How do NIDRR Grantees Disseminate Information?

Are the results of disability research useful to people with disabilities? If so, where and how do people find such information? How do service providers and others generally get information to consumers? Would the information be more useful if it were more accessible? The National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research (NCDDR) conducted a three-phase nationwide survey to find answers to these and other related questions.

Each phase focused on the sampling of one major group:

D1

1. Consumers
(people with disabilities and their families) affiliated with independent living organizations,

 D2

2. Stakeholder Groups
Representatives of stakeholder groups providing services or information to people with disabilities and their families, and

 D3

3. Researchers
funded by grants and contracts through the National Institute for Disability and Rehabilitation Research (NIDRR).

The first (consumer) phase involved independent living organizations, including Title VII-funded Centers for Independent Living (CILs), Statewide Independent Living Councils (SILCs) and other independent living programs. A total of 1,238 consumers affiliated with 277 independent living organizations responded. Results were presented in The Research Exchange,
Vol. 2, No. 4 (NCDDR, 1997a) and the Report of NCDDR Consumer Survey (NCDDR, 1997b).

Phase 2 of the study surveyed various stakeholder groups in order to learn how their organizations prefer to receive information and how they typically get information to their audiences. A total of 1,789 surveys were sent and 851 completed surveys were returned from representatives of a number of constituencies. These included rehabilitation researchers; administrators of independent living organizations and medical rehabilitation facilities; directors of Client Assistance Programs/ Protection and Advocacy Agencies; State Directors of Special Education; Federal and State legislators/aides; members of Committees on Employment of People with Disabilities, and disability media representatives. Results were presented in The Research Exchange, Vol. 3, No. 2 (NCDDR, 1998a) and the Report of NCDDR Stakeholder Survey (NCDDR, 1998b).

The data gathered in the first two phases of the study were used to develop instrumentation for the final survey of NIDRR grantees. The focus in this final phase was to identify the dissemination practices of grantees, whose audiences include consumers as well as other stakeholder groups. The responses of NIDRR grantees were also compared with those of consumers and stakeholders to identify areas of consistency or gaps. In addition, grantee responses will be compared with data from an initial survey of grantees conducted in 1996 and reported in The Research Exchange, Vol. 1, No. 3.

Procedures

The survey was conducted in late 1998 and early 1999 through telephone interviews with the NIDRR projects' Principal Investigator or a designated Contact Person. In some cases, respondents requested that the questionnaire be sent by surface mail, fax, or electronic mail. A letter and copy of the questionnaire were sent to the 18 grantees NCDDR staff could not contact by telephone.

A total of 309 projects funded by NIDRR during FY 1999 were included in this survey. The projects in 13 program areas were generally funded from 6 months (Small Business Innovative Research) to 60 months (Rehabilitation Research Engineering Centers, Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers, and others). The numbers of projects in each program area are presented in Table 1.

The survey had three parts. The first part updated contact information in the NCDDR database such as contact names, addresses, and telephone numbers. This information is not included in the survey report. The second part was a series of questions about how the project preferred to receive information from the NCDDR, and the possible modes and formats the project could use to disseminate their project's information. The last part was more open-ended and asked grantees about outreach activities as well as their need for technical assistance from the NCDDR. After completing the survey, respondents were asked if they had information to share with the NCDDR about special recognition for their NIDRR project or its staff, or any activities that could be entered in the NIDRR projects' calendar on the NCDDR Web site.

The survey questions are presented in a separate file (NIDRR Grantee Survey Questions). Questions 1 - 11 refer to dissemination preferences and practices. Questions 12 and 13 refer to outreach strategies. Questions 14 and 15 focus on technical assistance needs of grantees.

Findings and Implications

Surveys were completed for 294, or 95 percent, of the grantees contacted in late 1998 and early 1999. Table 1 shows the rate of responses from each NIDRR program area.

