NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework Final Draft 20101203

8/8/2019 NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework Final Draft 20101203

1/149

A NATION PREPARED

his governance model will serve as a framework for organizational structure and operations for the enhancement and efficientgeospatial technology. It serves as a resource to meet interagency GIS (Geographic Information System) program requirem

nd initiatives within the wildland fire community. And finally, it provides recommendations to achieve the geospatial servicesssion for integrated implementation and strategic governance of the wildland fire communitys GIS program.

NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework 2010


2/149

NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework 2010FINAL DRAFT, December 1, 2010

ii

Geospatial CommunityMissionEnsure geospatial leadership and coordination to facilitate the business of the interagencywildland fire community

VisionProvide seamless, integrated, and adaptive geospatial technologies across the landscape of theNWCG geospatial community.

Guiding Principles

Safety: Follow highest related standards and remain diligent withapplication of resources

Decision-making: Seek ways to deliver geospatial services through cohesive interaction

Innovation: Seek creative means to improve geospatial services meetingchallenges head on

Partnership: Work collaboratively with partners and each other to achievecommon goals

Public Stewardship: Manage resources prudently and provide highest qualityservice cost efficiently

Reduce Workload: Make customers and their needs the highest priority and beresponsible for decisions and results while acknowledgingmistakes and working to correct them.

GoalsGoal 1: Develop and implement programmatic infrastructure necessary to meet the

geospatial needs of the wildland fire communityGoal 2: Coordinate and standardize interagency wildland fire data by instituting and

maintaining policies and proceduresGoal 3: Create enterprise architecture for a wildland fire geospatial database which

allows simple centralized access and supports multiple application utilizationGoal 4: Foster a proactive and adaptive approach to emerging and innovative

geospatial technologies and techniques


3/149


iii

Table of Contents

Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... 1

1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 3

1.1. Current Status of the NWCG Geospatial Stakeholder Community ................................... 3

1.1.1. United States Forest Service Geospatial Fire Program ............................................ 3

1.1.2. Bureau of Land Management Geospatial Fire Program ........................................... 4

1.1.3. National Park Service Geospatial Fire Program ....................................................... 4

1.1.4. US Fish and Wildlife Geospatial Fire Program .......................................................... 4

1.1.5. US Bureau of Indian Affairs Geospatial Program ...................................................... 4

1.1.6. US Department of Interior Office of Wildland Fire Coordination ................................ 5

1.1.7. United States Geological Survey .............................................................................. 5

1.2. Case for Change............................................................................................................... 5

1.2.1. People ...................................................................................................................... 8

1.2.2. Process ..................................................................................................................... 9

1.2.3. Technology ............................................................................................................. 11

1.2.4. Physical Infrastructure ............................................................................................ 12

1.3. Challenges to Implementation ........................................................................................... 14

1.3.1. NWCG Infrastructure .............................................................................................. 14

1.3.2. Workforce Management ...................................................................................... 14

1.3.3. Limited Resources ............................................................................................... 14

1.3.4. Technology ........................................................................................................... 15

1.3.5. Change Management .......................................................................................... 15

1.4. Scope of NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework ...................................... 15

1.4.1. Needs Assessment ................................................................................................. 16

1.4.2. Stakeholder Analysis .............................................................................................. 18

1.4.3. Agency Policy and Guidance Analysis .................................................................... 19

1.4.4. Strategic Framework Development ......................................................................... 20

1.5. Approach to Development of the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework

and the Framework Organization ............................................................................................... 21

1.5.1. Work Streams ......................................................................................................... 22

1.5.2. Phases Aligned with the Life-Cycle Time Periods ................................................... 22

2. Detailed Description of the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework Elements . 26

2.1. Phase 1: Envision ........................................................................................................... 26

2.1.1. Element C.1.1: Envision Strategic Context of GIS Program ................................... 27


4/149


iv

2.1.2. Element C.1.2: Baseline of Current GIS Capabilities .............................................. 32

2.1.3. Element C.1.3: Envision Future GIS Program Capabilities ..................................... 35

2.1.4. Element O.1.1: Envision Stakeholder Engagement ................................................ 38

2.1.5. Element O.1.2: Envision GIS Community Change Profile....................................... 42

2.1.6. Element P.1.1: Envision (Initiate Program Management) ....................................... 45

2.1.7. Element P.1.2: Initiate GIS Community Risk Strategy ............................................ 47

2.1.8. Element P.1.3: Initiate Geospatial Budget Plan ...................................................... 49

2.2. Phase 2: Design ............................................................................................................. 52

