Economic 

Research 

Service

Electronic Publications from the Food Assistance & Nutrition Research Program

Establishing a Web-Based Data

Collection System for National

School Lunch and National School

Breakfast Program Data

Technical Report

Abstract

This report is a followup to an initiative to establish a central website to collect data from

States on the National School Lunch and the School Breakfast Programs. A central website

could be used by researchers and program administrators to compare and analyze data across

State and local areas for participation trends in local school district programs. The report 

provides an implementation plan for establishing a central website, including potential costs,

benefits, and alternatives. The initiative is one of three that have the potential to improve the

usefulness and cost-effectiveness of research on Federal food assistance and nutrition programs.

The other initiatives are addressed in the reports, Linking the Current Population Survey to

State Food Stamp Program Administrative Data (E-FAN-04-005-1) and Linking WIC

Program Data to Medicaid and Vital Records Data (E-FAN-04-005-2).

E-FAN-04-005-3

June 2004

This report was prepared by Health Systems Research, Inc., and RTI

under a research contract from the Economic Research Service. The

views expressed are those of the authors and not necessarily those of

ERS or USDA.

By Loren Bell, Health Systems Research, Inc., and Anne Kenyon,

Todd Heinrich, and Dea Zullo, RTI

ERS project representatives: Parke Wilde and Alex Majchrowicz
TABLE OF CONTENTS 

I. OVERVIEW............................................................................... 1 

II. BACKGROUND........................................................................ 4 

III. INITIATIVE SUMMARY ............................................................ 6 

STRUCTURE AND CONTENT...................................................................................... 6 

IMPORTANCE FOR RESEARCH AND ADMINISTRATIVE PURPOSES.............................. 7 

IV. OVERVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN................... 10 

DESCRIPTION OF ACTORS....................................................................................... 10 

OVERVIEW OF THE ACTIVITIES .............................................................................. 11 

POTENTIAL IMPLEMENTATION BARRIERS .............................................................. 13 

V. DESCRIPTION OF SPECIFIC TASKS................................... 14 

TASK 1 – CONDUCT INITIAL AND SUBSEQUENT STEERING COMMITTEE

 MEETINGS............................................................................................ 14 

TASK 2 – DEVELOP CONTACT LISTS ................................................................... 14 

TASK 3 – CONDUCT ASSESSMENT OF STATE-LEVEL DATA BEING COLLECTED .. 15 

TASK 4 – COLLECT SAMPLE OF ARCHIVED DATA FROM STATES......................... 16 

TASK 5 – IDENTIFY AND CONDUCT REVIEW OF EXISTING DATABASES............... 17 

TASK 6 – ANALYZE DATA ELEMENTS, ASSESS AVAILABILITY, AND DEFINE 

 CORE DATA SET .................................................................................. 17 

TASK 7 – EXPLORE AND POTENTIALLY DEVELOP OPTIONS FOR USING 

 AUTOMATED UPLOADS TO RETRIEVE DATA FROM STATES OR

 EXISTING DATABASES ......................................................................... 18 

TASK 8 – DESIGN THE WEBSITE, INCLUDING DEFINING DATA SECURITY 

AND ACCESS ........................................................................................ 19 

TASK 9 – BUILD COMPUTER-ASSISTED DATA ENTRY PROGRAMS........................ 20 

TASK 10 – BUILD TOOLS TO QUERY, SORT, AND EXPORT THE DATA.................... 21 

TASK 11 – DESIGN SUMMARY TABLES, REPORTS, AND ARTICLES TO BE

 POSTED TO THE WEB............................................................................ 21 

TASK 12 – IMPLEMENT INITIAL DATA COLLECTION FOR NINE STATES................. 22 

TASK 13 – OBTAIN OMB CLEARANCE.................................................................. 23 

TASK 14 – PREPARE TO ADD ADDITIONAL STATES............................................... 23 

VI. SUMMARY OF COSTS AND SCHEDULE............................. 25 

VII. SUMMARY OF INITIATIVE ALTERNATIVES........................ 27 

SNPIIS PIGGY-BACK ALTERNATIVE...................................................................... 27 

OTHER ALTERNATIVES .......................................................................................... 28 

VIII. REFERENCES........................................................................ 31 

ii 
iii 

TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) 

IX. APPENDIX A: DETAILED COST ASSUMPTIONS FOR 

SPECIFIC TASKS: BASE INITIATIVE ...................................32 

X. APPENDIX B: DETAILED COST ASSUMPTIONS FOR 

SPECIFIC TASK ALTERNATIVES AND SUMMARY OF 

SNPIIS PIGGY-BACK INITIATIVE ALTERNATIVE ................44 

LIST OF EXHIBITS 

EXHIBIT 1. EXAMPLE OF A “MOCK” REPORT WITH EMBEDDED WEB LINKS ............ 8 

LIST OF TABLES 

TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF COSTS OF BASE INITIATIVE BY GOVERNMENT AGENCY... 25 

TABLE 2. SUMMARY BY PROPOSED TASK OF SCHEDULE AND ESTIMATED COST ... 25 

TABLE A-1. LABOR AND NON-LABOR COSTS BY TASK, WEB-BASED DATA

 COLLECTION SYSTEM INITIATIVE............................................... 32 

TABLE A-2. SUMMARY OF WEB-BASED INITIATIVE LABOR AND NON-LABOR

 COSTS....................................................................................... 35 

TABLE B-1. COST OF TASK ALTERNATIVES FOR WEB-BASED INITIATIVE.............. 46 

TABLE B-2. SUMMARY OF WEB-BASED INITIATIVE ALTERNATIVE TASK COSTS ... 47 

TABLE B-3. SNPIIS PIGGY-BACK INITIATIVE ALTERNATIVE: TASKS 

 RETAINED/ELIMINATED .............................................................. 48 

I. OVERVIEW 

The purpose of this report is to establish a central website to collect data from 

States about the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the School Breakfast 

Program (SBP). This report is a follow-up to Wittenburg, et al. (2001), which included a 

summary of ten data collection/enhancement initiatives that have the potential to improve 

the utility and cost-effectiveness of research on federal food assistance and nutrition 

programs. Economic Research Service (ERS) selected three initiatives from that report 

for further development. This report, along with Wittenburg, et al. (2001) and Bell

(2001), provide a specific implementation plan, including potential costs, benefits, and 

alternative options, for the three initiatives selected by ERS. 

This initiative proposes to establish a central website to collect data from States 

about the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the School Breakfast Program

(SBP), which together served approximately 34 million children daily in FY2000 at a 

cost of approximately $7 billion1

. Data would be collected at the School Food Authority 

level (i.e., these are typically school districts) and would include information about the 

characteristics of participating SFAs and students. In addition to serving as a data 

collection point, the proposed website will be used to disseminate resulting databases, 

summary reports, and articles. 

A phased approach is suggested, which will query state-level contacts to obtain SFAlevel data and gradually increase the respondent pool and expand the nature of the data 

being collected, as much as is feasible. Although States cannot be required to participate, 

FNS could tie participation to program funding to encourage compliance. However, 

some considerations weigh against mandating participation, at least in the early stages of 

this initiative. After this initiative has been piloted, FNS may need to consider additional 

rulemaking to require states' participation in order for the database to be representative. 

The first phase of implementation will include the design of the website, identification of

state-level contacts (i.e., “respondents”) for approximately 20 states, and collection of 

data from an initial set of nine states. A core set of data elements will be identified and 

collected from these state contacts, and initial reports to be posted on the web will be 

designed. Subsequent phases of the initiative will include the expansion of the respondent 

base to incorporate additional states, a possible expansion of the data collection requests 

to include school-level data, and the development of a school food authorities contact list 

to which web-based queries will be directed. This initiative provides an initial 

framework upon which relevant stakeholders—including the Education Information 

Advisory Council (EIAC), States, the American School Food Service Association 

(ASFSA), and USDA—can build; it must be recognized that part of this initiative is an 

exploration of available data and their potential uses for researchers. 

This initiative seeks to capitalize on information routinely collected by state 

agencies and aggregated across SFAs but not systematically compiled for research use as 

 

1

 Child Nutrition Web Pages, U.S. Department of Agriculture Website. 

1
a database of SFA-level observations. Often these data become part of higher-order 

aggregates reported and analyzed as state totals, but the details—easily accessed at the 

prior step—are then lost. A "data capture" of these local-level aggregates could produce 

important benefits for the NSLP and SBP, and possibly be extended to the other food 

assistance and nutrition programs. We acknowledge that this initiative will require states 

to report more "data fields" than they are currently reporting and that this may increase 

their reporting burden; however, since states are already required to collect these data to 

support their aggregate-level reporting requirements, the increase in reporting burden 

should not be extreme. 

A national database that contains data at the SFA level could be used by 

researchers and program administrators to compare and analyze data across both state and 

local geographic areas (e.g., school districts or regions). For example, SFAs with similar 

demographic characteristics would be able to compare percentages of free or reducedprice meals across different grade levels to identify programs with high success rates. 

SFAs that have lower rates may then be able to identify some of the key elements of 

success that contribute to higher rates. 

Where possible, SFAs would be mapped to school districts, enabling the 

incorporation of district-level data, such as name, geographic location, size (number of 

students), and meals served broken out by paid, free, and reduced price categories. The 

2000 Census geographic files include school district boundaries, and an initial 

exploration could be done on the viability of using these linkages. The resulting data 

could permit characterization of the school districts based on the following factors: 

• Degree of poverty (i.e., high vs. low) 

• Degree of urbanicity (i.e., urban vs. suburban vs. rural) 

• Level of NSLP/SBP participation 

The initiative proposes that SFA data2

 be collected for one month each year 

corresponding to the timing of the states’ annual reporting requirement to FNS. While 

there is much variability in when SFAs report data to the States, part of this initiative will 

explore the optimal time to request these data. Thus, this initiative seeks to create as

much as possible, a point-in-time view of program characteristics and participation of 

low-income children, providing comparable information that highlights differences 

across SFAs. The resulting database would contain SFA-level information about children 

who qualify for free and reduced-price meals, as well as the number of meals served to

all children in the SFA. 