TABLE 1:
Response Rate by NIDRR Program Area (Percent)
[Text Version of Table One]

Program Area	No. Grantees	No. Responses	Response Rate (%)
ADA Technical Assistance Programs	12	12	100
Advanced Rehabilitation Research Training Projects	8	8	100
Disability and Rehabilitation Research Projects	37	36	97
Fellowships	10	10	100
Field-Initiated Projects	80	77	96
Model Spinal Cord Injury Systems	18	18	100
Rehabilitation Research and Training Centers	42	41	98
Rehabilitation Research Engineering Centers	17	16	94
Small Business Innovative Research--Phase I	13	10	77
Small Business Innovative Research--Phase II	6	6	100
State Technology Assistance Programs	59	54	92
Utilization Projects	5	4	80
Contracts	2	2	100
TOTAL FOR ALL PROGRAMS	309	294	95

Formats and Modes Preferred by Grantees

Tables 2 and 3 show the responses for Questions 1-8 about the formats and modes that grantees prefer for receiving information from the NCDDR. About 96 percent of respondents preferred to receive Day-to-Day Communication in a Regular Print format, 1 percent identified Large Print and another 1 percent preferred information in Electronic Disk format. Electronic mail was the delivery mode most preferred, and was identified by 56 percent of respondents. US Mail was the preferred mode for 35 percent of respondents, and 9 percent identified Fax as a preferred mode.

Few changes were seen in preferred formats to receive Materials and Products. About 95 percent of respondents preferred Regular Print, 1 percent selected Large Print and about 3 percent preferred information in Electronic Disk format. More changes were found for delivery modes: US Mail was the preferred mode for 79 percent of respondents, Electronic Mail was preferred by 21 percent, and about 1 percent identified Fax.

TABLE 2:
Formats and Modes Preferred by Grantees for Receiving Day-to-Day Communication from the NCDDR
[Text Version of Table Two]
Grantees N=294

Format	Number	Percent
Regular Print	282	95.9
Large print	3	1.0
Braille	0	0
Audio Tape	0	0
Mac File/disk	0	0
MAC-text	0	0
MAC-MSWord	0	0
MAC-WP	0	0
PC File/disk	2	0.7
DOS-text	0	0
DOS-MSWord	1	0.3
DOS-WP	0	0
ASCII	0	0
Mode of Distribution	Number	Percent
US Mail	103	35.0
Fax	26	8.8
E-mail	165	56.1
Other	0	0.0

TABLE 3:
Formats and Modes Preferred by Grantees for Receiving Materials and Products from the NCDDR
[Text Version of Table Three]
Grantees N=294

Format	Number	Percent
Regular Print	278	94.6
Large print	3	1.0
Braille	0	0
Audio Tape	0	0
Mac File/disk	0	0
MAC-text	0	0
MAC-MSWord	0	0
MAC-WP	0	0
PC File/disk	9	3.1
DOS-text	0	0
DOS-MSWord	2	0.7
DOS-WP	1	0.3
ASCII	1	0.3
Mode of Distribution	Number	Percent
US Mail	231	78.6
Fax	3	1.0
E-mail	61	20.7
Other	0	0.0

These data provide some indication of the impact of technology on the communication preferences of NIDRR grantees since the initial NIDRR grantee survey was conducted in 1996 (see The Research Exchange, Vol. 1, No. 3). Little change was observed in the preference of formats. Regular print was preferred by 98 percent of respondents in 1996 and by 96 percent in 1999.

In comparing the 1996 and 1999 surveys, there was an increase in preference for electronic communication as a mode of distribution. US Mail was preferred by 69 percent of grantees in 1996, but decreased to 35 percent in 1999. In contrast, 29 percent of grantees preferred E-mail in 1996 compared with 56 percent in 1999. The two surveys showed similar changes in preferred modes for receiving materials and products with 96 percent preferring US Mail in 1996 and 79 percent in 1999. E-mail preferences for materials and products changed from 4 percent in 1996 to 21 percent in 1999. Fax was the mode preferred for day-to-day communication by 20 percent of grantees in 1996. This decreased to 9 percent in 1999.

