Evaluation of NWS Twin Cities, MN Products and Services

OMB # 0648-0342
Expires 12/31/2011

Evaluation of NWS Twin Cities, MN Products and Services
During the 2010 Spring Flood
Responses to this survey are completely voluntary.
1.

What is your affiliation?
Federal Government
City Government

State Government
County Government
Other ______________________________

2. How important is hydrology and weather information in determining your daily
activities?
Very Important
Important
Somewhat Important
3. How important was hydrology and weather information to your responsibilities prior to
and during in the flood.
Very Important
Important
Somewhat Important
4. Did you attend a NWS flood outlook briefing or use the Probabilistic Flood Outlook
products, prior to the flood.
Yes
No
5. If yes, were you able to make decisions and plans based on the Flood Outlooks? If so,
what decisions were you able to make and what were the impact of those decisions?
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
6. What technologies do you use to access weather and hydrology information from the
National Weather Service? (Check all that apply)
Emergency Managers Weather Information Network (EMWIN)
Interactive Weather Information Network (IWIN)
NWS Twin Cities Main Website (http://water.weather.gov/ahps2/index.php?wfo=mpx)
NWS MN Flood Briefing Webpage (http://www.crh.noaa.gov/mpx/?n=springflooding)
NWSChat
AHPSMobile/iNWS website (http://ahpsmobile.wrh.noaa.gov/ or
http://inws.wrh.noaa.gov/)
NWS Emails and Briefings
RSS Feeds
NOAA Weather Radio (NWR)
NOAAPORT
Commercial Weather Information Vendor
1

OMB # 0648-0342
Expires 12/31/2011

7. Rank your preferred method of accessing hydrology and weather information both
prior to and during this flood event. (1 being the most preferred followed by 2, etc…)
Method
WFO Twin Cities Website
AHPSMobile/iNWS website
Webinars (as needed)
Emails briefings/notifications
Call the WFO NWS Twin
Cities Office
NWSChat
NOAA Weather Radio
Weather Information System
(EMWIN, IWIN,
NOAAPORT, Comm.
Vendor)
Other Media Sources (T.V. /
Radio, etc…)
Other Methods

Prior To The Flood

During the Flood

If you used “other methods” to accessing hydrology and weather information, could you
elaborate?
______________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
8. If you used the MN Flood Briefing webpage
(http://www.crh.noaa.gov/mpx/?n=springflooding), did it provide you the supplemental
information, in addition to the NWS AHPS pages
(http://water.weather.gov/ahps2/index.php?wfo=mpx), you needed to make flood
related decisions? If not, what additional information would have been of value to
include in this webpage.
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
9. A blend of Webinars and Email briefings were used provide information during the
flood. Did you attend a NWS Flood Webinar Briefing and/or use the Flood Briefing
Emails, during to the flood?
Yes
No

10. If yes, was this approach effective?
Prefer the blend of webinars and Email briefings
Prefer Email briefings only
2

OMB # 0648-0342
Expires 12/31/2011

Prefer Webinars only
Please elaborate if you had any specific comments regarding your response.
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________

11. Regarding the Webinars and Email briefings, what decisions did you make or
reconsider with the information you gained from these briefings? Were the impacts of
these decisions of significance?
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
12. Was there additional information that you needed for key decisions that was not
provided via the traditional weather and hydrology products or via the webinars and
briefings? If so, what was that additional information?
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
13. How reliable was the hydrology and weather information provided by WFO Twin
Cities?
Very Reliable
Reliable
Somewhat Reliable
14. How timely was the hydrology and weather information provided by WFO Twin
Cities?
Very Timely
Timely
Somewhat Timely

3

OMB # 0648-0342
Expires 12/31/2011

15. How satisfied were you with WFO Twin Cities products during the flood in following
areas:
Product

Very
Satisfied

Satisfied Neutral

River Flood
Warnings
Areal Flood
Warnings for
Ice Jams
Areal Flood
Warnings for
Non Forecast
Point River
Flooding
Flash Flood
Warnings for
Ice Jams
Flash Flood
Warnings
(other
situations)
River or Areal
Flood Watches
Spring Flood
Outlooks
Hazardous
Weather
Outlook (either
Text or
Graphical)
General
Weather
Forecasts

4

Dissatisfied

Very
Dissatisfied

Not
Applicable
(N/A)

OMB # 0648-0342
Expires 12/31/2011

16. NWS Twin Cities used a broader areal flood warning, in addition to the River Point
Flood Warnings, to convey the full extent of flooding along the larger river systems
(specifically the Minnesota, Mississippi and Crow Rivers). Information such as road
closures was included in the product. Was this strategy of issuing a broader areal flood
warning helpful?
Yes
No
If the broader warning was helpful, was the road closure information in the warning
appropriate or would referencing MNDOT’s 511 website as well as a generic statement
of “Please refer to your local County Website for possible road closures.” be a better
approach? Also, do you have suggestions for other information to include in a broader
areal flood warning?
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
17. Do you have suggestions as to how NWS Twin Cities can improve its hydrology related
products or services (respond to those that apply)
Webinar Briefings
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
Email briefings
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
River Outlook Information
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
River Forecast Information
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
Flood Warnings due to Ice Jams
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
River Flood Warnings for rivers do not receive River level forecasts (hydrographs) or are not
near a River Forecast Point.
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
NWSCHAT (either NCRFC-Agencies Chat or MPXChat)
_________________________________________________________________________
5

OMB # 0648-0342
Expires 12/31/2011

_________________________________________________________________________

One-on-one conversation with NWS staff for information
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
18. Sharing of information not only from the NWS to Decision Makers but also from
Decision Makers to the NWS in real-time was a key component to this event. What are
some of the best/easiest methods for you to provide this information to the NWS?
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________
19. What is your overall satisfaction with WFO Twin Cities’ products and services?
Very satisfied
Satisfied
Neutral
Dissatisfied
Very Dissatisfied
If you are dissatisfied, why?
_________________________________________________________________________
_________________________________________________________________________

PAPERWORK REDUCTION ACT STATEMENT
Paperwork Reduction Act Information: In accordance with Executive Order 12862, the
National Performance Review, and good management practices, NOAA offices seek to
determine whether their customers are satisfied with the services and/or products they are
receiving and whether they have suggestions as to how the services/products may be improved or
made more useful. The information will be used to improve NOAA’s products and services.
Responses to this survey are completely voluntary. No confidentiality can be provided for
responses, but you need not supply your name or address. Public reporting burden for this
collection of information is estimated to average 30 minutes per response. Send comments
regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including
suggestions for reducing this burden, to Sarah Brabson, CIO-PPA1, Station 9826, 1315 EastWest Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910. Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, no
person is required to respond to, nor shall any person be subject to a penalty for failure to comply
with, a collection of information subject to the requirements of the Paperwork Reduction Act,
unless that collection of information displays a currently valid OMB Control Number.

6