Users will be able to query the system for information contained in the resulting 

database or view summary tables, reports, and articles designed to highlight the collected 

data. At the same time, to keep the information on the website from becoming static, this 

initiative proposes to periodically download information that is reported by states to the 

 

2

 As mentioned earlier, subsequent phases of this initiative will potentially expand the number and type of respondents 

to include survey requests to school district food authorities and requests to states or individual school districts for

school-level data. 

2
federal government, such as the aggregated data that go into producing the federally 

mandated monthly and annual Reports of School Program Operations, and incorporate it 

into the reports and tables posted on the website. This will allow researchers to examine 

trends in participation at the state level and compare them to local school district 

demographics. Due to the “phased” nature of the proposed implementation as well as the 

fact that data collection requests will take place annually (at least initially), it must be 

noted that it will take several years to create a database that will provide sufficient data to 

permit longitudinal analyses. 

3
II. BACKGROUND 

Many of the NSLP/SBP data are already collected by local school districts and 

reported to their state Departments of Education, where they are aggregated to produce 

the federally mandated monthly and annual Reports of School Program Operations for 

each state. Because the use of Netscape and Explorer browsers is so widespread among 

organizations today, and most computer programs developed to collect information are 

supported by these browsers, the Internet represents an ideal medium for providing nearly 

universal access to the resulting program data from almost any geographic location. This 

initiative would permit dissemination of the collected data in a variety of formats, 

including tables, articles, and reports. 

Over the years, a number of national databases have been developed to track 

participation in food assistance programs (e.g., the WIC program participant 

characteristics database). These national databases rely on state program administrators 

to collect data from local programs delivering services and to aggregate the information 

into a format prescribed by USDA. In general, these national databases tend to focus on 

client and program participation issues, benefit distribution, and client demographics. 

However, state and local food assistance programs often provide far more details in their 

data than ever are reported at the national level. For example, data regarding the number 

of school meals served in the NSLP and SBP are collected first for individual schools, 

then reported to school districts, passed on to state agencies as district-wide aggregates, 

and finally aggregated into a single state total reported to the Food and Nutrition Service. 

By the time the information is collected and aggregated at the federal level, it is 

impossible to compare demographics or participation rates between school districts 

within a state, let alone among school districts of similar size located in different states. 

As discussed earlier, there is also potentially some important program descriptive and 

cost information collected locally but never aggregated or reviewed at either the state or

federal level. 

Part of this initiative includes an exploration of data currently available from

existing databases and whether that data might be useful to include in the proposed 

database. For example, the National Center for Education Statistics maintains a 

comprehensive national statistical database [i.e., the Common Core of Data (CCD)] of all 

public elementary and secondary schools containing data on school lunch participation 

rates, demographics, school type and geographic location. By consolidating the data that 

are already collected by school districts into a single, accessible database, researchers 

would be able to both conduct analyses of those district-level data and potentially 

combine these data with existing databases, such as the CCD, to conduct trend analysis 

related to school district demographics. 

Having better access to state and local data is important if research is to be

expanded beyond simple information about program participation . Issues related to the 

effectiveness of program services can only be examined if more and better data are 

available. The problem of limited access to local data was cited by the report of the 

Advisory Panel on the Research Uses of Administrative Data, which noted that "program

4
administrators and policymakers will need reliable state and local data if, among other 

things, they are to summarize program operations; determine who is being served by 

which programs; who is being underserved; who is not being served; and how services 

can best be targeted to those in greatest need...” (Hotz, et al., 1998). In addition, the 

Panel noted that national survey research could not adequately monitor the diverse local 

programs currently being funded by state and local governments. To better understand 

the dynamics of food assistance programs at the local level, as well as to better 

understand how well clients are being served, better access to local data seems critical. 

5
III. INITIATIVE SUMMARY 

Structure and Content 

This initiative seeks to address current data access limitations for NSLP/SBP by 

using the Internet to host surveys and computer-assisted data entry programs to collect 

SFA data in a uniform way. Data can be collected, cleaned, and posted back to a central 

website location quickly, enabling more timely use of the data by interested (and 

authorized) USDA agency and program staff, and state- and school district-level 

authorities. The ability to obtain expedited data will allow USDA to better deal with 

current policy and program issues and may also broaden the types of research it conducts. 

The website will be designed to allow directors of food service programs within 

State Departments of Education and other State-level officials to submit and obtain SFAlevel food and nutrition program data. Not only would state-level authorities have access 

to the database, but also individuals at the federal level and potentially public users would 

have access to the data. The website will be developed to allow states to report the 

relevant data via electronic upload where possible or via a computer assisted data entry 

program. Researchers and state level officials (i.e., the target constituents) could access 

the data by querying the system or downloading any of the summary-level reports posted 

to the website. The website will serve both those who are “browsing” or seeking 

particular information and those who may be looking for a dataset to download for 

research purposes. 

 The potential exists for the national database to include both current information 

about the school food service programs in each SFA, as well as demographic information 

about the SFAs themselves. One of the distinct advantages of using the web-based 

approach to creating the national database is that relevant data regarding some of the 

demographic characteristics of the food service programs can be captured through the use 

of standardized request forms (i.e., computer-assisted data entry forms). These forms 

would yield standardized demographic summaries for each SFA, which can provide some

consistency in conducting data analysis by demographic variables. This type of data 

provides a “value added” to the database and provides an opportunity for researchers and 

program administrators to conduct comparisons using standardized demographic 

variables. As part of the development of these forms (Task 9), standardized definitions 

would be developed and provided to users, to attempt to collect standardized data during 

the data collection process. However, as with any data collection activity, there is still 

some probability that states or localities may interpret definitions differently during the 

reporting or data entry process. To the extent that this initiative will provide useful data

to the states, we hope that there will be an incentive to report better quality data. 

Exhibit 1 displays a “mock” summary-level report that is geared to a broad 

audience and is designed to allow the reader to click on various links within the report to 

access data files or related tables. These types of reports can be automatically generated, 

depending on the types of tables or text required. 

6
Importance for Research and Administrative Purposes 

A national database that contains data at the SFA level could be used by 

researchers and program administrators to compare and analyze data across both state and 

local geographic areas. These data could be used to answer some basic questions about 

participation trends in local school district programs. Some examples of the types of 

research questions that this initiative could address include: 

 To what extent do SFAs of similar size and demographic characteristics 

succeed in enrolling low-income clients into the free and reduced–price school 

meals programs?

 What are the characteristics of SFAs that serve a high percentage of students 

in their school meals programs?

 How does enrollment in the free and reduced-price school meals programs

compare with enrollment in other food assistance programs within specific 

geographic areas? 

 What trends in NSLP/SBP participation occur over time? How do these 

trends vary by type of SFA? 

During the key informant interviews conducted for this project, representatives 

from NSLP/SBP noted that it would be valuable to compare program participation trends 

across local school districts with similar demographics and characteristics, but not located 

within the same state. An example that was noted was the ability to compare the number 

of free and reduced price meals served and the rates of school lunch and school breakfast 

participation between large school districts located in inner cities across various states.

The number of school meals served, broken out by free, reduced price, and paid, 

will be available at an aggregated level for each school district. This will allow 

researchers to examine the extent to which school districts of similar size and 

demographics are serving these client groups as well as the proportion of children 

enrolled in local schools who eat meals funded by the NSL and SB programs. These 

outcomes can then be examined in relation to school district policies, procedures, or 

outreach methods. The ability to examine program outcomes from other state and local 

7
Exhibit 1. Example of a “Mock” Report with Embedded Web Links 

8
programs around the country will help local school districts identify and contact other 

programs to discuss why some programs are more successful than others. 

Researchers could merge the aggregated file with individual records to examine 

correlations between broad trends in the NSLP/SBP at the local level and individual 

participant characteristics. In addition, data could be merged with Census data to 

examine trends in program participation based upon community demographics and 

income levels of school district residents. 

Because data from local school districts can be identified by a specific geographic 

unit (e.g., counties), these data can be compared with data from other food assistance 

programs serving the same geographic areas. This type of comparison would allow

program administrators and researchers to examine the extent to which programs are 

reaching those in need of services. 

9
IV. OVERVIEW OF THE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN 

This section introduces the proposed methodology for the initiative to establish a 

web-based data collection framework. Specifically, it provides a description of the 

primary actors, activities, and implementation barriers. 

Description of Actors 

The implementation of the website as a data collection tool and data repository 

will be conducted by two primary actors: USDA and state government employees. The 

likely state government actors will be individuals within each State’s Department of 

Education, although it is not clear whether these individuals will be directors of food and 

nutrition programs or individuals from other departments. Additional players may include 

district-level school authorities (for specific data collection requests). 

USDA will be responsible for: 

 Conducting an initial meeting to identify the required “core” database 

elements, target constituents, and data collection schedules, and hosting 

subsequent “steering committee” meetings during the first phase of the 

project; 

 Developing contact lists for food and nutrition program directors within each 

state and selecting a representative nine states to include in the first round of 

data collection; 

 Conducting an assessment of SFA-level data currently being collected by the 

States; 

 Collecting a sample of archived data from States; 

 Identifying and conducting a review of existing databases; 

 Analyzing data elements, assessing availability, and defining the core data set; 

 Exploring options for using automated uploads to retrieve data from states or 

existing databases; 

 Designing the website, including defining data security and access; 

 Building computer-assisted data entry programs; 

 Building tools to query, sort, and export the data; 

 Designing summary tables, reports, and articles to be posted to the Web; 

10
 Conducting training and implementing data collection for the initial nine 

selected states; 

 Obtaining OMB clearance to increase the number of participating states; and 

 Preparing to add additional states. 

State-level employees (i.e., directors of food and nutrition programs within State 

Departments of Education) will be responsible for: 

 Participating in an interview to report data currently collected at the SFA 

level, their structures, and their format; 

 Obtaining requested archived data and sending the data to USDA for review; 

 Using the web-based computer assisted data entry programs to provide 

requested data for data elements not subject to automatic upload. 

Additional actors who may be involved include: 

 Individuals from the US Department of Education (to answer questions about 

publicly available databases); and 

 District-level school authorities to answer questions about data currently being 

collected and possibly to respond to Web-initiated surveys. 

Neither of these two actors’ roles will be costed in this report due to the 

uncertainty surrounding their roles. 