2.2.1. Element C.2.1: Identify GIS Technical Requirements (Hardware, Software, andData) 53

2.2.2. Element C.2.1 Implementation Plan ....................................................................... 55

2.2.3. Element C.2.2: Design GIS Capabilities (Hardware, Software, and Data) .............. 56

2.2.4. Element C.2.3: Design GIS Conceptual Solution Architecture ................................ 60

2.2.5. Element C.2.4: Design GIS Performance Management System ............................. 63

2.2.6. Element O.2.1: Design GIS Change Management Plan ......................................... 65

2.2.7. Element O.2.2: Design GIS Communications Plan ................................................. 68

2.2.8. Element O.2.3: Design High-Level Training Plan .................................................... 72

2.2.9. Element P.2.2: Design GIS Risk Management Plan ............................................... 74

2.2.10. Element P.2.3: Design Geospatial Budget Framework ........................................... 76

2.2.11. Element P.2.1: Design Geospatial Program Management Plan ............................. 78

2.3. Phase 3: Test ................................................................................................................. 81

2.3.1. Element C.3.1: Test Geospatial System Components ............................................ 82

2.3.2. Element O.3.1: Expand Geospatial Ownership Building ......................................... 83

2.3.3. Element O.3.2: Test Geospatial Communication Plan ............................................ 85

2.3.4. Element O.3.3: Test Geospatial Training Development .......................................... 87

2.3.5. Element P.3.2: TestGeospatial Budget Plan .......................................................... 88

2.3.6. Element P.3.1: Test Geospatial Program Management Plan .................................. 91

2.4. Phase 4: Implement ........................................................................................................ 93

2.4.1. Element C.4.1: ImplementDetailed Geospatial Design/Build Solution ................... 94

2.4.2. Element O.4.1: Implement GeospatialChange Management Plan ......................... 95

2.4.3. Element O.4.2: Implement Geospatial Communications Plan ................................ 99

Element O.4.3: Implement Geospatial Training ................................................................... 101

2.4.4. Element P.4.1: Implement Geospatial Risk Management Plan ............................. 103

2.4.5. Element P.4.2: Implement Geospatial Program Management Plan ...................... 104

2.5. Phase 5: Evaluate......................................................................................................... 106


5/149


v

2.5.1. Element C.5.1: Evaluate and Monitor Geospatial Implementation ........................ 107

2.5.2. Element C.5.2: Establish Continuous Improvement Process ................................ 110

2.5.3. Element P.5.1: Assess Budget and Performance Targets .................................... 112

2.5.4. Element P.5.2: Evaluate Geospatial Program Plan .............................................. 113

2.6. Strategic Framework Development ............................................................................... 115

2.6.1. Internal Review ..................................................................................................... 115

2.6.2. Leadership Guidance and Staff Input ..................................................................... 116

3. Appendices .......................................................................................................................... 117

Appendix A: Charter Document .................................................................................................... 117

Appendix B: Organizational Intent ................................................................................................ 119

Appendix C: Organizational Assessments .................................................................................... 122

Appendix D: Executive Sponsor Activities .................................................................................... 123

Appendix E: Sponsorship Coalition Checklist ............................................................................... 124

Appendix F: Program Management Schedule .............................................................................. 125

Appendix G: Summary of Authorities ............................................................................................ 127

Appendix H: Acronyms ................................................................................................................. 139

Appendix I: Glossary..................................................................................................................... 141

List of FiguresFigure 1: Representative Issues and Challenges ............................................................................ 6

Figure 2: Duplicate Program Support of the Wildland Fire Community .......................................... 10

