View
550
Download
1
Category
Tags:
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
NSGIC and National GIS news
Citation preview
NSGIC 2007 was held in Madison !
WisconsinWisconsin
Wisconsin @ NSGIC 2010
Chris Diller, GIS Manager, Wisconsin DMA
John Ellingson, Wisconsin Geodetic Advisor, NOAA, NGS
Travis Franz, Content Specialist, NAVTEQ
Ted Koch, University of WI - Madison
James Lacy, Associate State Cartographer, UW, SCO
Curtis Pulford, State Geographic Information Officer, DOA, DET
Jerry Sullivan, GIS Data Specialist, Wisconsin DNR
Dr. Howard Veregin, Wisconsin State Cartographer
Dick Vraga, USGS Geospatial Liaison for Wisconsin
AJ Wortley, Sr. Outreach Specialist, UW, SCO
This year’s top opportunities are:
For the Nation Data Initiatives
Address Points from Census Bureau
Governance of theNational Spatial Data Infrastructure
Technology to ImproveGovernment Effectiveness
Other Wisconsin NSGIC members
Michael Friis, Program Manager, WI Coastal Mgmt. Program
David Mockert, Director State & Local Practice, GeoDecisions
David Moyer, Wisconsin Geodetic Advisor, NOAA, NGS (ret.)
Kenneth J Parsons, IV, Chief, GIS Services, Wisconsin DNR
GeoPlatform.gov - Call to Action
In 2010 and 2011, Federal data managers for geospatial data will move to a
portfolio management approach, creating a Geospatial Platform to support
Geospatial One-Stop, place-based initiatives, and other potential future programs.
This transformation will be facilitated by improving the governance framework to
address the requirements of State, local and tribal agencies, Administration policy,
and agency mission objectives.
Investments will be prioritized based on business needs.
The Geospatial Platform will explore opportunities for increased collaboration with
Data.gov, with an emphasis on reuse of architectural standards and technology,
ultimately increasing access to geospatial data."
President’s Budget, Fiscal Year 2011
Geospatial Platform Conceptual Model
* It is recognized that partner agencies may be both providers and customers of GeoPlatform.gov assets
StateGovernment
Volunteers,Crowds
NGOs,Academia
TribalGovernment
Privatecompanies
LocalGovernment
FederalGovernment
Str
ea
mlin
ed
Ac
ce
ss
toR
es
ou
rce
s
Imp
rove
dB
us
ine
ss
Pro
ce
sse
sa
nd
Ou
tco
mes
http://www.GeoPlatform.gov
GeoPlatform.govIt took only an estimated $480,000 to get the Geospatial Platform up and running.
The open-source ERMA application, uses Google Maps for its layers, was expanded toaccommodate 600 different data layers, many of which are updated in real time.
The Geospatial Platform allows the public to search and display data about:• Oil spill trajectories near the shore.• Shoreline Cleanup and Assessment Team results.• Satellite interpretations for potential oil footprints. Field photos.• Wildlife observations. Closures of fisheries in federal and state waters.• Shoreline flight imagery from NOAA, NASA and EPA.• Navigational caution area for mariners. Data buoys.• Current environmental conditions.• Predicated environmental conditions.• Location of research and response vessels.• Related data, such as seafood safety, EPA monitoring and subsurface monitoring
analytical chemistry.
• The data is updated twice a day.
In early June, Geospatial Platform was launched, public site received 3.5 million hits.Since then, it has had more than 4.8 million visitors.
