X hits on this document

219 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

33 / 108

The Project Management Team compiled a summary of the responses and the top five groups that states were “very interested in doing”: Small Quantity Generators of Hazardous Waste (SQGs), Auto Body Shops, Underground Storage Tanks (UST), Dental Offices and Stage II Programs. After further discussion, “Stage II Programs” was not selected as a measurement group and was not included in the second work assignment. See Appendix D for individual state responses to group preference checklist.

    • 2.2

      SELECTING THE INDICATORS

      • 2.2.1

        Summer Work Assignment 2: Group and Indicator Packet

The second work assignment asked states to complete a Group and Indicator Packet for each of the groups that they were interested in measuring. The purpose of this assignment was to:

  • Further refine thinking about the top four groups in order to select final group(s) to

measure.

  • Begin to develop preliminary indicators for those selected groups.

  • Identify the data issues associated with those indicators.

The Group and Indicator Packet consisted of two parts: a) The Group Evaluation Chart and b) The Indicator Evaluation Charts. States were asked to complete these charts based on the data quality training from the project kick-off meeting as well as the follow-up training each state received in September 2006.

2.2.2 Part A: The Group Evaluation Chart

The Group Evaluation Chart asked states to identify a group and consider a series of issues that would influence selection of the group for measurement:

The States Common Measures Project Final Report

33

Document info
Document views219
Page views219
Page last viewedSat Dec 03 03:16:31 UTC 2016
Pages108
Paragraphs3821
Words29990

Comments