My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FLOOD08639
CWCB
>
Floodplain Documents
>
Backfile
>
8001-9000
>
FLOOD08639
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/25/2010 7:15:09 PM
Creation date
10/5/2006 3:46:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Floodplain Documents
County
Statewide
Community
State of Colorado
Stream Name
All
Basin
Statewide
Title
Statewide River Rehabilitation and Floodplain Management Needs Inventory
Date
2/18/1998
Prepared For
CWCB
Prepared By
McLaughlin Water Engineers, Ltd.
Floodplain - Doc Type
Educational/Technical/Reference Information
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
90
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />CHAPTER III <br /> <br />COMPILATION OF NEEDS ASSlcSSMENT DATABASE <br /> <br />GENERAL DESCRIPTION <br /> <br />Once the questionnaires wen~ filled out by the various communities, a method was needed to categorize <br />and store the information contained in e,ach questionnaire, MicroSoft Access 97 was used because of the <br />great diversity the program knds to its users. The databasf: was divided into two main parts, wmmunities <br />and organizations, for each questionnaire sent out. (See Appendix C for a copy of the original <br />questionnaires distributed.) Even thou,!:h the two parts are similar overall there were enough differences <br />to warrant the separation, <br /> <br />Each part contains one table for every major section of the questionnaires, six for communities and five <br />for organizations. (The question reBarding a need for single purpose projects in the community <br />questionnaire was regarded as a major section because it lacked any relationship to other sections,) There <br />are essential items required by all data ertries, for example, the community, county and organization name, <br />Each community is then linked to a num'Jer allowing Acc(~ss to keep track of all the information associated <br />with a particular questionnaire response, Every table has an additional number to distinguish which table <br />the data came from, <br /> <br />Differences Between DatabllSe and Questionnaires <br />The Needs Assessment database contains more information than what was originally reqUi:sted in the <br />questionnaires. Some communities provided maps with their responses which led to the addition of a <br />yes/no response to indicate that there is a map in the hard copy file, The type of map was also recorded, <br /> <br />Another difference between ~le database and the questionnaire is that each yes/no response or check box <br />has an individual description associated with it. For example, the question regarding the amount of stream <br />erosion, which has three diff,:rent yes/no responses, had only one line for questionnaire respondents to <br />indicate length of stream erosion suffered. In the database, reach lengths having erosion are se~parated for <br />each yes/no response (e.g. a length for vertical movement, a length for channel meandering, etc,), If a <br />single length or description was given and more than one box was checked, the length was indicated as the <br />total length for all three responses. <br /> <br />The final difference, which iis seen mostly in the organiz:ation part, is the addition of remark boxes <br />(descriptive responses) for yes/no resporu;es. Many organizations made beneficial comment~ next to yes/no <br />responses but the questionnaires did not have indicated lines to write tile response, To make the database <br /> <br />m-l <br /> <br />97.060001 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.