Public reports on drinking water quality known as Consumer Confidence Reports (CCRs) are mandated by the 1996 Amendments to the Safe Drinking Water Act. The reports, referred to as right-to-know information, are intended to facilitate consumer decisions about their drinking water. Of interest is whether the public considers the CCR as a useful source of information. This poster presentation will give participants an overview of the information objectives of CCR regulations and compare different ways to evaluate the usefulness of an informative document. Three pilot studies of consumer satisfaction with the CCR were conducted among 3 communities: 1) a mailed survey in communities A & B, 2) a telephone survey in community C, and 3) the plus-minus text evaluation method in community C. The surveys included close-ended and open-ended items. The telephone survey had a better response rate (67%, n=48) than the mailed survey (22%, n=67), scaled items provided a measure of consumer satisfaction while open-ended items yielded data that identified specific likes and dislikes, and, the plus-minus method generated the largest number of specific comments. The results generated by different evaluation methods, and, the advantages and disadvantages of each are presented. The telephone survey data indicated the CCR did not meet the information needs of about ¼ of the respondents. In the mailed survey participants perceived the quality of the CCR as very good. Evaluation methods and questions should be carefully selected to provide data that is useful to the evaluation objectives
Learning Objectives: Participants who attend this poster session can identify the main communication objectives of the Consumer Confidence Report.They also can describe the difference between evaluation methods that verify the quality of a document and those that identify specific reader problems.
Keywords: Drinking Water Quality, Communication Evaluation
Presenting author's disclosure statement:
Organization/institution whose products or services will be discussed: None
I do not have any significant financial interest/arrangement or affiliation with any organization/institution whose products or services are being discussed in this session.