Virtual Enrollment Party

As you all have been going to the web form and indicating your preference for switching to 4HOnline, there have been a couple of things that caught me by surprise... first, that at the present time, 100% of you want to change this fall. That's extremely gratifying, but scary. In the beginning, I had planned to switch about a dozen folks this fall (the Guinea Pig Group), but then decided to open the decision up to some other Brave Souls. Turns out we're just FULL of bravery here in Iowa!!! The second surprise is that 2/3 of those who have responded want to start with empty datasets. Again, I was HOPING for a few of the Guinea Pig Group to try it, giving the rest of us a view of the advantages/disadvantages.

Before anyone can use the new program, there are some things I have to do: set up user accounts, convert our projects/literature/activities, set up some standard screens, and LEARN more about the program both from an administrative and user standpoint. However, the "fall-empty" group should, in theory, be able to begin using the program very shortly. So the dilemma is more about training than anything else. If I hold off on deployment until I can head to Texas and get myself all trained, that's going to delay this whole thing maybe more than it should be. So, should we forge ahead and muddle through this together? Hmmmm... Maybe.

My TENTATIVE and subject-to-change-again "plan" MIGHT be to start the fall-empty folks as soon as we can make that happen, and book 3-4 days of a come-and-go 4HOnline Party here on campus. We'd be learning together, and I'd provide laptops for you all to get started entering data and learning the program. You would have a double benefit of actual uninterrupted data entry time, and the learning aspect.

In the meantime, I'd continue working on the conversion process--it's going to take a lot of pretty manual data manipulation on my part to export BR data, then get it into the file format that 4HOnline needs. When that's done, then the fall-converted folks would be ready to roll. Again, we'd need some workdays, hopefully with some of the first group attending.

I will definitely be reprising the Snowstorm Tour this year, and expanding it to more sites, so lay in plenty of provisions. During that time, if anyone chooses the "winter" option, they'll get training. But more important, everyone will get more than the "triage" training that the fall will consist of! I'm considering 10-12 sites, so there are people who would have an option of which one to attend, I think.

So what's the elephant in the room? Tonya addressed it in her previous comment... with fewer folks in the county offices, leaving for training becomes more difficult. Can we use Connect? You all know that I'm not exactly "excellent" at the whole Connect thing, particularly in terms of doing training that way. I tend to lose my place, lose my mouse, lose my memory, and lose my train of thought. HOWEVER, I'll be willing to give it a shot, particularly in terms of "lunch and learn" 30-minute sessions on specific tasks/topics. Depending on how quick the fall crowd gets comfortable, it could either start after the first of the year, or towards the end of the Snowstorm Tour. That might be a valuable way to continue training and share discoveries. We'll also develop a library of support docs, similar to the HelpSheets we have for Blue Ribbon.

The short version is that I can't completely eliminate training and the scheduling challenges that it presents. I'll do my best to make it as easy as possible, and I also want to utilize my EXCELLENT Guinea Pig Group (which is growing by leaps & bounds) as mentors for others. In no way do I want them to feel burdened by support expectations, as that is (and hopefully will "always" be) my job, but in a situation like this, with all of us learning together, combined knowledge is always going to be better than any one individual.

We have all seen instances where the deployment of new technology created more problems than it solved, and that is honestly my worst nightmare. There will be frustration in learning and using something new and unfamiliar. The only "control" I have over the outcome of this switch is support and training. If I support you well enough, and train you well enough, maybe the frustrations won't be overwhelming. I also hope that by giving you choices in when & how you convert, you can make it work best for your own circumstances.

Posted by Becky at 06:59 AM | Permalink | Comments (5) | TrackBacks (0)

The decision is done. We're switching to 4HOnline during the 2009-2010 program year. There are lots of details to be decided and communicated throughout the first year, but the important thing now is that we are switching. It's web-based, which means no software to install, and access from anywhere. It does some things better than we're used to, and some things just differently. We may find things we liked better about Blue Ribbon, but hopefully not many!

