13

Framework for Evaluation

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

Framework for Evaluation. Framework for Evaluation. Other Factors. Timeline To decision To funding To RFP To collection / processing / QC Useful product to stakeholders To operational efficiencies or payback (C/B) Partnerships State only Add Federal Partners. Other Factors. Funding - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: Framework for Evaluation
Page 2: Framework for Evaluation
Page 3: Framework for Evaluation

Framework for EvaluationAgency/Org Use case Features mapped Requirements

DOD, FAA Public Safety, Airports, man made featuers, hydrography, navigation features

Scale:

Bands:

Revisit

USFWS Environmental

Land Cover

Land cover, wetlands S: B: R:

NPS Land Cover

Land Management

Hydrography, man made featues, land cover

S: B: R:

BLM Land mgmt,, Environmental, Land Cover

Landforms, land cover, parcels, man made features, hydrography

S: B: R:

USFS Forest inventory, Environmental

Forest stands, hydrography, land cover,

S: B: R:

SOA Land mgmt, habitat, regulatory, resource inventory, transport.

Hydrography, forestry, geology, parcels

S: B: R:

Native corps. Land mgmt, resource inventory

Hydrography,, land cover, roads, parcels

S: B: R:

Local govt. Land mgmt, watershed analysis, coastal zone mgmt, parcels,transportation

Parcels, roads, hydrography, watersheds,

S: B: R:

Page 4: Framework for Evaluation
Page 5: Framework for Evaluation
Page 6: Framework for Evaluation
Page 7: Framework for Evaluation
Page 8: Framework for Evaluation

Framework for Evaluation

AREA SQ KM % OF STATE % 5+m % 2.5 - 5m % 0.5-1m IFSAR dted-2

Bureau of Land Management 209,758 14%

Fish and Wildlife Service 290,343 19%

Forest Service 85,942 6%

Melakatla Indian Res 353 0%

Military 8,498 1%

National Park Service 203,342 14%

Native Patent or IC 174,298 12%

Native Selected 75,180 5%

Private 821 0%

State Patent or TA 403,702 27%

State Selected 57,695 4%

Buffered Populated Places (10km) 114 0%

Buffered Roads (5km) 0%

Buffered Trans Alaskan Pipeline (10km) 25,307 2%

Page 9: Framework for Evaluation

Other Factors

• Timeline– To decision– To funding– To RFP– To collection / processing / QC– Useful product to stakeholders– To operational efficiencies or payback (C/B)

• Partnerships– State only– Add Federal Partners

Page 10: Framework for Evaluation

Other Factors

• Funding– Single shot– Multi-cases

• Spin-off benefits– Control– Education– Employment

Page 11: Framework for Evaluation

Straw-man Proposal

• Create 1-3 scenarios based on above

• Have stakeholders input to decision

• Go forward with unified proposal, multi-stage for funding

• Have backup plan if funding doesn’t happen

Page 12: Framework for Evaluation

Straw-man Proposal #1– Fund clean-up of ASTER DEM– Acquire part of state via Rapideye– Repeat inventory w/ pressure from stakeholders &

uplift as necessary existing content & try to leverage NGA collects

• Use as ground control and for applications– Request funding for IFSAR DEM– Include X sq. mi. 2.5m in request– Include Y sq. mi. 0.5 – 1m in request– Have SDMI act as clearing-house for 0.5 – 2.5m

requests to get bulk pricing

Page 13: Framework for Evaluation

Straw-man Proposal 2– Fund clean-up of ASTER DEM– Acquire part of state w/ 2.5m from SPOT or ALOS– Repeat inventory w/ pressure from stakeholders &

uplift as necessary existing content & try to leverage NGA collects

• Use as ground control and for applications– Procure telemetry contract from SPOT– Build processing capability in state to process– Request funding for IFSAR DEM