Overview of the Activities 

The proposed initiative will be conducted in several phases, implemented over a 

period of at least two years. Several preliminary activities need to take place prior to 

initiating data collection requests and producing final databases and reports. A 

comprehensive task list is provided in Section V; however, we note the preliminary 

activities below because of their importance in defining the final scope of this initiative. 

These activities, along with the remaining steps that will be taken to implement this 

initiative, are discussed briefly in the paragraphs that follow: 

 Conduct an initial meeting with FNS, ERS, the Education Information and 

Advisory Committee (EIAC), and the American School Food Service 

Association (ASFSA) to define minimum and desired database elements and 

research objectives (including whether periodic downloads from federally 

available data are desired); 

 Develop contact lists of Directors of Food Service programs within State 

Departments of Education and conduct an inventory of the data currently 

11
collected, their format (e.g., how are these data received from school districts: 

electronically or via hard copy); and 

 Conduct a review of existing databases and their contents (such as the 

aforementioned CCD maintained by the National Center for Education 

Statistics) to determine whether any essential elements of the database can be 

pulled in from existing, available databases. 

Conduct Initial and Subsequent Steering Committee Meetings. It will be important 

not to simply collect data because they are available but to set the proper context by 

identifying how collecting these data at the local program level will enhance program 

research efforts. Hence the importance of an initial meeting among the initiative’s target 

constituents. As part of the initial evaluation of what data elements should be collected, 

it will be important to consider whether these data are valuable to program administrators 

or researchers in achieving national research goals. It must be remembered that some of 

the data collected by local programs may serve a limited purpose related to local program

administration, and may not be useful or important in conducting research on national 

issues. These preliminary evaluations and discussions should help in limiting the overall 

size of the database to the most important data elements. We also recommend identifying 

a steering committee to provide input and guidance during the first phase of this 

initiative. 

Conduct Inventory of State-level Data. To explore whether nutritional program

data currently collected at the SFA level can be combined with school district 

demographic information to facilitate comparisons of program participation between 

districts of comparable size and demographics, it will be important to conduct an 

inventory to determine the nature of the data currently collected by states on their school 

districts’ NSLP and SBP. Included in this assessment will be the development of criteria 

for creating an accessible national database, the limitations on the amount of data that 

will be made available to persons outside the federal government, and methods by which 

these data could be accessed. As it is not likely that all state or local programs will 

collect the same or similar data, this preliminary evaluation will also serve to identify the 

similarities and differences in the types of data collected and any variations in the data 

definitions across states. Consistent data definitions for client and agency data will need 

to be developed. Once the inventory is complete, data elements will be analyzed to 

determine the extent to which they are consistent and are collected and available in 

electronic format. From this information, profiles of data sets can be developed to begin 

the process of designing the database and computer-assisted data entry programs. 

Once the above activities have been completed, the rest of the initiative can 

proceed with the design of the website, the development of computer-assisted data entry 

programs to collect the required data should the data not be readily accessible in 

electronic form from the states, and the population of the database through queries to 

individual states. As part of this initiative, a preliminary set of summary tables, reports, 

and articles will also be designed for posting to the web. 

12
Potential Implementation Barriers 

Although we feel that the advantages of participating far outweigh the disadvantages, 

there are potential barriers to implementing this system. For example, there may be states 

that are unwilling to participate, either because of resource constraints or an 

unwillingness to share information in this manner. There may be difficulty in defining

common data elements such that correlations and analyses are valid. Finally, although 

unlikely, there may be regions where access to internet systems is either restricted or nonexistent. 

13
V. DESCRIPTION OF SPECIFIC TASKS 

This section presents the 14 tasks we suggest to implement this initiative. For 

each task description, we provide a summary of the goals and activities that would take

place, as well as a list of the key subtasks or deliverables. At the end of each task 

description, we present an estimated cost for each of the key actors in the task. Where 

applicable, task alternatives are discussed and their costs summarized. In many cases, no 

alternative tasks are suggested. For most of the tasks, USDA is assumed to have primary 

responsibility for the task activities; however, USDA could choose to contract out some

or all of these activities. States’ involvement is noted in brackets next to the subtask lists. 

Task 1 – Conduct Initial and Subsequent Steering Committee Meetings 

Conduct an initial meeting with FNS, ERS, EIAC, and ASFSA to define 

minimum and desired database elements and research objectives (including whether 

periodic downloads from federally available data are desired). To obtain continued 

feedback/oversight from these key constituents, select a committee to serve as a “steering 

committee” and establish a series of approximately four steering committee meetings 

throughout the duration of the project. The budget assumes that USDA will pay for 

travel associated with steering committee meetings. Deliverables and subtasks will 

include: 

 A final definition of desired database elements and research objectives. 

 A preliminary schedule for querying States and, possibly, district school 

authorities. 

 Identification of steering committee members and schedule for steering 

committee meetings. 

 A final workplan. 

USDA Costs: $28,945

State Costs: $40

Total Task Cost: $28,985

Task 2 – Develop Contact Lists 

Develop contact lists of directors of food service programs within an initial set of 

20 State Departments of Education. The deliverable of this task will be a list that will 

include at least one contact within each of the 20 State Departments of Education. If all 

parties agree in the initial meeting, Task 2 will also include creating a preliminary list of 

district school food authorities, if this information is easily available. While a contact 

will be developed for each of the 20 States’ Department of Education, it is recommended 

that only nine states be selected for the initiative tasks. Adding additional states will 

14
require obtaining OMB clearance, which should not be necessary if only nine states are 

used initially. The selection of both the initial 20 States for which contacts will be 

developed as well as the final nine States to select for participation will be made in 

conjunction with ERS and FNS to ensure representation across states with varying school 

districts, demographics, sizes, etc. Once the website has been developed and the nine 

states are participating, additional states will be added. 

Subtasks: 

 Define an initial group of 20 States to call and the 9 states to sample (i.e., 

participate) in the initiative. 

 Use a combination of phone calls, emails and letters to various individuals in 

the State Departments of Education or state food service programs to request 

the name of individuals to contact for the desired elements outlined in the 

initial meeting. [States and USDA] 

 Develop a list of key contacts that will be used for the data collection effort. 

This may require more than one contact in each state. 

 Send the members on the contact list a letter to outline the actors and objective 

of the collection project and define the anticipated roll of the contact. 

USDA Costs: $8,366

State Costs: $2,224

Total Task Cost: $10,590

Task Alternative: Solicit Contact Information and Participation from the States 

One possibility for determining contacts and selecting the nine initial states to 

participate in the initiative is to take a less proactive approach than the task above 

suggests and send an email or letter to States asking if they would like to participate in 

this initiative and to identify the appropriate contact person if so. This might lead to a

less diverse selection of nine states for the first phase of the initiative, but it would reduce 

labor required to identify contacts. 

USDA Costs: $5,332

State Costs: $2,780

Total Alternative Cost: $8,111

[Totals may not add due to rounding.] 

Task 3 – Conduct Assessment of State-Level Data Being Collected 

For Task 3, develop a structured interview form to be used to conduct interviews 

with directors of food service programs within State Departments of Education. Use of a 

15
standardized form will ensure that terminology used and questions asked during each 

interview are consistent. Using the contact list developed in Task 2, conduct structured 

interviews with contacts in nine States to identify data currently reported to the State by 

SFAs, formats in which data are delivered, and what data are regularly aggregated and 

reported to the federal level. As part of the interview, it will be critical to examine how 

eligibility data are collected and reported at the SFA level, to what extent these data are 

broken out by participant demographics, and how feasible it would be to incorporate 

these data into the envisioned database. 

The deliverable of this task will be a matrix of data elements currently available at

the school district level by each of the nine states, as well as a final contact for each of the 

states. It may also be necessary to contact some of the school districts within the nine 

states to examine the variability of data between districts and the capabilities of districts 

to report electronically. 

Subtasks: 

 Develop a structured interview form to be used to conduct interviews with 

state contacts (to report on the data they are currently collecting). 

 Determine the best method for executing the survey (e.g., phone, mail, web, 

etc.). 

 Initiate the survey. [States and USDA] 

 Compile the survey results into a document that outlines the current elements 

collected by the states. 

USDA Costs: $16,046

State Costs: $9,318

Total Task Cost: $25,364

 

Task 4 – Collect Sample of Archived Data from States 

This task will occur simultaneously with Task 3. During the interviews with each 

of the nine states, a request will be made for that state to provide archived data (e.g., data 

collected from 1998-2000). Examining the data will help identify and design the data 

elements that will ultimately be collected from the states. Further, it will help determine 

common formats and structures. For example, files can be formatted in different ways, 

such as comma-delimited text files, Excel files, MS Access files, etc. The phrase, “data 

structures,” refers to how the data are organized (for example, one file may contain 

district names, another enrollment information, another program participation data, etc.) 

During this task, the data will be collected, either via hard copy or electronically, and set 

aside for review in a later task. 

16
Subtasks: 

 Create an ftp (file transfer protocol) site to allow states to upload any archived 

data. 

 Create an email address to allow states to email any archived data. 

USDA Costs: $4,811

State Costs: $16,175

Total Task Cost: $20,986

 

Task 5 – Identify and Conduct Review of Existing Databases 

Task 5 can occur simultaneously with Tasks 3 and 4. In this task, identify and 

conduct a review of existing databases and their contents, such as the Common Core of 

Data (CCD) maintained by the National Center for Education Statistics, to determine 

whether any essential elements of the database can be extracted from existing databases. 

The product of this task will be a matrix of data elements available by database source. 

Subtasks: 

 Search the web for online data sources that could be used with State program

data. 

 Contact education researchers to find any data that have been used on prior 

projects that might be applicable. 

 Create a document outlining the data that are currently available. 

 Highlight elements from existing databases that will not need to be collected 

from the state contacts. 

USDA Costs: $15,466

State Costs: $0

Total Task Cost: $15,466

 

Task 6 – Analyze Data Elements, Assess Availability, and Define Core 

Data Set 

Once the State inventory and review of existing databases are complete, all of the 

data elements will be analyzed to determine the extent to which they are consistent and 

available in electronic or hard copy format. This information will be used to design the 

database and computer-assisted data entry programs necessary to ensure standardized

data capture. An assessment will also be made of the best time of year to collect the data. 