This is where I want you to chime in. Questions, suggestions, ideas... whatever. Get the discussion going!

Posted by Becky at 02:45 PM | Permalink | Comments (10) | TrackBacks (0)

Okay, it's finally down to the wire... we're really going to get a new web-based enrollment system. Really.

Last week, I asked 12 "volunteers" to take the system I've chosen for a test-drive. The system is called 4HOnline, and it's from a company in Texas. They have a test server, where my volunteers are "playing" right now. Let me give you some short details as I know them now, and then I'm going to turn the forum over to the Guinea Pig Group to talk about what they're finding, ask/answer questions, lalala.

4HOnline is compatible with ShoWorks, a fair management package. Just as Fair Management is now a separate county purchase, ShoWorks would also be a county decision/purchase. I've seen it, and I like it. But it's a county decision--I won't be the one using it, so won't make that decision for you.

My plan AT THE PRESENT TIME is to convert data for the Guinea Pig Group this fall, and they will do the bulk of the re-enrollment process in the new program. We'll learn from them about what works, what's different, etc. The rest of the counties would have data sometime around January, when the bulk of the re-enrollments would be done--then just use the program for the rest of the year.

We will use the program as "county-based" for at least the 2009-10 year... what that means is that county staff would still enter all data. Beginning in the fall of 2010, each county will have the option to allow their RETURNING families to re-enroll on-line, ALL families to enroll on-line, or to continue with county-based entry. There's lots more to know about that, but trust me for now.

4HOnline has an available Events Registration component. At some point in the not-so-distant future, we may set that up. But we all need to get comfortable with the enrollment portion first.

I had a group of folks in last week, and they were split about whether they'd like to start with empty datasets (entering all members in the new program) or starting with existing data. There are advantages to both. Once we see how well the Guinea Pig Group's data converts (is there still lots of clean-up going on?) we'll have more info to make that decision. I'm TOYING with the idea of giving you opt in/out choices for the data conversion. It's a flat fee--all or none, so I guess in the end it doesn't matter if some want one thing and some want another.

One teensy caveat--this is the system that I believe (TODAY) that we will be purchasing. There are still contracts to be signed and deals to be made. There is another system out there that is making a hard pitch to the state directors, so there is a teensy-weensy chance that I'm going to end up having to change my mind. Just truth in advertising.

Posted by Becky at 01:37 PM | Permalink | Comments (3) | TrackBacks (0)

Andrea Traeger posted a comment, dreaming about what a web-based system could do... expanding the horizons of just data entry. It's pretty interesting, and I decided it deserved a public response, because some of you may be thinking some of the same things. My response is going to sound like I'm raining on a parade, but that's not true. In part because of the reorganization, we're taking a closer look at our processes, looking for places to streamline and automate. We're certainly looking at how technology can help us with our work. However, although much of the technology exists for accomplishing many of these tasks, it's not cheap. And presently, there's nothing that would accomplish ALL of our data management needs, although some come pretty close. So, here are some of my thoughts from when I did the research on web-based enrolllment. Bear in mind that most of the things in Andrea's email will happen someday, and we'll probably not even remember when it wasn't that way!!

Most everything in the list can happen at some point in the future -- FOR A COST. There's no free lunch with these web-based products--for example, moving to an on-line entry system costs a sizable upfront investment, then an on-going fee of $2 per registration (for fairs, for conferences, for anything). We either have to add that to a participant fee (we're going to charge kids to apply for scholarships & awards???) or find a way to cough it up ourselves. For state conference, that's $2000. For State Fair, it's going to be over $10,000, which is not chump change!!

The fee payment thing is tough, because some counties pay 4-H fees, some counties have kids pay it, some have donors or clubs, some charge more than $20, and some split fees. And those are just the ones I know about! Add into that the fact that ISU doesn't let us all collect money over the internet--the 4-H Foundation can because they're not really ISU. Even if we overcome that hurdle, credit cards are also not free. The recipient of the money pays a fee for the "convenience" of using credit cards--usually in the range of 1-2% of the sale. Somebody has to come up with that money as well...

