Chapter 8
8.10 Measuring Public Education Success
Practice Statement:
An effective damage prevention education program includes structured annual or biennial (every two years) measurement(s) to gauge the success of the overall program.
Practice Description:
Damage prevention education program effectiveness can be gauged in several ways. Consider the following examples:
- Use of a direct-mail or telephone survey to effectively determine how 811 center and/or member facility customers are hearing and recalling the damage prevention message.
- Use of Arbitron Areas of Dominant Influence (ADI) boundaries to measure increases in 811 center call volume and/or member facility owners/operators’ one call messages is also an effective measurement. For a given area, these can be compared against the money and resources used in that area for further indications of program effectiveness.
- The collection and tracking of individual or collective facility owners/operators’ damage information from year to year is another outstanding method of measuring success, providing that other internal factors at a given facility owner/operator remain constant.
References:
- Various 811 centers including CT, GA, IL, IA, KY, MS, MO, NC, OK, OH, and WI
- API Data Collection Initiative
- INGAA Foundation Pipeline Safety Awareness Material Focus Group Research Report
- “Presentation of Findings: OPS/DAMQAT Underground Facility Damage Prevention Study” (nationwide survey)
- “Presentation of Findings: DAMQAT Pilot Evaluation Study” (regional survey)
- Great Lakes Common Carrier Committee Six-State Survey
- Virginia State Corporation Commission survey on why damages occur
- PHMSA 9 Elements (PIPES ACT)