The deliverable of this task will be a matrix, by state, showing the final set of core data

17
elements that will be “collected” from the States on a yearly basis, with a notation 

indicating how the data will be derived (electronically or via a survey query, and whether 

they will be collected from the States or downloaded from existing databases). 

Subtasks: 

 Create a document that outlines the different elements available and highlight 

areas of similarity and difference. 

 Meet to discuss and define which items will be used as the core data to be

collected. 

 Determine if some elements should be defined as ‘optional.’ Some elements 

may be desirable to collect but may not be added to the core because of 

inconsistencies or lack of availability. 

 Draft a list of core elements. 

USDA Costs: $20,830

State Costs: $0

Total Task Cost: $20,830

 

 

Task 7 – Explore and Potentially Develop Options for Using Automated 

Uploads to Retrieve Data from States or Existing Databases 

During this task, which will begin simultaneously with Tasks 3, 4, and 5, the 

archived data provided by the States and information collected during the interviews will 

be reviewed to determine whether there are any software packages or formats commonly 

used to warehouse the core data. If common formats are identified, applications will be 

developed to allow contacts to submit core data by uploading files over the Internet. Also 

during this task, applications will be developed to retrieve data that are currently 

available on-line. The deliverable of this task will be a set of applications to facilitate 

collection of the core data with minimal burden to the State-level contacts. 

Subtasks: 

 Analyze the archived data that is collected in Task 4, looking for common 

formats and/or identifying common software packages used by the state. 

 Determine if there are enough similarities in the data that would allow the 

creation of an automated process to gather some of the core data from the 

state. This could include applications where the states upload data to the 

centralized website or where applications are written to retrieve data from 

existing databases. 

18
 Build a set of applications for the formats that are common among the 

different data sets. 

USDA Costs: $14,594

State Costs: $0

Total Task Cost: $14,594

 

Task Alternative: Eliminate Use of Automatic Uploads from States 

While this alternative still includes the review and potential development of tools 

to retrieve data automatically from existing databases, it defines an option for not 

building tools to automatically upload data from the States. The cost of this task would 

decrease; however, in not automatically uploading data from States, States would have to 

key the data into a worksheet (if a web-based system is used) or send the data on hard 

copy. If States elect to send hard copy data to USDA, USDA will have to key the hard 

copy data directly into a database (or into a worksheet that can be uploaded to the 

database), thus increasing labor hours for USDA if an automatic upload is not used. 

However, until USDA conducts interviews with States to determine how these data are 

stored, it is not clear whether the use of automatic uploads will be useful or not. 

USDA Costs: $7,477

State Costs: $0 

Total Alternative Cost: $7,477

 

Task 8 – Design the Website, including Defining Data Security and Access 

Design the website. Include links that provide background and information about 

the purpose of the website and its contents, including descriptions and availability of the 

core data. During this task, identify and define user groups and create a security structure 

to restrict levels of user access. Establish procedures to manage requests for restricted 

levels of access. 

Subtasks: 

 Create images and design elements to be used in the website. 

 Define structure and sections to be used on the website. 

 Set up a web server to host the web site. 

 Determine if a unique URL should be used and register it, if needed. 

 Set up the security structure for the web site. 

 Determine which content will/will not be restricted to authorized personnel. 

19
 Establish a procedure to determine who should have access to the restricted 

areas. 

 Build an application to manage users and security. 

 Establish an approval procedure for posting content. 

USDA Costs: $17,900

State Costs: $0

Total Task Cost: $17,900

 

Task 9 – Build Computer-Assisted Data Entry Programs

To accommodate states that are not equipped to handle the automated tools 

developed in Task 7, an Internet-based computer-assisted data entry application will be 

developed to allow contacts to submit the core data. A series of browser-based 

worksheets will be designed to collect the data. The web application will include detailed 

instructions and validation features to ensure that data collected are consistent across 

States. Sample worksheets will also be developed to help the States gather and organize 

the data before data are keyed in the requested format. 

Subtasks: 

 Determine who will be using the computer-assisted data program.

 Create username/password for each respondent. 

 Notify each respondent of the username/password and login process. 

 Create a ‘paper version’ of the worksheets to collect the core data. 

 Build the web application to handle entry of the data in the worksheets via a 

browser. 

 Create a user manual to answer questions about the collection program. 

 Set up an email address or toll-free number for technical support. 

 Notify users of the option and allow users to request a ‘paper version’ of the 

worksheet if they do not have Internet access. 

 

USDA Costs: $31,153

State Costs: $1,001

Total Task Cost: $32,154

 

20
Task 10 – Build Tools to Query, Sort, and Export the Data 

In this task, build a web-based interface to the database to allow users to query, 

sort, and perform other activities on the collected program data. Initial and continuing

discussions with ERS and FNS will help inform this process and ensure that users will be 

able to sort and query the database as anticipated. A search tool, which will allow 

simultaneous access by multiple users, will be developed. Download functionality will 

be incorporated into the Internet application. A Quality Assurance protocol will be

developed to fully exercise the application and toolset prior to release to the user 

community. 

Subtasks: 

 Build an interface to allow users to select how they want to view the data. 

 Determine key variables that users might want to query and sort. 

 Develop an online glossary that defines each variable in the data set to be

easily accessible while working with project data. 

USDA Costs: $28,313

State Costs: $0

Total Task Cost: $28,313

 

Task 11 – Design Summary Tables, Reports, and Articles to be Posted to 

the Web 

Templates for summary reports and data views will be designed for posting on the web 

site, based on discussions during the initial meeting with staff identified in Task 1. 

Automated content management tools, which will allow selected individuals (e.g., at ERS 

or FNS) to post new articles, graphs, and reports to the website without programmer 

intervention, will be developed. 

Subtasks: 

 Build a tool to allow validated users to post content to the web site. 

 Define the type of reports that should be presented. 

 Develop a series of reports. 

 Establish a procedure to validate data included in reports and to ensure that 

the reports are current. 

21
USDA Costs: $25,188

State Costs: $0

Total Task Cost: $25,188

 

Task 12 – Implement Initial Data Collection for Nine States 

In this task, implement a round of data collection for all of the participating nine 

States. This will include all of the mechanisms that have been constructed to facilitate 

this process, including data entry, automatic uploading of data, and extractions from

existing databases. The estimated budget includes a half-day training session at each of 

the nine State sites on the web-based data entry program3

. It is assumed that there will 

be some “testing” of the final database by States and that some revisions will be made as 

a result of States’ comments. This initial data collection will serve to populate the 

database. Reports and articles can be generated based on these data. The costs are 

broken out by “initial” and “on-going” data collection activities, where on-going 

activities reflect the costs of undertaking the data collection activity on an annual basis. 

Subtasks: 

 Ensure that appropriate data collection mechanisms are in place. 

• Develop training materials and conduct on-site half-day training sessions at 

each of the nine State sites. 

 Implement data collection. [States and USDA]

• Conduct automatic uploads from existing databases and/or States. 

 Manually enter any paper versions received from States. 

 Clean and merge data. 

 Produce reports and articles as desired. 

 Make changes to reports, query tools, database structure as needed 

 

3

 We have budgeted the trainings as half-day on-site in-person sessions; however, it may 

be more cost-effective to produce a streaming video that can be accessed at any time or 

conduct training via teleconference instead. 

22
Initial On-going

USDA Costs: $27,026 $26,405 

State Costs: $8,256 $15,938 

Total Task Cost: $35,282 $42,343 

 

Task 13 – Obtain OMB Clearance 

In this task, an OMB package will be prepared and submitted authorizing the 

additional States to be contacted and queried for participation in the website data 

collection effort. The number of States to be added will depend on discussions with ERS 

and FNS. However, this step is necessary before additional States can be added. 

Subtasks: 

 Prepare a draft and final OMB package for USDA, including copies of data 

collection protocols. 

 Make revisions to protocols as required. 

USDA Costs: $6,742

State Costs: $0

Total Task Cost: $6,742

 

Task 14 – Prepare to Add Additional States 

In this task, preparations will take place to add additional States to the website. 

Adding states will require that states be queried in much the same way as the initial nine. 

That is, States with the capability to provide their data electronically must be identified 

and States that do not have this capability will be targeted as potential users of the data 

entry application. For purposes of costing this initiative, this task includes developing a 

plan for adding states and finalizing a contact person within the remaining states. States 

contacted during Task 2 but not participating in the group of nine will be called to 

confirm the contact person; additional state contacts will be developed. USDA can make 

a decision at this point as to the number of states to phase in for the next round of data 

collection. 

Subtasks: 

 Developing a plan for the phased addition of states. 

 Calling contacts developed in Task 2 to confirm appropriate contact person. 

[States and USDA]

23
 Developing additional contacts within all remaining states. [States and USDA]

 

USDA Costs: $8,051

State Costs: $3,336

Total Task Cost: $11,387

 

24
VI. SUMMARY OF COSTS AND SCHEDULE 

A caveat to this chapter is that the full costs of expanding the database to all states 

and territories that participate in NSLP and SBP are not included here. Task 14 includes 

developing a plan to phase in additional states. The first phase of this initiative, 

collecting data from nine states, will be used to help inform future cost estimates. Table 

1 summarizes the costs of the Base Initiative by government agency. 

Table 1. Summary of Costs of Base Initiative by Government Agency

Agency Total Cost 

USDA $279,837

States $56,248 

Total $336,085

Table 2 summarizes the schedule and estimated cost for each of the proposed 

tasks described in Section V. A detailed itemization of the estimated costs for each task 

in the Base Initiative is presented in Section IX (Appendix A). A detailed itemization of 

the estimated costs for each alternative task is presented in Section X (Appendix B). 