Data SharingData Sharingwhat workswhat works…… what doesnwhat doesn’’tt
Lynda Wayne, GeoMaxim/FGDCDr. Tim De Troye, SC GIS Coordinator
BackgroundBackground
2008-2009• South Carolina Geospatial Administrators
Association (SC GAA) Data Policy surveyshows lack of data policies in localgovernment
2009• SC GAA develops guidelines for the
development of policies• SC GAA and GeoMaxim/FGDC survey national
community as to successes and failures with regard todata policies
• lessons learned compiled and guidelinesdrafted
A Process Frameworkfor
Developing LocalGovernment
Data Access Policies
For the recordFor the record……
Data sharing is valuable becausethe more data is used the:
• better it gets via broaderQA/QC
• greater attention to yourorganization
• more opportunities to leveragedata
• fewer competing data setscreated
• more complementary data setscreated
Data Sharing SupportsData Sharing SupportsEmergency Response
If all sectors, public and private, can’t accesscritical information, lives can be lost
Economic DevelopmentIf they can’t find about you – theycan’t come spend/invest their money
PlanningBad decision-making by others can havefar-reaching effects on your community
Navigation Systems / Online MappingIf the route is wrong – you get the blame
Differing Perspectives
Data Sharing IssuesData Sharing Issues
Complicated Data Sharing Agreements
Poor Data Documentation
Limited Capacity and/or Infrastructure
Personal Privacy and Public Safety
Data Control
Data Misuse and Exploitation
Special ThanksSpecial Thanks……
Jim Steil Randy Johnson Anne Payne
Pat Bresnehan Kenny Miller Tom Morgan
AJ Wortley Patti Day Will Craig
Learon Dalby Scott Samson Neil McGaffey
Jim Sparks Phillip Worrall Joy Paulus
Jeff Brown Bob Nutsch Nancy von MeyerNC GICC SC GAA
AR, MS, MD, NC,SC, WI
Data Sharing AgreementsData Sharing Agreements
© The Simpsons
What Works:• Handshakes and trust
• Collaboratively developed, effective,standardized data sharingagreements
What doesn’t:
• Formal agreements that includeimprecise language, serve as road blocks toinnovative partnerships and add overhead
• Over-involvement on the part ofAdministration and Legal staff that attemptto cover all the bases
AR, MS, MD, NC,SC, WI
Poor Data DocumentationPoor Data Documentation
What Works:• Providing metadata creation
and support in return for dataaccess
• Support for community-wide metadata training andresources
What doesn’t:• Trying to create metadata for
another's data by guessing athow the data were created
NC, WI
Balancing Right to Know and ConfidentialityBalancing Right to Know and Confidentiality
What Works:
• Data standards that address privacy andsecurity issues
• Edited/generalized versions that excludesensitive content
• Public Record Laws & Data Sharing Policies thataddress geospatial & establish guidelines as to whocan access the data and how
• Recognizing that very little data istruly ‘sensitive’
• FGDC Data Access Guidelines
AR, MA, SC
http://www.fgdc.gov/policyandplanning/Access%20Guidelines.pdf
FGDC Publication:
Access to Geospatial Datain Response to SecurityConcerns
Balancing Right to Know and ConfidentialityBalancing Right to Know and Confidentiality
What Doesn’t:
• Wholesale approaches thateliminate sharing of all‘potentially’ sensitive data
• Over-involvement on the partof Administration and Legalpersonnel that attempt to coverall the bases
Maintaining Data ControlMaintaining Data ControlWhat Works:
• Earnest dialog about concernsand solutions
• Data stewards / trusted sources
• Data acknowledgement andlineage guidelines
• Data management models thatallow the use of data that ismaintained in your system
What doesn’t:
• Treating public data as a privateresource
IN, LA, NC, MetroGIS,SC
Data Misuse and ExploitationData Misuse and Exploitation
What Works:
• Metadata, metadata, metadata withvalid ‘Use Constraints’, ‘DistributionLiability’ and ‘Purpose’ statements
• Clearly stated license/copyrightrequirements and mandatoryacknowledgement by the consumer
• Making data freely accessible so
consumers use current version
What doesn’t:
• Confusing misuse with innovation
AR, MA, NC
Limited Data Sharing Capacity & InfrastructureLimited Data Sharing Capacity & Infrastructure
What Works:• $ - especially if designated to build and
maintain data sharing capacity (newdata collection, hardware, software,training, etc)
• A simplified process that adds noburden to the data provider
• Documenting return on investment towarrant capacity building
What doesn’t:• One time payments for data that are
not tied to capacity buildingAR, IN, MA, MD,MetroGIS, SC, WA, WI
Differing PerspectivesDiffering PerspectivesWhat Works:
