NIMAC AU & AMP Survey Results Julia Myers Nicole Gaines

March 2012 Survey The NIMAC provided a customer satisfaction survey to AUs & AMPs to collect information and gather feedback in these areas: –Formats being produced by users –Satisfaction with NIMAC system performance, use of features, and suggested system changes –Satisfaction with NIMAC and OverDrive staff support –Interest in future trainings The NIMAC received responses from 66 AUs and 64 AMPs.

AU Recent Downloads

70% of AUs downloaded at least one file set in the prior 6 months. 44% of AUs downloaded 1 to10 file sets. Only 4.5% downloaded more than 100 file sets. This finding confirms that file downloading varies dramatically among AUs.

AU Formats Produced

Over half of respondents produce embossed braille from NIMAS while 39% produce BRF. This finding was surprising in light of the fact that braille readers are a minority of those eligible for NIMAS from NIMAC and that braille transcription software is still unable to directly import NIMAS XML. This highlights the importance of NIMAS in braille production.

AU File Assignments

Formats Assigned to AMPs

AU File Assignments Assignment of files for braille production was higher than for other formats. 55% of respondents assigned NIMAS for the production of embossed braille. 51% assigned files for BRF files. 35% assigned files for DAISY text. 25% assigned files for Large Print. 25% assigned files for DAISY Audio. Over 36% had not assigned any files in the previous six months.

AU Use of Contact Info

NIMAC System: AU Responses

NIMAC System Overall responses regarding NIMAC system were very positive! Lack of familiarity of some respondents with the AMP and Publisher Contact Information and the Reports functionality points to the need to emphasize these features in upcoming trainings this fall.

Recommended System Changes Respondents were also asked for their recommendations on future NIMAC system development; the items below are compiled from both the AU and AMP responses. System development recommendations: –Improve system response time –Provide 10- and 13-digit ISBN search for all files –Ensure all files validate to 2005 NIMAS DTD –Provide Bookshare and Learning Ally results in NIMAC search

Recommended System Changes: Status Improved system response time: In progress –OverDrive has moved the NIMAC system to a more robust server and is looking into ways to further improve response time. Searchability by 10 and 13-digit ISBNs: Under review –NIMAC is working with OverDrive to explore an automated process to supply ISBNs not provided by publisher. File validation improvement: Resolved –In March 2012, OverDrive released and NIMAC announced new validation wizard with enhanced DTD feedback. Provide unified search capability: Resolved –APH has implemented Louis Plus. Bookshare has agreed to participate in the unified search. Learning Ally and AccessText Network have also been invited to participate.

AU Webinar Interest

AU Webinars In response to the high interest in webinar trainings, NIMAC will be offering its AU, AMP, and Publisher & Vendor webinars again this fall! As in the past, once the trainings are scheduled, users will receive an notification of the trainings and instructions on how to register. We will also post this information on the NIMAC web site.

AU NIMAC Staff Ratings

AU OverDrive Support Ratings

NIMAC and OverDrive Support Responses were overwhelmingly positive! Of those respondents who had contacted NIMAC, the majority reported “Excellent” in all four areas surveyed: Promptness of Response, Knowledge, Helpfulness, and Availability. 100% rated NIMAC staff “Excellent” or “Good” for Knowledge and Availability and 98% gave those ratings for Promptness and Helpfulness.

NIMAC and OverDrive Support Over 70% of respondents indicated that they had not contacted OverDrive support. Of those who had contacted OverDrive, the vast majority indicated “Excellent” or “Good” in all four surveyed areas.

AMP Survey Results AMPs were surveyed in the same areas as AUs, with the exception of ratings on AU system functions that did not apply. In general, AMP survey feedback was similar to that provided by AUs. 64 AMPs participated in the survey, which is a remarkably good response rate given that there are 82 active AMP accounts in the system (i.e., AMPs that have been assigned at least one file).

AMP Downloads

60% of respondents downloaded at least one file in the prior 6 months. 42% of respondents downloaded 1 to10 files in the prior 6 months. No AMPs reported downloading more than 50 files in that period. One caveat: Because the survey was conducted in March, and winter is a less busy time for many AMPs, results may be lower than had the survey been conducted at a different time of year.

AMP Formats Produced

65.5% of respondents produce embossed braille; 45.5% produce BRF. As with the AU responses, this underscores the importance of NIMAS in braille production, despite the lack of software that can directly import NIMAS XML for braille transcription. One-fourth of respondents produce large print; this is good news as it indicates producers beyond APH have developed workflows to successfully convert NIMAS into that format.

AMP Use of Contact Info

AMP NIMAC System Ratings

AMP Webinar Interest

AMP System Ratings & Training While the overall responses were positive, the presence of some “Fair” ratings for system navigation and other features probably indicate a need for more training for AMPs. This is echoed in the overwhelmingly positive response to the offer of future webinar trainings. We plan to use the upcoming trainings to solicit additional input from AMPs as to any specific issues or difficulties they are encountering.

AMP NIMAC Staff Ratings

AMP OverDrive Ratings

NIMAC and OverDrive Support Roughly 40% of respondents indicated they had not contacted NIMAC in the past; 70% had not contacted OverDrive support. Of those who had contacted NIMAC, 100% rated NIMAC staff “Excellent” or “Good” for Promptness and Knowledge; 97% gave these ratings for Availability and 94% for Helpfulness. Of those who had contacted OverDrive, ratings were similarly positive, although one respondent gave them a “Poor” rating in all four areas.

Survey Comments and Responses The AU and AMP surveys also asked for any additional comments or questions. Many of the comments related to “big picture” issues beyond the purview of the NIMAC. The NIMAC has actively shared these issues with others so that the overall system of AIM provision can be made more efficient and effective. Comment: There is a need for information regarding state edition classroom compatibility. NIMAC response: This is a long-standing concern of braille producers. It was discussed on last NIMAC User Group call. A publisher representative in the group is investigating further.

Survey Comments and Responses Comment: There is a need for local training on AIM and how the bigger system of AIM provision works. NIMAC response: Raised with OSEP and fellow NIMAS grantees Comment: Need for unified search of Bookshare, Learning Ally and NIMAC materials NIMAC response: Louis Plus went live in July Bookshare participation in progress; Learning Ally contacted again

Survey Comments and Responses Comment: Need for information on which AMPs produce Nemeth braille NIMAC response: Information is available at the AMP Database at APH; more outreach/training in the works to increase awareness Comment: Need to know who to contact if a NIMAC file will not open in Read:OutLoud/cannot be successfully converted into an EPUB NIMAC response: Raised at OSEP meeting in May. Bookshare has offered to follow-up with Don Johnston to create a technical support and feedback loop.

Reflections and Next Steps The survey gave much positive feedback to the NIMAC and indicated high satisfaction from users. However, respondents also indicated a continuing need for assistance with broader NIMAS implementation and support. We will reach out with additional NIMAC trainings, and continue to seek ways to work collaboratively with the other NIMAS-related projects to improve the overall system of AIM provision. To further follow up on issues related to braille: APH & NIMAC have plans to work with Frances Mary D’Andrea of BANA on a survey of how NIMAS is being used in braille production.