Another concern for us is preserving the link between counties and youth/parents/volunteers. Even when young people can enroll on-line, it's going to require a county person to go in and "approve" that enrollment before it becomes active. As far as volunteer background checks, the DCIA requires us to have a "real" signature on forms that give us permission to perform those, not a digital signature. Our feeling is that with new volunteers, we'd certainly like them to have been to the county office to visit about opportunities, and then fill out those forms, etc.

FSQA will continue to plague us, not because we're so in love with the database, but because of some of our commodity group partners. The "age" thing will always be an issue!! I'd like to find a way to integrate that into the enrollment process, however. It won't be right away, but it'll be a goal.

For the short term, the enrollment system would do everything that Blue Ribbon does, which is considerable, truthfully. It will do some things better, a few maybe not so quite well, some differently, and will do some new things as well. The one I'm looking at is more "customizable"--meaning that I can set it up to record those vol. trainings in a more logical way, and counties can also customize what they want to record (beyond the four checkboxes in BR). Features will be integrated as they become available and affordable.

I guess my main deal is going to be getting a replacement system on the ground and running... then we'll play with new stuff!! Job security is a valuable commodity in these economic times...

Posted by Becky at 01:03 PM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

Good thing I mentioned that there is lots more that I think, or think I know, than what I really KNOW. But, thanks to you, now I KNOW something new.

I did not know that Cougar Mountain was totally web-based. When I got the tidbit about the internet changing, I was reassured that since Cougar Mountain has to continue to exist, so that's the same as Blue Ribbon. Not necessarily.

HOWEVER, with a dandy little program named VPN, available thru ISU, you CAN access any of the ISUE servers from any computer. That's how I do it at home. I can see/access the S drive, the X drive, and the web server. Speed is dependent on your internet provider speed. That will be one option for continuing Blue Ribbon on the X drive, unless there's something else in the works that I'm not privy to.

Sue reminded me that the counties were also offered the option of having a "local server", meaning a shared drive located in your office, presumably not connected to ISU. That would be another option for relocating your own Blue Ribbon data, but it still means you have to send backups. Should speed up the access time, will allow multiple users, but doesn't give me access like I have now.

The big deal will be switching to a new program, which will be totally web-based, meaning that you can use it from anywhere. That access is even more important now than it was in the beginning of the search.

Jill was the first one to volunteer to try whatever new system we get, which I think is admirable, but cause for concern about her mental stability... nonetheless, it's in ink, Jill. No backing out now. I still just have to find the money!!

Keep responding. Some comments I'll post, and others, like this one, I'll just answer as a batch with a new posting.

Posted by Becky at 11:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBacks (0)

I have a bunch of things I've been MEANING to blog about, and haven't necessarily got "a round tuit" but now's a good time. This entry is going to combine info about what happened to the servers last week, and what MIGHT be happening in the reorganization that will affect Blue Ribbon. Hot topics, eh?

First, the easier one--last week. Apparently a router in Durham that controls off-campus access to Extension servers (like the X drive) went down, and it was probably brief, because Darin hadn't gotten any notice about it when I sent him a message saying that I had three--no, four--no, wait, seven--counties with the same issue, which seemed to indicate that it wasn't a coincidence. Anyway, the short version is that anyone who was working in Blue Ribbon when that happened had problems. If Blue Ribbon was not running, no problems. So, if you're having issues with Blue Ribbon that include "search table not active", just back out of the program, send me an email and I'll fix it for you. Takes less than 5 minutes, and is easier/faster to do than to send instructions to you!!

Well, time to talk about the Elephant in the Room. What's going to happen with Blue Ribbon when/if county offices contract for internet service with a local provider instead of using the T-1 we currently have? I'll tell you what I know (not much), what I think (some of it) and what I think I know (subject to change). My understanding right now is that you will still have access to the Cougar Mountain server, which SHOULD mean that you could also still access the X (Blue Ribbon) drive. This all falls under the category of "what I think I know".