• Approaching data providerswith a proposal
• Data consumers that inquire asto the data providers needs andbring something to the table: $, services, data…
• Approaching data sharing as a cooperative partnership
• A respected champion, Will Craig’s ‘White Knight’
What doesn’t:
• Demands for data MD, MSU, MetroGIS, NC,SC, WA, WI
South Carolina ExampleSouth Carolina Example
•• Home rule stateHome rule state –– counties retain powercounties retain power
•• FOIAFOIA –– interpretation varies between stateinterpretation varies between stateand local governmentand local government
•• Many counties copyright/license data to usersMany counties copyright/license data to users
•• Prior gov to gov sharing of roads and imageryPrior gov to gov sharing of roads and imagery
•• Views of gov to gov sharing varies by countyViews of gov to gov sharing varies by county
South CarolinaSouth Carolina –– Building RelationsBuilding Relations
•• CAP grant outreach to local governmentCAP grant outreach to local government
•• Build relationships first, ask for data secondBuild relationships first, ask for data second
•• Campaign on state uses of local data, stressCampaign on state uses of local data, stressbenefits to local community membersbenefits to local community members
•• Educate on importance of no data agreementsEducate on importance of no data agreements
•• Explain benefits of streamlined access to stateExplain benefits of streamlined access to statethrough datathrough data ““collectorcollector”” –– minimize individualminimize individualrequests to countiesrequests to counties
South CarolinaSouth Carolina –– Expanding SharingExpanding Sharing
•• Built on precedenceBuilt on precedence of sharing centerlinesof sharing centerlines
•• Created inventory of address points/parcelsCreated inventory of address points/parcels ––many counties have points, most have parcelsmany counties have points, most have parcels
•• Timeline:Timeline:
–– After 1.5 yearsAfter 1.5 years -- asked for address pointsasked for address points
–– Six months laterSix months later -- asked for parcels (asked for parcels (any formany form))
–– Six months laterSix months later –– asked for parcels/CAMAasked for parcels/CAMA
South Carolina ParcelsSouth Carolina Parcels
Parcels Status
Complete
Waiting
OK w Agreement
Checking
No Sharing
Data Building
No Parcels
Parcels Status
South Carolina Address PointsSouth Carolina Address Points
Address Points Status
Address Points Status
Complete - Address Points
Waiting
Complete - Parcel Centroids
OK w Agreement
Checking
No Sharing
Data Building
No Points
South CarolinaSouth Carolina –– Giving BackGiving Back
•• Provide feedback on uses, caveats/storiesProvide feedback on uses, caveats/stories
•• Provide stateProvide state--maintained data improved bymaintained data improved bylocal data sharinglocal data sharing
•• Provide ungeocoded addresses for QA/QCProvide ungeocoded addresses for QA/QC
•• Ask for local government involvement onAsk for local government involvement onprojects that donprojects that don’’t involve moneyt involve money –– continuedcontinueddemonstration of their value/expertisedemonstration of their value/expertise
•• Giving back encouragesGiving back encouragescontinued participationcontinued participation
South CarolinaSouth Carolina –– Avoiding BarriersAvoiding Barriers
•• Never pay for data, if not a joint projectNever pay for data, if not a joint project(imagery/LiDAR acquisition, etc.)(imagery/LiDAR acquisition, etc.)
•• Educate on importance of avoidingEducate on importance of avoidingagreementsagreements
•• NEVERNEVER ask local government to modify dataask local government to modify data
–– ESRI Data Interoperability ExtensionESRI Data Interoperability Extension
–– Model Builder can do the work for youModel Builder can do the work for you
South CarolinaSouth Carolina -- ChallengesChallenges
•• Must abide by local permissions grantedMust abide by local permissions granted –– nonosharing with Feds at this point due to fear ofsharing with Feds at this point due to fear ofdata getting pushed to public domaindata getting pushed to public domain
•• Long timeline to effect a philosophy shiftLong timeline to effect a philosophy shift
•• Cannot force anyone to participate (a fewCannot force anyone to participate (a fewhold outs)hold outs) –– incomplete data coverage forincomplete data coverage forstatestate
•• Maintaining relationships is labor intensive,Maintaining relationships is labor intensive,but pays offbut pays off
More info?More info?
•• Lynda WayneLynda Wayne
Lwayne@GeoMaxim.comLwayne@GeoMaxim.com
•• Tim De TroyeTim De Troye
detroyet@gis.sc.govdetroyet@gis.sc.gov
Recommended