Table 2. Summary by Proposed Task of Schedule and Estimated Cost 

Task Description 

Duration of 

Activity

Estimated 

Cost

Estimated 

Cost of 

Alternative 

Task 1

Conduct Initial and 

Subsequent Steering 

Committee Meetings 

Conduct meeting(s) with FNS, 

ERS, EIAC, and AFSA Month 1 $28,985 NA 

Task 2

Develop Contact Lists 

Develop contact lists within State 

Departments of Education Month 1 $10,590 $8,111 

Task 3

Conduct Assessment of 

State-level Data 

Conduct structured telephone 

interviews with nine States to 

identify data currently collected 

Months 1-3 $25,364 NA 

Task 4

Collect Sample of Archived 

Data from States

Collect archived data from nine 

States interviewed in Task 3 Months 1-3 $20,986 NA 

Task 5

Identify and Conduct 

Review of Existing 

Databases 

Identify existing databases and 

review their contents Months 2-3 $15,466 NA 

(Continued) 

25
Table 2. Summary by Proposed Task of Schedule and Estimated Cost (Concluded)

Task Description 

Duration of 

Activity

Estimated 

Cost

Estimated 

Cost of 

Alternative 

Task 6

Analyze Data Elements, 

Assess Availability, and 

Define Core Data Set 

Examine interview data, archived 

data, and existing database 

information to define core data 

and their sources 

Months 3-5 $20,830 

NA 

Task 7

Explore and Potentially 

Develop Options for Using 

Automated Uploads to 

Retrieve Data 

Analyze interview data, archived 

data, existing databases to 

identify what can be uploaded. 

Develop applications to retrieve 

on-line data 

Months 2-6 $14,594 $7,477 

Task 8

Design the Website, 

including Data Security and 

Data Access 

Design the Website, including 

user groups, security structure, 

and procedures. 

Months 5-7 $17,900 NA 

Task 9

Build Computer-assisted 

Data Entry Programs 

Build web application to allow 

States to submit core data via the

Website. 

Months 5-8 $32,154 NA 

Task 10

Build Tools to Query, Sort 

and Export the Data 

Build the web-based interface to 

allow users to query, sort, and 

export the collected data. 

Months 6-8 $28,313 NA 

Task 11

Design Summary Tables, 

Reports, and Articles to be 

posted to the Web 

Design the templates for 

summary reports and views of the 

data 

Months 5-8 $25,188 NA 

Task 12

Implement Initial Data 

Collection for Nine States 

Implement a round of core data 

collection using all applications for 

the nine participating states. 

Populate summary tables and 

reports. 

Months 9-12 $77,625 NA 

Task 13

Obtain OMB Clearance 

Prepare and submit OMB 

package. Respond to OMB 

comments as needed. 

Months 6-12 $6,742 NA 

Task 14

Prepare to Add Additional 

States 

After obtaining OMB clearance, 

select additional states for 

querying and repeat Tasks 3 and 

7 as needed to determine how 

each State’s data will be obtained 

Month 12+ $11,387 NA 

Total Cost $336,085 NA

 

26
VII. SUMMARY OF INITIATIVE ALTERNATIVES 

This section provides a discussion of alternatives to conducting this initiative. 

SNPIIS Piggy-back Alternative (Summary of Costs provided in Appendix B) 

Before discussing this alternative, we want to stress that the intent of the proposed 

initiative is not only to use a new data collection methodology to capture existing data but 

also to develop an interactive communication tool in the form of the proposed website. 

However, given the current effort to develop the School Nutrition Programs Integrated 

Information System (SNPIIS), we recognize that parts of the proposed initiative may 

result in duplication of effort and increased (and unnecessary) burden to the States. 

Although not definite, it is possible that SNPIIS will eventually collect School Food 

Authority data; this presents a unique opportunity to tailor this initiative to capture those 

data elements directly from SNPIIS. In effect, this would eliminate the need to develop 

computer assisted data entry programs and conduct annual data collections under this 

initiative. 

However, collecting the data is only part of the proposed initiative. The need still 

exists to design a research-friendly database, tables, query tools, and articles that will be 

useful to researchers, States, and district personnel. As such, we suggest in this 

alternative to eliminate some of the proposed activities yet retain the basic elements of 

identifying and working with a steering committee, designing a research-friendly website, 

developing table and article formats, and pursuing ad hoc inquiries with School Food 

Authorities if possible. We also retain activities related to developing automatic data 

uploads, not only from SNPIIS, but also from other databases, since not all of the data 

elements are expected to be available from SNPIIS. Finally, if SNPIIS data becomes 

available for all States, this initiative alternative would not need to be limited to nine 

states. Similarly, OMB clearance would no longer be necessary, as no new data 

collections would be required. 

While not addressed in this alternative, it is also worth considering that many of 

the proposed tasks that attempt to lay the groundwork for the kind of data that would be 

collected in this initiative could help inform the eventual collection of SFA data through 

SNPIIS. For example, developing contact lists at the State level, conducting structured 

interviews with States to assess the format, and type of data available, reviewing archived 

data, identifying existing databases from which data elements can be extracted, are all 

critical steps in building a database that will be useful to the relevant stakeholders. For 

the purposes of costing this initiative alternative, however, we assume that SNPIIS will 

collect many of the SFA data elements sought in this initiative. Thus, we eliminated 

certain tasks and reduced others with this assumption in mind. 

A summary of the costs associated with this initiative alternative is presented in 

Appendix B, along with a discussion of the hours associated with the initiative tasks. 

 

27
Other Alternatives (Not Costed) 

As previously mentioned, many of the proposed tasks are necessary regardless of 

how the data are ultimately collected; however, the use of a web-based data collection 

and display system is not necessary. An alternative to developing the website is to collect 

the data using a mail survey, possibly with a telephone follow-up to clarify or collect 

missing data. The final datafile can then be made available through USDA. Since costing 

out a mail survey of this magnitude would require that many of the proposed tasks be 

redefined or deleted, and new tasks added, we will not attempt to cost this initiative in 

this report. 

Initial tasks of defining the key elements of the database, the schedule of data 

collection, and the selection of the initial nine states will be fairly common across any 

means of collecting the data. Similarly, there will need to be an analysis of which data 

elements are currently available from existing database sources. While this initiative 

proposes to design a system that ostensibly should be able to be used indefinitely, a mail 

survey would require the production and receipt of hard copy forms each time a survey is 

implemented. 

In comparing a web-based data collection system with a mail survey, one needs to 

consider whether the use of a web-based data collection system has advantages that a 

mail survey may not have, and vice versa. From USDA’s perspective, the advantages of 

using a web-based data collection system to collect the proposed data are: 

 Respondent burden is potentially reduced, especially if data can be 

automatically uploaded from the States (positive from OMB’s perspective, as 

well as the participating States’); 

 Skip logic and range checks can be programmed into the website forms, 

ensuring cleaner data and a shorter “data cleaning” period; 

 There are no return postage costs (unless States must send their data via hard 

copy); 

 Labor to handle incoming hardcopy forms is substantially reduced, if not 

eliminated; 

 Storage and eventual disposal of hardcopy forms is eliminated; 

 Data entry (typically performed twice for quality control) is eliminated. 

 Data can be collected, analyzed, and disseminated in a timely manner. 

 Once the system is set up, data collection requests can be made with much 

less effort and cost than with a traditional mail survey design; 

28
 Prompting, reminders, and questions during the data collection process can be 

handled via email; and 

 The Web site itself can function as an interactive tool between USDA and the 

States, depending on the kinds of queries, reports, and articles that are posted. 

From the States’ perspective, if data collection is implemented as a standard mail 

survey, it is not clear whether the burden to the States will be higher than the proposed 

initiative or lower. However, several advantages to using a website still exist: 

 States can automatically upload required data elements to the central database 

if these data elements are in a file format compatible with USDA’s 

requirements; this reduces States’ response burden; 

 Skip logic and range checks can be programmed into the forms States use to 

key in their data, allowing States to make corrections or edits on-line; 

 States will be given access to a user-friendly datafile able to be queried and 

displayed in a variety of formats. 

It is also worth mentioning two potential disadvantages (or issues) that may arise 

with web-based data collection. Neither of these are insurmountable and neither may 

occur; however, we mention them here nonetheless. 

 USDA may have to spend time working with the States to educate them on 

“using the web” as a data collection tool. That is, there may be a higher 

learning curve for respondents than one would expect to observe with a 

standard mail survey; and 

 It is possible that the target “respondent” may pass the data entry 

responsibility to another individual, who may or may not be familiar with the 

data. Typically, in a mail survey, one can request that the person who is 

supposed to provide the data provide a signature authorizing that the data are 

correct to the best of his or her knowledge. This is not possible with a webbased data collection, as the target respondent will be given a username and 

password, both of which can easily be handed off to someone else. 

Additional “alternatives” to this initiative exist; however, it is not clear how 

feasible some of these are. For example, one alternative might be to have USDA require

that all states report SFA level data to receive funding for the NSLP/SBP programs. The 

proposed initiative could then be redesigned to build a web application to collect data 

from States or SFAs in a format specified by USDA. Thus, the responsibility passes to 

States or SFAs to provide the data elements in the specified format. The advantage to

this approach is that the data will be uniform, and USDA should also be able to obtain 

data from a census of States, rather than a sample of States. Another alternative might be 

to purposively select a sample of nine states that have similar software and systems. If 

29
one system is used or is compatible with all nine of these states, costs could be kept lower 

as the automatic uploading and web-based applications could be less “general” and more 

specific. A disadvantage to this is that it may or may not accommodate additional states’ 

systems if the data collection system is expanded. 

30
VIII. REFERENCES 

Hotz, J., R. Goerge, J. Balzekas, and F. Margolin (1998). Administrative Data for PolicyRelevant Research: Assessment of Current Utility and Recommendations for 

Development, A Report of the Advisory Panel on Research Uses of 

Administrative Data of the Northwestern University/University of Chicago Joint 

Center for Poverty Research. 

Child Nutrition Web Pages, U.S. Department of Agriculture 

(http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/Lunch/AboutLunch/faqs.htm and 

http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/Breakfast/AboutBFast/faqs.htm). 

31
IX. APPENDIX A: DETAILED COST ASSUMPTIONS FOR 

SPECIFIC TASKS: BASE INITIATIVE 

In this section, we describe the distribution of labor and activities within each task 

across the key actors. Table A-1 shows the labor and non-labor detail associated with 

each task, and Table A-2 presents a summary of these costs by task. In the paragraphs 

that follow, we discuss the cost assumptions for each specific task. Tables A-1 and A-2 

are presented at the end of the task discussions. 

To be consistent with Bell (2001) and Wittenburg, et al. (2001), we assume that 

each agency has three labor categories: Senior Manager, Senior Analyst, and Research 

Assistant. The Senior Manager category includes experts who have at least ten years of

research and/or program experience. The Senior Analyst category includes researchers 

and programmers who have between three to nine years of research and/or program

experience. The Research Assistant category includes individuals with very limited 

experience. We generated cost estimates for these categories using a list of hourly wage 

rates from industry averages and a review of similar projects that RTI has performed of 

this type.