What I KNOW is that T-1 service is darn fast, and easy to get used to. There may not be a local provider in your community who can give you service at that same level. Some may be at DSL speed, hopefully not dial-up. Don't ask me to expand a lot on that. I'm stretching my technical limits just typing those words. I have DSL at home, and I can use Blue Ribbon with server data. I'm spoiled because I think we have faster than T-1 speed on campus, so it seems slow for me at home. It's pretty acceptable once the program is up and running, but I do notice a speed difference. I'm not sure how different it will be than your current office speed, but it could be.

So, let's play "What if". What if you contract with a local internet company and it's INCREDIBLY slow--so much that running Blue Ribbon is a burdensome task? We'll fix it. We'll have to move the Data folder back to your C: drive and you'll have to go back to sending me backups, probably on a monthly schedule. What if I'm wrong about the Cougar Mountain & Blue Ribbon servers, and they're not accessible to county offices any more? Same answer, on a larger and faster scale.

The larger question is what are we going to do over the long-term, not patching this up to get by? I need to rustle up some more money and get serious about moving to a web-based platform, faster than I thought I had to. Given the new sense of urgency, I probably only have one option, since it's "done" and more importantly, "I could sell that in Iowa". Whenever I saw one of these potentials, I had to consider if there were deal-breakers, and I did it with the words, "I can't sell that in Iowa... it would have to be fixed." One company listened closely and fixed everything I found, so I'm going to have to visit more seriously with them!!

There are lots of budget issues still working themselves out, but Chuck and I have visited briefly about moving this up the priority list. We have SOME of the money we need (from your Blue Ribbon support fees), but have to find some more. That's why I can't give you a definite date or even more details. There are negotiations waiting to happen. As things start to shake out, however, I'll update you on progress through this blog. I'll be looking for victims, but we won't be the first state to transition, so it might not be as painful as it could be!!

I'm being as open with you as I can be at this point. If you have questions I've not addressed, post them to the blog. I'm hesitant to do too much "guessing" but if I KNOW something, I'll share that. You can also email me if you have concerns that you don't want to share on the blog. Basically, the short version of the story is that we'll make it work. I'm not quite sure HOW yet, but I AM sure we'll come up with something. And I'm also sure that YOU are the most important consideration in that plan. What works best for me is never as important as what works best for you. There's only one of me, and I can make ...whatever... work.

Posted by Becky at 10:05 AM | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBacks (0)

As I was looking at one system, I found that they have their projects listed a little bit differently than we do--they have two different fields... one for the project name, and another for the "level" or "unit". So, a young person's project would be Market Beef, and they'd also note that they were in Level 1 this year. The pubs are linked to the levels, just as ours would be.

What do you think? The big question is whether you keep track of "years in project" by the general topic (market beef) or by the LEVEL... so a member might be in Mkt Beef level 1 for 3 years, then in Mkt Beef level 2 for 2 years, and you'd never see the combined 5 years of market beef... kind of a convoluted explanation, but...

For those of you who track years in project in Blue Ribbon, what do you do when a young person switches from Level 1 of a project to Level 2? Do you add up the years in project, or do you start over at 1?

Do you think this is a change we could all adapt to? The change would be that although the pubs are linked to the specific level, the years in project are linked to the project, regardless of level. Let me know your thoughts!

Posted by Becky at 10:56 AM | Permalink | Comments (3)

Hmmm. My responses are dwindling. I'm going to post a few more questions over the next week or so to help bolster my numbers!! It's incredibly important to me that you provide "in the trenches" guidance for me as we work towards our goal of having a web-based enrollment system that fits YOUR needs, so speak up. Today's question is pretty simple, but I do want some direction from you for possible changes.