Formats and Modes Used for Distribution

Questions 9 - 11 asked grantees about their capabilities and practices in distributing information to their audiences, including consumers with disabilities. Table 4 shows responses about grantees' use of various formats. Respondents were asked if their project had the capability to produce materials in a format, even if it had not been requested. Grantees were also asked which formats were frequently used when distributing information to their audiences. Electronic file was the format identified by the largest percentage of respondents (98 percent). It was also the most frequently used format (43 percent). Large Print (96 percent) was the format with the second highest percentage of responses. Over half of the respondents reported having the capability to produce Audio/oral formats (87 percent), Visual/graphic formats (81 percent), materials in Other languages (72 percent), and Braille (65 percent). None of these formats were frequently used (16 percent or less). Fewer than half of the respondents reported capabilities to produce special video formats (Opened-caption, 49 percent; Closed-caption, 47 percent; and Descriptive video, 38 percent).

TABLE 4:
Projects Reporting Capability to Produce Formats and
Formats Frequently Used
[Text Version of Table Four]

	Grantees N=294		Frequently Used
Format	Number	Percent	Number	Percent
Electronic file	288	98.0	127	43.2
Large print	283	96.3	47	16.0
Audio/oral	255	86.7	48	16.3
Visual/graphic (non-print)	238	81.0	47	16.0
Other language: If YES, which? *	212	72.1	34	11.6
Braille	190	64.6	35	11.9
Opened-caption video	146	49.7	11	3.7
Closed-caption video	139	47.3	5	1.7
Descriptive video	113	38.4	2	.07

* Spanish=132;
* 27 Other languages=Alaska native, Asian (6), Arabic, ASL, Cambodian, Chamorro (2), Chinese (10), Dutch (5), Filipino (2), French (8), German (11), Greek, Haitian (2), Hmong, Italian (4), Japanese (6), Korean (5), Navajo, Norwegian, Pohnpeian, Polish, Portuguese, Russian (3), Samoan (3), Swedish, Tongan, Vietnamese (3).

A comparison of the 1996 (The Research Exchange, Vol. 1, No. 3) and 1999 surveys shows changes resulting from increased computer usage including an increase in capabilities to produce electronic files, from 92 percent in 1996 to 98 percent in 1999, and an increase in capabilities to produce large print from 89 percent to 96 percent. Capabilities to produce Braille documents decreased from 74 percent in 1996 to 65 percent in 1999. In comparing use of the various formats, the percentage of grantees indicating they frequently used the formats in questions 9-11 decreased for every format. Taken in total, these changes perhaps result from alternative formats provided by the Internet and E-mail, plus improvements in such areas as scanner and screen reader technology and affordability.

Table 5 reports grantee responses about their use and planned use of modes of distribution. US Mail (100 percent), Fax (99 percent), Electronic mail (99 percent) and computer disk (97 percent) were modes used by nearly all grantees. Other modes reported by a large number of respondents included Internet (89 percent), Audio tape (80 percent), Text telephone (70 percent), and Video tape (69 percent). The only mode reported by less than half of the grantees was CD-ROM (42 percent). Nearly 24 percent of grantees reported plans to use CD-ROM as a distribution mode in the future.

TABLE 5 Current and Projected Use of Modes of Distribution
[Text Version of Table Five]

	Grantees N=294		Planned for Future
Mode	Number	Percent	Number	Percent
U.S. Mail	293	99.7	--	--
Fax	290	98.6	--	--
E-mail	290	98.6	1	0.3
Computer disk	285	96.9	6	2.0
Internet/World Wide Web	261	88.8	26	8.8
Audio tape	237	80.6	14	4.8
Text Telephone	207	70.4	10	3.4
Video Tape	202	68.7	24	8.2
CD ROM	123	41.8	69	23.5

Interesting contrasts occured between grantees' use of the Internet/World Wide Web in the 1996 survey where 51 percent of grantees reported current usage, and 33 percent projected future usage, compared with 1999 survey data indicating 89 percent usage and 9 percent projected future usage. These data, coupled with an increase in E-mail usage from 91 to 99 percent, indicate an increasing reliance on the Internet as a favored distribution mode.