4

 

Again, these estimates are for illustrative purposes only and reflect a modest 

number of “core” data elements. USDA may choose to contract out some or all of these 

activities and take on more or less responsibility for these tasks. A decision to implement 

these tasks within USDA may require additional “subtasks,” depending on the level of

expertise within USDA, such as educating staff internal to USDA on website design and 

maintenance. These kinds of additional tasks are not considered “in scope” for purposes 

of costing this initiative.

Task 1: Conduct Initial and Subsequent Steering Committee Meetings 

USDA Responsibilities

USDA would organize the initial and all subsequent meetings of the proposed 

steering committee, including developing agendas and arranging meeting locations. 

USDA would lead each meeting and also develop a final workplan after the initial 

meeting. 

Estimated time requirements. 80 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide all meetings (initial meeting and 4 subsequent meetings throughout the duration of 

the first phase of the project). 150 hrs. of Sr. Analyst time to develop materials necessary 

for the meetings, summarize decisions made, and contribute to the final workplan. 250 

 

4

 We developed these industry averages from our original proposal to ERS for this task 

order. 

32
hrs. of Research Assistant labor to assist with meeting logistics, workplan, and meeting 

material development.

States’ Responsibilities 

None. 

Task 2: Develop Contact Lists 

USDA Responsibilities 

USDA would work with the Steering Committee and other staff to obtain contact 

lists and identify contacts within 20 states. Working with the Steering Committee, 

USDA will identify the final nine states to select for this initiative. Much of the contact 

will be made through a series of emails, letters, calls, etc. 

Estimated time requirements. 32 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts. 40 hrs. of Sr. Analyst time to take the lead in developing letters, 

information to send to states and making final calls to the nine states. 60 hrs. of Research 

Assistant labor to make initial set of calls working off of the lists to identify contacts 

within 20 states. 

States’ Responsibilities 

It is anticipated that each of the 20 States approached to develop a contact name

will spend no more than an hour identifying an appropriate contact(s). 

Estimated time requirements. 20 hrs. of Sr. Management time to identify a 

contact person within each of the 20 states approached by USDA. 

Task 3: Conduct Assessment of State-Level Data Being Collected 

USDA Responsibilities 

USDA will develop a structured interview, conduct interviews with State contacts 

for the initial nine states, and compile the survey results. 

Estimated time requirements. 32 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts. 100 hrs. of Sr. Analyst time to take the lead in making calls to the 

nine states and developing summary matrix. 160 hrs. of Research Assistant labor to 

make calls and assist with documentation of calls.

States’ Responsibilities 

The nine selected states will respond to interviews and provide requested data. 

33
Estimated time requirements. 68 hrs. of Sr. Management time to respond to 

interviews; 27 hrs. of Sr. Analyst time to respond to interview requests. 

Task 4: Collect Sample of Archived Data from States 

USDA Responsibilities 

USDA will set up mechanisms, either via email or ftp, to receive data from States. 

If States prefer to send hard copy data, USDA will receive that data as well. 

Estimated time requirements. 16 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts. 24 hrs. of Sr. Programmer time to set up mechanisms to receive 

and/or receive data from the nine states. 40 hrs. of Jr. Programmer labor to assist in 

collecting and organizing data from states.

States’ Responsibilities 

Obtain requested data (from previous years) and send to USDA, either via email, 

ftp, or mail. 

Estimated time requirements. 80 hrs. of Sr. Management time to identify sources 

of archived data. 90 hrs. of Sr. Programmer time to obtain the archived data and prepare 

it for sending to USDA. 36 hrs. of Jr. Programmer labor to assist with sending the data to 

USDA. 

Task 5: Identify and Conduct Review of Existing Databases 

USDA Responsibilities 

USDA will identify and conduct a review of existing databases and their contents. 

This will include web searches, contacting education researchers to identify relevant

databases, summarizing data that are available, and determining which of the core 

elements can be collected from existing sources. 

Estimated time requirements. 40 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts. 100 hrs. of Sr. Programmer time to take the lead in investigating the 

formats, content, and structures of existing databases. 120 hrs. of Jr. Programmer labor 

to conduct web searches and take a preliminary pass at identifying required data base 

elements from existing databases.

States’ Responsibilities 

None. 

34
Task 6: Analyze Data Elements, Assess Availability, and Define Core Data 

Set 

USDA Responsibilities 

USDA will conduct a review of all of the potential sources of key data elements 

and their format (e.g., electronic or hard copy). This information will be put into a matrix 

showing which core elements will be collected from the States or existing databases, 

when they will be collected, and how they will be derived (or downloaded). 

Estimated time requirements. 60 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts. 100 hrs. of Sr. Programmer time to take the lead in investigating the 

formats, content, and structures of existing databases, archived data from States, and 

results of interviews conducted with the State contacts. 80 hrs. of Jr. Programmer labor 

to assist with analysis of available data and development of core data elements.

States’ Responsibilities 

None. 

Task 7: Explore and Potentially Develop Options for Using Automated 

Uploads to Retrieve Data from States or Existing Databases 

USDA Responsibilities 

USDA will conduct a review of all of the information collected during the 

interviews with the State contacts and from a review of existing databases to determine 

whether there are software packages commonly used to warehouse the data that would 

permit an automated process to be developed to retrieve data currently available 

electronically. The cost estimate assumes that applications can be developed fairly 

easily; however, this task could cost more depending on the number of applications that 

must be developed and the number of data elements being collected. 

Estimated time requirements. 40 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts. 80 hrs. of Sr. Programmer time to take the lead in investigating the 

formats used to warehouse data and whether there are software packages that are 

commonly used. Also includes time for the Sr. Programmer to develop necessary 

applications to “retrieve” relevant data. 80 hrs. of Jr. Programmer labor to assist with 

analysis of available data and development of automated processes to retrieve selected 

data elements from States or existing databases.

States’ Responsibilities 

None. 

Task 8: Design the Website, Including Defining Data Security and Access 

35
USDA Responsibilities 

USDA will design the website, including all background information and relevant 

links to other sites, if desired. USDA will be responsible for all activities associated with 

the design of a website, including defining user groups, creating a security structure, and 

managing user access. 

Estimated time requirements. 40 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts. 160 hrs. of Sr. Programmer time to take the lead designing the 

website and all relevant access and security structures associated with it. 80 hrs. of Jr.

Programmer labor to assist with design of the website.

States’ Responsibilities 

None. 

Task 9: Build Computer-Assisted Data Entry Programs 

USDA Responsibilities 

USDA will be responsible for developing programs necessary to accommodate 

states that are not equipped to handle any of the automated tools developed in Task 7. 

USDA will develop the browser-based worksheets to collect the required data and build 

the web application to collect and validate the data. 

Estimated time requirements. 40 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts. 320 hrs. of Sr. Programmer time to build the computer-assisted data 

entry programs, worksheets, and applications for validating the data keyed in by the 

States and develop a user manual. 160 hrs. of Jr. Programmer labor to assist with 

development of the web application, the user manual and development of technical 

support guidelines.

States’ Responsibilities 

States would be asked to provide information on potential users so that 

usernames/passwords could be established. 

Estimated time requirements. 9 hrs. of Sr. Management time to provide a list of 

names of individuals who might directly interact with the system during data collection. 

Task 10: Build Tools to Query, Sort, and Export the Data 

USDA Responsibilities 

36
USDA will be responsible for building an interface to allow users to select how 

they want to view the data, determine key variables that users might want to query and 

sort, and develop an online glossary that defines each variable in the data set. 

Estimated time requirements. 40 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts. 320 hrs. of Sr. Programmer time to build tools to allow data to be 

queried and viewed in numerous ways, including tabular formats. Also build tools to 

allow users to export the data. 80 hrs. of Jr. Programmer labor to assist with 

development of query, sorting, and exporting tools.

States’ Responsibilities 

None. 

Task 11: Design Summary Tables, Reports, and Articles to be Posted to 

the Web 

USDA Responsibilities 

USDA will be responsible for building a tool to allow validated users to post 

content to the web site, defining the types of reports that could be presented, and 

developing a series of reports. 

Estimated time requirements. 80 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts. 160 hrs. of Sr. Programmer time to build tool to allow users to post 

content to the web site and developing series of reports for posting on the web site . 160 

hrs. of Jr. Programmer labor to assist with development of the web reports.

States’ Responsibilities 

None. 

Task 12: Implement Initial Data Collection for Nine States 

USDA Responsibilities 

USDA will be responsible for implementing a round of data collection for the 

initial nine states. This includes supporting all features of the web site as they pertain to 

the States’ interaction with the web site, cleaning and merging the data as necessary, 

producing reports and articles, and making changes to any aspect of the data collection 

system as needed based on feedback from the States. It also includes the time and travel 

costs associated with conducting a half-day on-site training session on the web-based 

system with personnel from each State. 

37
Estimated time requirements. 60 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts, of which 30 hrs. are for start-up activities only. 360 hrs. of Sr. 

Programmer time to manage the data collection process, including providing technical 

support; 120 hrs. of these are assumed to be for start-up activities only. Also includes 

time for making changes to any aspect of the web-based data collection system, from user 

interface through design of reports. 320 hrs. of Jr. Programmer labor to provide 

technical support to States, key in data received via hard copy, and assist with any 

required programming changes, of which 120 hrs. are assumed to be for start-up 

activities. 150 hrs. of Sr. Research Assistant time to prepare materials and conduct nine 

on-site training sessions, all of which are assumed to be start-up activities only.

States’ Responsibilities 

Each of the nine States will be responsible for attending a half-day training 

session and providing the requested data, unless data are being automatically uploaded. 

States will also provide comments on the usability of the system and suggestions for 

reports, query tools, etc. 

Estimated time requirements. 45 hrs. of Sr. Management time to respond to data 

collection request and provide feedback to USDA on usability of the system, of which 27 

hrs. is assumed to be for start-up activities. 200 hrs. of Sr. Programmer /Sr. Analyst time

to attend training and key data into the web-based worksheets or otherwise make data 

available to USDA for downloading to the database; of these hours, 50 are assumed to be 

start-up (i.e., training-related) activities. 100 hrs. of Jr. Programmer labor to assist in 

responding to the data collection request; all of these hours are assumed to be on-going. 

