NIST/ATP 1999 National Meeting Feedback Analysis

1. Location and facilities.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor	1 2 3 4 5	26 21 13 3 1	40.6 32.8 20.3 4.7 1.6	40.6 32.8 20.3 4.7 1.6	40.6 73.4 93.8 98.4 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean 1.938             Mode 1.000             Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

2. Pre-conference registration process.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor N/A	0 1 2 3 4 5 6	2 28 16 8 1 1 8	3.1 43.8 25.0 12.5 1.6 1.6 12.5	3.1 43.8 25.0 12.5 1.6 1.6 12.5	3.1 46.9 71.9 84.4 85.9 87.5 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean 2.203             Mode 1.000             Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

3. On-site registration process.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Excellent Very Good Good Fair N/A	0 1 2 3 4 6	7 18 17 4 2 16	10.9 28.1 26.6 6.3 3.1 25.0	10.9 28.1 26.6 6.3 3.1 25.0	10.9 39.1 65.6 71.9 75.0 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean 2.625             Mode 1.000       Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

4. On-site management/organization.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Excellent Very Good Good Fair	0 1 2 3 4	1 24 26 11 2	1.6 37.5 40.6 17.2 3.1	1.6 37.5 40.6 17.2 3.1	1.6 39.1 79.7 96.9 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean 1.828             Mode 2.000       Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

5. Technical content.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Excellent Very Good Good Fair N/A	0 1 2 3 4 6	2 16 31 13 1 1	3.1 25.0 48.4 20.3 1.6 1.6	3.1 25.0 48.4 20.3 1.6 1.6	3.1 28.1 76.6 96.9 98.4 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean 1.984       Mode 2.000       Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

6. Presenters/instructors.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Excellent Very Good Good N/A	0 1 2 3 6	4 17 29 13 1	6.36 26.6 45.3 20.3 1.6	6.3 26.6 45.3 20.3 1.6	6.3 32.8 78.1 98.4 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean 1.875       Mode 2.000       Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

7. Support materials.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor	0 1 2 3 4 5	4 10 19 19 9 3	6.3 15.6 29.7 29.7 14.1 4.7	6.3 15.6 29.7 29.7 14.1 4.7	6.3 21.9 51.6 81.3 95.3 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean 2.438       Mode 2.000 * multiple       Modes exist       Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

8. Audiovisuals.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor N/A	0 1 2 3 4 5 6	2 14 25 14 7 1 1	3.1 21.9 39.1 21.9 10.9 1.6 1.6	3.1 21.9 39.1 21.9 10.9 1.6 1.6	3.1 25.0 64.1 85.9 96.9 98.4 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean 2.266       Mode 2.000       Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

9. Keynotes, evening activities, etc.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor N/A	0 1 2 3 4 5 6	2 23 18 6 1 1 13	3.1 35.9 28.1 9.4 1.6 1.6 20.3	3.1 35.9 28.1 9.4 1.6 1.6 20.3	3.1 39.1 67.2 76.6 78.1 79.7 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean 2.563       Mode 1.000       Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

10. Exhibits/demos.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Excellent Very Good Good Fair Poor N/A	0 1 2 3 4 5 6	5 8 12 21 4 1 13	7.8 12.5 18.8 32.8 6.3 1.6 20.3	7.8 12.5 18.8 32.8 6.3 1.6 20.3	7.8 20.3 39.1 71.9 78.1 79.7 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean 3.031       Mode 3.000       Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

11. Overall rating considering costs, expectations and benefits.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Excellent Very Good Good Fair	0 1 2 3 4	11 13 30 6 4	17.2 20.3 46.9 9.4 6.3	17.2 20.3 46.9 9.4 6.3	17.2 37.5 84.4 93.8 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean 1.672       Mode 2.000       Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

11a. Should ATP do this kind of meeting again?
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Yes	0 1	10 54	15.6 84.4	15.6 84.4	15.6 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean .844       Mode 1.000       Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

13. Have you attended previous NIST-sponsored conferences/workshops?
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Yes	0 1 2	9 44 11	14.1 68.8 17.2	14.1 68.8 17.2	14.1 82.8 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean 1031       Mode 1.000       Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

13a. If yes, how many?
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
	0 1 2 3 4 5	53 4 3 2 1 1	82.8 6.3 4.7 3.1 1.6 1.6	82.8 6.3 4.7 3.1 1.6 1.6	82.8 89.1 93.8 96.9 98.4 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean .391       Mode .000       Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

14. How did you learn about this event?
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Colleague Mail Internet Other	0 1 2 4 5	9 22 13 11 9	14.1 34.4 20.3 17.2 14.1	14.1 34.4 20.3 17.2 14.1	14.1 48.4 68.8 85.9 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean 2.141       Mode 1.000       Valid Cases 64       Missing Cases 0

15. Employment.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response US Non-US	0 1 2	21 42 1	32.8 65.6 1.6	32.8 65.6 1.6	32.8 98.4 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean .688       Mode 1.000       Valid Cases 64

15a. Employment.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Federal State/Local	0 1 2	58 3 3	90.6 4.7 4.7	90.6 4.7 4.7	90.6 95.3 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean .141       Mode .000       Valid Cases 64

15b. Employment.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Industry Academic Other	0 1 2 3	18 38 6 2	28.1 59.4 9.4 3.1	28.1 59.4 9.4 3.1	28.1 87.5 96.9 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean .875       Mode 1.000       Valid Cases 64

15c. Employment.
Value Label	Value	Frequency	Percent	Valid Percent	Cum Percent
No Response Executive Mid-level Technical Other	0 1 2 3 4	17 16 18 11 2	26.6 25.0 28.1 17.2 3.1	26.6 25.0 28.1 17.2 3.1	26.6 51.6 79.7 96.9 100.0
	Total	64	100.0	100.0
Mean 1.453       Mode 2.000       Valid Cases 64