Table 6 reports specific strategies used by grantees to get information to consumers (persons with disabilities and their families). This question was asked of stakeholders in previous survey activities and their responses were compared to those of grantees. All strategies were used by over 60 percent of grantees, with Personal communication (96 percent) receiving the highest percentage of responses.

TABLE 6: How grantees get information to consumers
[Text Version of Table six]

	Grantees N=294		Frequently Used
Strategies	Number	Percent	Number	Percent
Personal communication	283	96.3	186	63.3
Computer online (Internet, WWW)	258	87.8	103	35.0
Training/classes/workshops	257	87.4	117	39.8
Electronic mail	255	86.7	101	34.4
Fax	254	86.4	79	26.9
Information mail outs	240	81.6	93	31.6
Reports	229	77.9	54	18.4
Telephone/information line	202	68.7	96	32.7
Newsletters	196	66.7	93	31.6
Library/information holdings	183	62.2	50	17.0
Other (please describe)	77	26.2	16	5.4

The category Other was chosen by 26 percent of respondents. Other strategies identified included:

• Conference exhibits, presentations (9)
• Community events, town meetings (9)
• Support groups, forums, focus groups, peer mentoring (8)
• Popular publications, magazines, newspapers (7)
• Distance learning, listserv, video conference (7)
• Database of resources (6)
• Press releases, public service announcements (6)
• Advisory board (5)
• CD-ROM materials (5)
• TV, public TV (4)
• Consumer videos (4)
• Chat rooms (4)
• Audio conference, referrals, brochures, mobile van, journal articles, posters

In comparing the data on Table 6 with similar data from representatives of stakeholder groups reported in The Research Exchange, Vol. 3, No. 2, about 88 percent of grantees used the Internet and electronic mail to get information to consumers, whereas approximately 25 percent of stakeholder groups use these modes. This latter percentage is consistent with the percentage of consumers who used the Internet as a source of information (27 percent) as reported in The Research Exchange, Vol. 2, No. 4. This disparity may be explained by the need for stakeholder groups to communicate with consumers as their primary audience, while research organizations must communicate with a variety of professional and consumer audiences. However, it also indicates a continued need to use a variety of communication modes to provide consumers and stakeholders with information.

Outreach Strategies

Grantees were asked if their NIDRR-funded project used (or had plans to use) computer-based outreach strategies such as electronic mail, listservs, World Wide Web pages, and CD-ROM formats for sharing information. There were four groups identified as recipients of grantee computer-based outreach: consumers with disabilities and their families, other researchers, service providers, and other target audiences. Grantees reported high use of computer-based strategies with all groups, ranging from 77 percent (Other target audiences) to 93 percent (service providers). Figure 1. reports these responses.

[Text Version of Figure One]

Grantees were also asked about use of other effective outreach strategies with the same groups (see Figure 2.). Over half the respondents reported use of such strategies, from 52.4 (Other target audiences) to 67.3 percent (Service providers).

[Text Version of Figure Two]

Some of the effective strategies identified include:

• many computer and technology-based strategies such as electronic mail, distance learning, Web-based materials (66)
• conference presentations (60)
• special training sessions/workshops (45)
• newsletters, brochures, other publications (38)
• journals/trade journals (19)
• training the trainer (4)
• direct in-service (3)
• audio tapes, video tapes, advisory groups, television and radio, exhibits, toll-free number, teleconferences, networking with industry and others

Grantee Technical Assistance Needs

In the last part of the survey, NIDRR grantees were asked about their need for technical assistance (TA) in planning and implementing outreach strategies, TA in other areas, or need for any other type of assistance. Figure 3. identifies specific areas of TA requests. Responses included a total of 115 grantees who requested TA in planning and implementing outreach strategies and/or requested other TA or assistance.