Task 13: Obtain OMB Clearance 

USDA Responsibilities 

USDA will be responsible for preparing an OMB package requesting approval to 

implement data collection beyond the initial nine states. 

Estimated time requirements. 24 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts. 40 hrs. of Sr. Analyst time to prepare the draft and revised OMB 

packages. 40 hrs. of Research Assistant labor to contribute to the development of the 

OMB package, including all supporting materials.

States’ Responsibilities 

None. 

38
Task 14: Prepare to Add Additional States 

USDA Responsibilities 

USDA will be responsible developing a plan for the phased addition of states. 

This will include calling contacts developed during Task 2 to verify contact information 

and identifying new contacts in remaining states. 

Estimated time requirements. 24 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts. 36 hrs. of Sr. Analyst time to assist with development of plan to 

phase in additional states. 80 hrs. of Research Assistant labor to confirm Task 2 contacts 

and identify additional contacts as needed.

States’ Responsibilities 

States will respond to USDA’s request to identify a contact person within their 

organization. 

Estimated time requirements. 30 hrs. of Sr. Management time to assist in the 

identification of contacts within each State. 

39
Table A-1. Labor and Non-Labor Costs by Task, Web-based Data Collection System Initiative 

USDA

Task 1: 

Conduct Initial and 

Subsequent Steering 

Committee Meetings 

Task 2: 

Develop Contact Lists 

Task 3: 

Conduct Assessment of 

State-level Data being 

Collected 

Task 4

Collect Sample o

Data from S

Assumed 

Rates

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Labor Categories Senior Management $111.19 80 $8,895.20 32 $3,558.08 32 $3,558.08 16 Sr. Analysts/Sr. Programmer $65.08 150 $9,762.00 40 $2,603.20 100 $6,508.00 24 Research Assist./Jr. Programmer $36.75 250 $9,187.50 60 $2,205.00 160 $5,880.00 40 TOTAL LABOR 480 $27,844.70 132 $8,366.28 292 $15,946.08 80 Non-Labor Costs Travel $1,000.00 $0.00 $0.00 Misc. software/hardware $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Server and Disk Storage $100.00 $0.00 $100.00 TOTAL NON-LABOR COSTS $1,100.00 $0.00 $100.00 

States

Task 1: 

Conduct Initial and 

Subsequent Steering 

Committee Meetings 

Task 2: 

Develop Contact Lists 

Task 3: 

Conduct Assessment of 

State-level Data being 

Collected 

Task 4

Collect Sample o

Data from S

Assumed 

Rates 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Labor Categories Senior Management $111.19 0 $0.00 20 $2,223.80 68 $7,560.92 80 Sr. Analysts/Sr. Programmer $65.08 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 27 $1,757.16 90 Research Assist./Jr. Programmer $36.75 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 36 TOTAL LABOR 0 $0.00 20 $2,223.80 95 $9,318.08 206 $Non-Labor Costs Local Travel $40.00 $0.00 $0.00 Misc. software/hardware $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Server and Disk Storage $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL NON-LABOR COSTS $40.00 $0.00 $0.00 

32 

NOTE: Phone, postage, and copy costs are not included. 
Table A-1. Labor and Non-Labor Costs by Task, Web-based Data Collection System Initiative (continued

USDA

Task 6: 

Analyze Data Elements, 

Assess Availability, and 

Define Core Data Set 

Task 7: 

Explore and Potentially 

Develop Options for Using 

Automated Uploads to 

Retrieve Data from States 

or Existing Databases 

Task 8: 

Design the Website, 

Including Defining Data 

Security and Access 

Task 9

Build Computer

Data Entry Pr

Assumed 

Rates

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Labor Categories Senior Management $111.19 60 $6,671.40 40 $4,447.60 40 $4,447.60 40 Sr. Analysts/Sr. Programmer $65.08 100 $11,119.00 80 $5,206.40 160 $10,412.80 320 $Research Assist./Jr. Programmer $36.75 80 $2,940.00 80 $2,940.00 80 $2,940.00 160 TOTAL LABOR 240 $20,730.40 200 $12,594.00 280 $17,800.40 520 $Non-Labor Costs Travel $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Misc. software/hardware $0.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 Server and Disk Storage $100.00 $0.00 $100.00 TOTAL NON-LABOR COSTS $100.00 $2,000.00 $100.00 

States

Task 6: 

Analyze Data Elements, 

Assess Availability, and 

Define Core Data Set 

Task 7: 

Explore and Potentially 

Develop Options for Using 

Automated Uploads to 

Retrieve Data from States 

or Existing Databases 

Task 8: 

Design the Website, 

Including Defining Data 

Security and Access 

Task 9

Build Computer

Data Entry Pr

Assumed 

Rates 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Labor Categories Senior Management $111.19 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 9 Sr. Analysts/Sr. Programmer $65.08 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 Research Assist./Jr. Programmer $36.75 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 TOTAL LABOR 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 9 Non-Labor Costs Local Travel $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Misc. software/hardware $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Server and Disk Storage $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 TOTAL NON-LABOR COSTS $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 

33 

NOTE: Phone, postage, and copy costs are not included. 
Table A-1. Labor and Non-Labor Costs by Task, Web-based Data Collection System Initiative (conclude

USDA

Task 11: 

Design Summary Tables, 

Reports, and Articles to be 

posted to the Web 

Task 12:

Implement Initial Data 

Collection for Nine States1

Task 13:

Obtain OMB Clearance 

Task 14

Prepare to 

Additional S

Assumed 

Rates

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Labor Categories Senior Management $111.19 80 $8,895.20 60 $6,671.40 24 $2,668.56 24 Sr. Analysts/Sr. Programmer $65.08 160 $10,412.80 360 $23,428.80 40 $2,603.20 36 Research Assist./Jr. Programmer $36.75 160 $5,880.00 470 $17,272.50 40 $1,470.00 80 TOTAL LABOR 400 $25,188.00 890 $47,372.70 104 $6,741.76 140 Non-Labor Costs Travel $0.00 $5,958.00 $0.00 Misc. software/hardware $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Server and Disk Storage $0.00 $100.00 $0.00 TOTAL NON-LABOR COSTS $0.00 $6,058.00 $0.00 

States 

Task 11: 

Design Summary Tables, 

Reports, and Articles to be 

posted to the Web 

Task 12:

Implement Initial Data 

Collection for Nine States 

Task 13:

Obtain OMB Clearance 

Task 14

Prepare to 

Additional S

Assumed 

Rates 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Labor Categories Senior Management $111.19 0 $0.00 45 $5,003.55 0 $0.00 30 Sr. Analysts/Sr. Programmer $65.08 0 $0.00 200 $13,016.00 0 $0.00 0 Research Assist./Jr. Programmer $36.75 0 $0.00 100 $3,675.00 0 $0.00 0 TOTAL LABOR 0 $0.00 345 $21,694.55 0 $0.00 30 Non-Labor Costs Local Travel $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 Misc. software/hardware $0.00 $2,000.00 $0.00 Server and Disk Storage $0.00 $500.00 $0.00 TOTAL NON-LABOR COSTS $0.00 $2,500.00 $0.00 

34 

NOTE: Phone, postage, and copy costs are not included. 1 See page 19 and pages 32-33 for the breakout between “initial” and “on-going” cost estimates. Travel costs in this task are based on n

Washington, D.C. and Kansas City, MO (i.e., a “generic” site), plus a per diem.
Table A-2. Summary of Web-based Initiative Labor and Non-labor Costs 

Task 1: 

Conduct Initial and 

Subsequent Steering 

Committee Meetings 

Task 2: 

Develop Contact Lists 

Task 3: 

Conduct Assessment of 

State-level Data being 

Collected 

Task 4: 

Collect Sample of Archived 

Data from States

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

USDA $27,844.70 $1,100 $8,366.28 $0 $15,946.08 $100 $4,810.96 $0 States $0.00 $40 $2,223.80 $0 $9,318.08 $0 $16,075.40 $100 TOTAL LABOR $27,844.70 $10,590.08 $25,264.16 $20,886.36 TOTAL NON-LABOR $1,140 $0 $100 $100 GRAND TOTAL $28,984.70 $10,590.08 $25,364.16 $20,986.36 

Task 6: 

Analyze Data Elements, 

Assess Availability, and 

Define Core Data Set 

Task 7: 

Explore Options for Using 

Automated Uploads to 

Retrieve Data from States 

or Existing Databases 

Task 8: 

Design the Website, 

Including Defining Data 

Security and Access 

Task 9: 

Build Computer-Assisted 

Data Entry Programs 

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

USDA $20,730.40 $100 $12,594.00 $2,000 $17,800.40 $100 $31,153.20 $0 States $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0 $0.00 $0 $1,000.71 $0 TOTAL LABOR $20,730.40 $12,594.00 $17,800.40 $32,153.91 TOTAL NON-LABOR $100 $2,000 $100 $0 GRAND TOTAL $20,830.40 $14,594.00 $17,900.40 $32,153.91 

Task 11: 

Design Summary Tables, 

Reports, and Articles to be 

posted to the Web 

Task 12:

Implement Initial Data 

Collection for Nine States 

Task 13:

Obtain OMB Clearance 

Task 14:

Prepare to Add 

Additional States 

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

USDA $25,188.00 $0 $47,372.70 $6,058 $6,741.76 $0 $7,951.44 $100 States $0.00 $0 $21,694.55 $2,500 $0.00 $0 $3,335.70 $0 TOTAL LABOR $25,188.00 $69,067.25 $6,741.76 $11,287.14 TOTAL NON-LABOR $0 $8,558 $0 $100 GRAND TOTAL $25,188.00 $77,625.25 $6,741.76 $11,387.14 

35 
X. APPENDIX B: DETAILED COST ASSUMPTIONS FOR 

SPECIFIC TASK ALTERNATIVES AND SUMMARY OF 

SNPIIS PIGGY-BACK INITIATIVE ALTERNATIVE 

In this section, we describe the distribution of labor and activities within each task 

across the key actors for those tasks with identified alternatives. We also present a 

summary of the SNPIIS Piggy-back Initiative Alternative discussed in Section VII. Task 

Alternatives are presented first: Table B-1 shows the labor and non-labor detail 

associated with each task alternative, and Table B-2 presents a summary of these costs by 

task. These tables are presented immediately following the Task Alternatives discussion. 

