| Progress 06/01/15 to 01/31/16
 Outputs
 Target Audience:We have contacted 10 different slaughter and processing entities to discuss the platform, and have met with approximately 60 livestock grower who regularly use slaugherhouses throughout the year. Changes/Problems:We have not changed the person we hired as a software programmer, but we are contemplating doing so due to his slow performance. Accordingly, we are interviewing other programmers. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?
Nothing Reported
How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?
Nothing Reported
What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?We intend to insist that the programmer complete his work, or switch to another provider in order to take the product out and test it with the targeted market.
 
 Impacts
 What was accomplished under these goals?
1. We have worked consistently on this tool and evaluated many different iteration. Our softward developer continues to make progress and refine the interface. 2. We have illustrated in principle, discussed in concept, the idea with farmers, slaughter and processors, industry participants, and as many "influeners" as we have been able to reach at one on one meetings, at meat conferences, at farmer gatherings, and any venue where we could be heard; there is indisputable demand on both sides of the transaction; our programmer is slower than we had hoped and we are waiting for a live site that can be demonstrated. Without it, we can go no further. 3. We cannot do any beta testing without a live site - we hope to be able to do so in December and have slaughterhouses waiting for the product to test. 4. This objective is dependent upon completion of #3 above; but we are aware that computer literacy at the slaughter end is lacking, and that we will need a robut help desk; we are searching for a capability that will suffice, as we do not believe our current programmer can handle the task.
 
 Publications
 
 
 | 
| Progress 06/01/15 to 01/31/16
 Outputs
 Target Audience:Target audience was the owners/operators of S&P facilities, and the farmers who use those facilities. Changes/Problems:We did not revise anything, but experienced considerable difficulty in having the software developer meet deadlines and demonstrate full functionality. We would undoubtedly employ more or different coders in Phase II. What opportunities for training and professional development has the project provided?The opportunity for both is substantial at the S&P level. We believe incorporation of technology will be essential to the continuation of S&P's as stand-along profitable businesses, and if they are integrated into a larger vertically integrated business model, as appears to be happening, the requirement for robust technology will be even more compelling. How have the results been disseminated to communities of interest?Yes, at meat conferences, farmer conferences, and individually with S&P's. What do you plan to do during the next reporting period to accomplish the goals?
Nothing Reported
 
 Impacts
 What was accomplished under these goals?
1. Web-based tool was developed. 2. Web-based tool was introduced to farmers, S*P owners, industry observers, lobbying groups, not-for profit ag groups. 3. Product was beta tested with VLSPC and with Eagle Bridge, and was evaluated with at least 10 other S&P's. 4. Help desk requirements are substantial, so substantial that we believe a full time individual is required to work with the S&P's to make the system operate smoothly. Farmers, especially younger farmers, are completely at home with tech solutions, but S&P's are not (with rare exceptions.) It turns out to be a good deal more complicated than showing them a product and helping them use it. It requires a whole level of acceptance and moral support to extablish the optimal use of the entire platform, not just the scheduling component. Consequently we have requested funding for this level of support in Phase II.
 
 Publications
 
 Type:
Websites
Status:
Under Review
Year Published:
2016
Citation:
www.livestockscheduler.com
 
 | 
|