[Text Version of Figure Three]

These data provide valuable cues to the NCDDR for prioritizing future informational and technical assistance activities. NCDDR informational sources, such as The Research Exchange, have consistently provided information about dissemination strategies, recently emphasizing cultural diversity and publishing in the popular, disability, and professional media. Future volumes will continue this emphasis while extending the NCDDR's focus to include researching target markets and developing marketing strategies, as well as a continuous updating of information about electronic communications and technology. The NCDDR will continue to focus on how service providers and consumers can get research information they can use. This will include electronic and interpersonal networking strategies, particularly in working with diverse consumer markets for research information.

Conclusion

It is interesting to observe the evolution of the NIDRR grantees' communication formats, modes, and strategies over time, particularly from the initial grantee survey in early 1996 to the recent survey in early 1999. In 1996, 51 percent of grantees reported use of the Internet/World Wide Web and 33 percent projected future usage. The 1999 survey reveals that grantees exceeded those combined percentages (84 percent) with an 89 percent Internet/World Wide Web usage level. With this increased usage, decreases in or stabilized levels for uses of many other modes of communication occurred. It appears that former technological innovations, such as use of computer disks and faxes, are being replaced by new or improved technologies, including World Wide Web information distribution and downloads, and the ability to transmit information and files via E-mail. These data, perhaps, provide a snapshot of widespread changes in the technologies and strategies of information dissemination.

However, enthusiasm about this upsurge in Internet/World Wide Web usage must be dampened by the realization that stakeholders and consumers lag behind researchers in their use of the Internet as a communication mode. Researchers should be careful to continue using a variety of dissemination strategies and modes to ensure that their research information reaches an array of potential users. Although high percentages of grantees use a variety of communication methods, from low tech personal communication to high tech Web sites and CD-ROM materials, there continues to be a need to increase the frequency of dissemination through both traditional and innovative communication methods.

Future innovations are likely to occur in dissemination methods listed under Other in Table 6. These include participatory strategies, such as support or focus groups, community events, and town meetings, and through technological innovations in distance learning, video conferencing, listservs, and emerging technologies. Future innovations will bring researchers closer to consumers and stakeholders, resulting in the need to make research information increasingly accessible to and understood by diverse target audiences.

It is apparent that NIDRR grantees are working toward this end and are seeking to go beyond traditional dissemination methods. Grantee requests for technical assistance indicate their interest in diversifying dissemination strategies and developing market research and marketing strategies to extend their efforts beyond distribution of research information to target consumers' and stakeholders' information needs. These strategies will include the Internet/World Wide Web and other electronic media as integral components of effective dissemination of research information and knowledge utilization.

References

National Center for the Dissemination of Disability Research (NCDDR). (1997a). How do consumers get information they can use? The Research Exchange, 2(4), 1-7. Retrieved September 17, 1999 from the World Wide Web: <http://www.ncddr.org/products/researchexchange/v02n04/index.html>
NCDDR. (1997b). Report of NCDDR consumer survey. Austin, TX: NCDDR/SEDL.
NCDDR. (1998a). How do stakeholders find and disseminate information? The Research Exchange, 3(2), 1-11. Retrieved September 17, 1999 from the World Wide Web: <http://www.ncddr.org/products/researchexchange/v03n02/>
NCDDR. (1998b). Report of NCDDR stakeholder survey. Austin, TX: NCDDR/SEDL.
NCDDR. (1996). Characteristics of NIDRR grantees: Initial findings. The Research Exchange, 1(3), 5-9. Retrieved September 17, 1999 from the World Wide Web: <http://www.ncddr.org/products/researchexchange/v01n03/characteristics.html>

---

Top

Web Accessibility  |  Site Map  |  Feedback   

---

NIDRR Project Number: H133A990008
Last Updated: Tuesday, 29 January 2008 at 04:12 PM,
Contents © 1996-2005

SEDL Southwest Educational Development Laboratory (SEDL)
211 East Seventh St., Room 400 - Austin, Texas 78701-3253
Voice/Text Telephone: 800-266-1832 or 512-476-6861 - Fax: 512-476-2286