web-based PUR form could be permitted to retrieve previously stored details (through use of a log-on name and password) which could then be used to automatically complete relevant but repetitious parts of the PUR form with their full name, contact details, address, etc., updating them only when necessary. Clearly the various opportunities to assist data entry by the user also provide for effective reduction in errors that can be submitted. These relatively straightforward techniques are commonly supplemented by programming code which performs automatic calculations and combinatorial checks (e.g. preventing accidental selection of “orchard misting” application type, when the product formulation is “granular”), in order to comprehensively validate data before it is submitted to the database system. The remaining benefit is perhaps simply the online availability of comprehensive instructions about the PUR form requirements.

Costs: estimate 0.5 to 1.0 FTE for 6 months for initial design and implementation by 1 programmer familiar with creating web-based applications, followed by 0.25 to 0.5 FTE during the pilot program and for first year of operation. Should also allow programming time (0.05 to 0.1 FTE annually) for longer-term maintenance and improvement. Some interaction with database and web server administrator(s) is needed.

4. Electronic (but offline) data entry forms. Using commercial software such as Adobe

Acrobat (http://www.adobe.com/products/acrobat), it is possible to create electronic versions of printed data entry forms which can incorporate some of the advantages normally available to online, web-based forms (see option 3) or specialty commercial PUR software (see

“LadyBug”, option 1). Though usually less extensive, these advantages can be achieved without the need for either an active Internet connection or software purchase by the user. Electronic forms (which can even be made to appear similar to printed versions) can be either retrieved (“downloaded”) once from an Internet site or supplied on a diskette (and possibly also via e-mail). The only requirement for their use is some version of installed “reader"

forms allow PUR preparation via an “offline” computer, complete with extensive user

assistance and error-reduction mechanisms, and provide the ability to save the entered data as a specially-formatted text file which can then be submitted as described in options 1 & 2 (above) or 5 (below). The electronic form itself is not submitted and can be reused indefinitely without repeated downloading, until an update is needed.

Costs: initial design and programming of electronic forms may require 0.1 to 0.2 FTE for 3 months (depending on form complexity/PUR requirements). However, processing the data files produced by electronic forms also requires option 1 and either of 2 or 5 (see below), plus some modification for the file format. It may also be necessary to include the costs for initial distribution of the “reader” software (and possibly also the forms) on diskettes or a CD-ROM, although these can also be distributed via a web site, if appropriate. Should provide ongoing 0.05 FTE for programming support after initial implementation. Some interaction with database administrator is needed during design and testing.

5. Submission of PUR data file as an e-mail message attachment. This option is essentially

intended as another variant of the file uploading element of option 1, i.e. the user would prepare a c.s.v. formatted data file containing the PUR information and then e-mail it to an ORPURS address, where the message attachment would be automatically processed and erroneous data returned to its origin via e-mail. This option is better (i.e. less error-prone and/or less manual intervention) than use of printed forms or diskettes. As with options 1 & 2, this option permits plenty of opportunity for commercial vendors to provide PUR data file preparation software solutions, reducing costs (to the state) of user-interface development and maintenance. This option could also work in conjunction with the electronic forms described in option 4, as the means of submitting the data files produced. There may be some initial development problems arising from the variation in protocols for e-mail and file attachments. As with option 1, would require provision of, or user-access to, various regularly updated database “lookup” tables to reduce errors.

Costs: programming of file attachment processing may add 0.05 to 0.1 FTE to the initial requirements for option 1, along with possibly +0.05 FTE for the pilot phase. Probably less than 0.05 FTE added to longer term maintenance and support.

Configuration Options

Although a variety of options have been described above and all could be implemented, certain configurations of these options can be recommended:

1. Minimum system design: printed forms, plus electronic options 1.

database. Printed forms and basic e-mail for PUR preparation and submission, combined with the programming necessary for data entry to the database.

2. Intermediate system design: printed forms, plus electronic options 1, 2 & 5.