Finally, we present a table (Table B-3) showing which tasks remain and which are 

expected to be eliminated under the SNPIIS Piggy-back Initiative Alternative and the 

initiative alternative cost. 

Task Alternatives 

Task 2 Alternative: Solicit Contact Information and Participation from the 

States (vs. Develop Contact Lists) 

USDA Responsibilities 

USDA would send an email or letter to States asking if they would like to 

participate in this initiative and to identify the appropriate contact if so. 

Estimated time requirements. 16 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts. 32 hrs. of Sr. Analyst time to take the lead in developing an email to 

send soliciting State participants and contact names. 40 hrs. of Research Assistant labor 

to develop an initial email address and name to send above email to, using existing lists.

States’ Responsibilities 

States would respond to the solicitation only if interested. Minimal labor required 

to respond to the solicitation and identify a contact person. 

Estimated time requirements. 25 hrs. of Sr. Management time to identify a 

contact person. 

Task 7 Alternative: Eliminate Use of Automatic Uploads from States (vs. 

Explore and Potentially Develop Options for Using 

Automated Uploads to Retrieve Data from States or

Existing Databases)

USDA Responsibilities 

As with the base initiative Task 7, USDA will still conduct a review of existing 

databases to determine whether there is an automated process that can be developed to 

44
retrieve data currently available electronically. However, this activity will not be done 

with respect to the States’ electronic data. 

Estimated time requirements. 24 hrs. of Sr. Management time to plan, lead, and 

guide these efforts. 40 hrs. of Sr. Programmer time to take the lead in investigating the 

formats used in existing databases and whether there are software packages that are 

commonly used. Also includes time for the Sr. Programmer to develop necessary 

applications to “retrieve” relevant data. 60 hrs. of Jr. Programmer labor to assist with 

analysis of available data and development of automated processes to retrieve selected 

data elements from existing databases.

States’ Responsibilities 

None. 

45
Table B-1. Cost of Task Alternatives for Web-based Initiative 

USDA 

Task 2 Alternative: 

Solicit Contact 

Information and 

Participation from the 

States 

Task 7 Alternative: 

Eliminate Use of

Automatic Uploads 

from States TOTAL 

Assumed 

Rates

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Labor Categories 

Senior Management $111.19 16 $1,779.04 24 $2,668.56 40 $4,447.60

Sr. Analysts/Sr. Programmer $65.08 32 $2,082.56 40 $2,603.20 72 $4,685.76

Research Assist./Jr. Programmer $36.75 40 $1,470.00 60 $2,205.00 100 $3,675.00

TOTAL LABOR 88 $5,331.60 124 $7,476.76 212 $12,808.36

Non-Labor Costs 

Local Travel $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Misc. software/hardware $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Server and Disk Storage $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

TOTAL NON-LABOR COSTS $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

States

Task 2 Alternative: 

Solicit Contact 

Information and 

Participation from the 

States 

Task 7 Alternative: 

Eliminate Use of

Automatic Uploads 

from States TOTAL 

Assumed 

Rates

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Total 

Hours 

Total 

Dollars 

Labor Categories 

Senior Management $111.19 25 $2,779.75 0 $0.00 25 $2,779.75

Sr. Analysts/Sr. Programmer $65.08 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00

Research Assist./Jr. Programmer $36.75 0 $0.00 0 $0.00 0 $0.00

TOTAL LABOR 25 $2,779.75 0 $0.00 25 $2,779.75

Non-Labor Costs 

Local Travel $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Misc. software/hardware $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

Server and Disk Storage $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

TOTAL NON-LABOR COSTS $0.00 $0.00 $0.00

46
Table B-2. Summary of Web-based Initiative Alternative Task Costs 

Task 2 Alternative: 

Solicit Contact 

Information and 

Participation 

from the States 

Task 7 Alternative: 

Eliminate Use of 

Automatic Uploads 

from States TOTAL 

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

Labor 

Costs 

Non-Labor 

Costs 

USDA $5,331.60 $0 $7,476.76 $0 $12,808.36 $0

States $2,779.75 $0 $0 $0 $ 2,779.75 $0

TOTAL LABOR $8,111.35 $7,476.76 $15,588.11 

TOTAL NON-LABOR $0 $0 $0

GRAND TOTAL $8,111.35 $7,476.76 $15,588.11 

SNPIIS Piggy-back Initiative Alternative 

Detailed labor and non-labor estimates are provided in Appendix A. Table B-3 on the 

next page illustrates which tasks are expected to remain or be eliminated under this 

initiative alternative and the estimated total cost. Key differences are noted as footnotes 

to the table.

47
Table B-3. SNPIIS Piggy-back Initiative Alternative: Tasks Retained/Eliminated 

Task Retained Eliminated 

Cost of 

Alternative 

Task 1

Conduct Initial and Subsequent Steering Committee Meetings1 X $28,985

Task 2

Develop Contact Lists X 

Task 3

Conduct Assessment of State-level Data X 

Task 4

Collect Sample of Archived Data from States X 

Task 5

Identify and Conduct Review of Existing Databases2 X $15,466

Task 6

Analyze Data Elements, Assess Availability, and Define Core 

Data Set 

X $20,830

Task 7

Explore and Potentially Develop Options for Using Automated 

Uploads to Retrieve Data 

X $14,594

Task 8

Design the Website, including Data Security and Data Access X $17,900

Task 9

Build Computer-assisted Data Entry Programs X 

Task 10

Build Tools to Query, Sort and Export the Data X $28,313

Task 11

Design Summary Tables, Reports, and Articles to be posted to 

the Web 

X $25,188

Task 12

Implement Initial Data Collection for Nine States3 X $18,259

Task 13

Obtain OMB Clearance X 

Task 14

Prepare to Add Additional States X 

Total Cost $169,535

 

1 FNS/SNPIIS representatives should be included in in the initial meetings, along with all stakeholders 

suggested in the original task description. 

2 This includes a review of SNPIIS data. 

3

 A misnomer, this task would include the extraction of required data from SNPIIS and any other external 

data sources rather than a data collection from States. The cost shown reflects 30 hrs. of Sr. Management 

time to plan, lead and guide these efforts. 120 hrs. of Sr. Programmer time to build a program to allow for 

importing data from SNPIIS and other databases to the initiative database 40 hrs. of Sr. Programming time 

(from a SNPIIS programmer) to help prepare the data for transfer. 120 hrs. of Jr. Programmer labor to 

implement the transfer of data from SNPIIS (and other databases) to the initiative database.

48
Suggested Bibliography

Web-based Data Collection Methodologies 

Bowker, Dennis and Don A. Dillman. 2000. “An Experimental Evaluation of Left and 

Right Oriented Screens for Web Questionnaires.” (see 

http://survey.sesrc.wsu.edu/dillman/papers.htm)

Carbonaro, Mike and Joyce Bainbridge. 2000. “Design and Development of a Process for 

Web-based Survey Research. The Alberta Journal of Educational Research Vol 

XLVI, No. 4, Winter 2000, 392-394. 

Clayton, Richard L. and George S. Werking. 1998. “Business Surveys of the Future: 

The World Wide Web as a Data Collection Methodology.” In Computer Assisted 

Survey Information Collection. eds. Mick Couper et al. John Wiley and Sons, 

Inc. New York, NY. 

Couper, Mick P. 2000. “Web Surveys: A Review of Issues and Approaches.” Public 

Opinion Quarterly 64: 464-494. 

Couper, Mick P., Michael Traugott, and Mark J. Lamias. 2001. “Web Survey Design and 

Administration.” Public Opinion Quarterly 65: 230-253. 

Dillman, Don. 1999. Mail and Internet Surveys: The Tailored Design Method. 2nd

edition, John Wiley and Sons. 

Dillman, Don, Glenn Phelps, Robert Tortora, Karen Swift, Julie Kohrell, and Jodi Berck. 

2001. Response Rate and Measurement Differences in Mixed Mode Surveys 

Using Mail, Telephone, Interactive Voice Response and the Internet. Draft Paper. 

(see http://survey.sesrc.wsu.edu/dillman/papers.htm)

Dillman, Don A. and Dennis K. Bowker. 2000. The Web Questionnaire Challenge to 

Survey Methodlogists. (see http://survey.sesrc.wsu.edu/dillman/papers.htm)

Dillman, Don A., Robert D. Tortora, and Dennis Bowker. 1998. Principles for 

Constructing Web Surveys. SESRC Technical Report 98-50, Pullman, 

Washington (see http://survey.sesrc.wsu.edu/dillman/papers.htm)

Fisher, B., D. Resnick, M. Margolis, and G. Bishop. 1995. “Survey Research in 

Cyberspace: Breaking Ground on the Virtual Frontier.” Proceedings of the 

American Association of Public Opinion Research, pp. 178-183. 

Harrell Jr., L.J., R.L. Clayton, and G.S. Werking. 1996. “TDE and Beyond: Data 

Collection on the World Wide Web.” Proceedings of the Section of Survey 

Research Methods, American Statistical Association, pp. 768-773. 

49
Hoffman, D.L., W.D. Kalsbeek, and T. Novak. 1996. “Internet Use in the United States: 

1995 Baseline Estimates and Preliminary Market Segments.” Project 2000 

Working Paper, Owen Graduate School of Management, Vanderbilt University. 

Sweet, E. and C. Russell. 1996. “A Discussion of Data Collection via the Internet.” 

Proceedings of the section on survey research methods, American Statistical 

Association, pp. 774-779. 

Shneiderman, B. 1997. Designing the User Interface: Strategies for Effective HumanComputer Interaction. 3rd edition, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA. 

Werking, G.S. 1994. “Establishment Surveys: Designing the Survey Operations of the 

Future.” Proceedings of the Section of Survey Research Methods, American

Statistical Association, pp. 163-169. 

Notable Web Sites 

Web Survey Methodology 

http://www.websm.org/ 

Don Dillman 

http://survey.sesrc.wsu.edu/dillman/ 

50