Do you use the Member Charts option under the Utilities menu? Whether or not you're using them now, do you think that these particular charts are useful? Are there other simple charts that you would find MORE useful? When I say "simple charts", I mean primarily those that only sort by one variable. The charts under the Utilities menu take the group of records and sort by one variable (grade, residence, etc.) for each chart.

While we're talking about charts, also take a look at the options under Reports>>Statistical Reports>>Member/Leader statistical. What combinations would be more useful than the ones that are listed there?

Keep those comments coming in--and keep watching the blog. There should be a couple more posts over the next week or so. Oh, yeah, try to keep dry as well!!

Posted by Becky at 08:58 AM | Permalink | Comments (7)

Here's a new topic that will hopefully generate lots of discussion!

We've all heard about the genie and the three wishes. If I was the genie, and you could have your top THREE wishes for improvements or additions to the 4-H enrollment system, what would they be?

It's important to me not only to know what you want, but also how many people ALSO want that same thing... so just because someone else has "already said what I was going to say", don't opt out. Post your comment. This is your chance to get to help influence some of the features we are going to look/ask for in a new system, and it's sure better to know this NOW before it's a done deal, rather than trying to negotiate changes after the ink is dry!!

Posted by Becky at 01:18 PM | Permalink | Comments (7)

GREAT discussion on the last question! That question dealt with input (how the data gets into the system), and now I'd like to focus on output for a little bit.

Those of you who have attended my Filemaker workshops have heard me say that all data management systems are built on the basis of input (what data do you have) and output (what do you want to do with it). When you talk about output, you're talking about not only the data (information) itself, but also the format--list, labels, summaries, whatever. Sometimes all I need is the information, and sometimes I need it in a specific way.

Thinking about Blue Ribbon, there are many pre-formatted reports available. On the parameters screen, you can select some filtering options and some format options. That allows you to choose both the set of records you want printed, and to some extent what fields are going to be included, what order, etc.

In some systems, there are unlimited filtering options--you can choose exactly which records are to be included, but fewer pre-formatted reports. After you chose the records you wanted, you would then choose what fields you want (from ALL available fields) and their order, but the data would go out to Word or Excel, and you would do any further formatting yourself. More flexible, less "canned". Advantages and disadvantages both ways.

With all that explanation, the question for discussion today is... if you had to choose your top FIVE report formats to keep as "canned" report formats, what would they be? Disregard anything about mailing labels--those are non-negotiable. I'm thinking in terms of list formats, that kind of thing. Think about ones that would be more difficult to fix up in Excel or Word. You probably have more than five you'd like to keep, but narrow it down to the TOP five. No, we won't be limited to that, but I want to see where we get some consensus, and where there are differences.

Posted by Becky at 01:11 PM | Permalink | Comments (8)

As you may have heard, some of us have been doing a bit of research on possibly finding an enrollment system that would allow for web-based data entry, eliminating the need for software installation. We're still looking, still thinking, and no firm decision has been made. However, in doing this, several questions are coming up, and I need to have some input from the folks who are actually going to be spending the most time USING it--that would be you guys! So, I'm going to post some "discussion questions" and I'd like to get some conversation going by using the comments feature of this blog.

The first question is about WHO does the web entry. Let's assume for now that we had two choices, all technical and privacy issues had been adequately addressed, and the functionality (reports, etc.) of the two was the same.

One of them was designed for information to be entered by county staff, with a staff-login site, adding information much the way we do now, just over the web instead of in a software package.

The other one allowed families to enter their own basic information over the web, with counties doing group enrollments and other editing to records as necessary. There would be controls in place that would not allow families to change project enrollment or whatever after county-specified dates, as well as fields that families would not see, but county staff would--like the checkboxes for health forms, for example.

What do you see as the benefits/drawbacks of each of these systems? Remember that we're not worrying right now about functionality or privacy or other things--the two options would be exactly the same except for whether families would enter their own data. What do you think? Let us know... share your thoughts... be polite, though... we're all friends here, even if we have different opinions. I figure we can all learn from each other!

Posted by Becky at 03:04 PM | Permalink | Comments (22)