Figure 3: Use of Classified Information .......................................................................................... 13Figure 4: Stakeholder Participation ................................................................................................. 16Figure 5: Alignment of Key Stakeholder Job Functions to Wildland Business Areas ...................... 17Figure 6: Federal Government Policy and Guidance ...................................................................... 20Figure 7: Recommended Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework ......................................... 21Figure 8: Implementation Status Icon Key ...................................................................................... 23Figure 9: NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework ...................................................... 25Figure 10: Key Wildland Fire Business Areas ................................................................................. 32Figure 11: Geospatial Data Producer and Consumer Categorization ............................................. 33Figure 12: Traditional MVGO Hierarchy .......................................................................................... 35Figure 13: Notional Geospatial Governance MVGO Content ......................................................... 36Figure 14: Key Wildland Fire Management Stakeholders ............................................................... 40Figure 15: Geospatial Survey Questions ....................................................................................... 40Figure 16: Key Stakeholder Sources of Information ....................................................................... 41Figure 17: Sample Change Readiness Assessment ....................................................................... 43Figure 18: Change Profile Scales ................................................................................................... 44Figure 19: Risk Strategy Elements ................................................................................................. 47Figure 20: Risk Assessment Chart ................................................................................................. 48


6/149


vi

Figure 21: Notional Return on Investment Curve ............................................................................ 50Figure 22: Geospatial Output Products ........................................................................................... 54Figure 23: National Wildland Fire Enterprise .................................................................................. 61Figure 24: Performance and Change Management ........................................................................ 64Figure 25: Change Management Plan ............................................................................................ 65

Figure 26: Change Adoption Curve ................................................................................................ 66

Figure 27: Sample Communications Products ................................................................................ 69Figure 28: Emerging GIS Cost Strategies ....................................................................................... 77Figure 29: Sample Program Management Plan .............................................................................. 79Figure 30: Sample Geospatial Business Case ............................................................................... 90Figure 31: Managing Change Status .............................................................................................. 96Figure 32: Temporal Concept of Change ........................................................................................ 96Figure 33: Elements of Change for Employees .............................................................................. 97 Figure 34: Change Transition Model............................................................................................... 98Figure 35: Confirmation of Communications ................................................................................. 100Figure 36: Continuous Improvement Performance Measurement Matrix ...................................... 111

List of TablesTable 1: Stakeholder-Identified Threats and Weaknesses ............................................................... 7Table 2: NWCG Wildland Fire Business Areas ............................................................................... 17Table 3: Recommended Revised Geospatial Fire Business Areas ................................................. 18Table 4: Interagency Wildland Fire Geospatial Community SWOT Analysis Highlights ................. 29Table 5: Stakeholder Policy and Guidance Review Results ........................................................... 30Table 6: Element C.1.1 Implementation Activities........................................................................... 31Table 7: Element C.1.2 Implementation Activities........................................................................... 34Table 8: Element C.1.3. Implementation Activities .......................................................................... 37Table 9: Element O.1.1 Implementation Activities .......................................................................... 41Table 10: Element O.1.2 Implementation Plan ............................................................................... 44Table 11: Element P.1.1 Implementation Plan ................................................................................ 46Table 12: Element P.1.2 Implementation Activities ......................................................................... 48Table 13: Element P.1.3 Implementation Activities ......................................................................... 51Table 14: Element C.2.1 Implementation Activities......................................................................... 55Table 15: Element C.2.2 Implementation Activities......................................................................... 58Table 16: Wildland Fire Community Example CONOPS and SOPs ............................................... 60Table 17: Element C.2.3 Implementation Activities......................................................................... 62Table 18: Element C.2.4 Implementation Activities......................................................................... 64Table 19: Element O.2.1 Implementation Activities ........................................................................ 67Table 20: Element O.2.2 Implementation Activities ........................................................................ 70

Table 21: Element O.2.3 Implementation Activities ........................................................................ 73Table 22: Element P.2.2 Implementation Activities ......................................................................... 75Table 23: Element P.2.3 Implementation Activities ......................................................................... 78Table 24: Element P.2.1 Implementation Activities ......................................................................... 80Table 25: Element C.3.1 Implementation Activities......................................................................... 83Table 26: Element O.3.1 Implementation Activities ........................................................................ 85Table 27: Communications Goal and Objectives ............................................................................ 86Table 28: Element O.3.2 Implementation Activities ........................................................................ 86


7/149


vii

Table 29: Element O.3.3 Implementation Activities ........................................................................ 88Table 30: DOI Geospatial Model Funding Alternatives ................................................................... 89Table 31: Element P.3.2 Implementation Activities ......................................................................... 91Table 32: Element P.3.1 Implementation Activities ......................................................................... 92Table 33: Element C.4.1 Implementation Activities......................................................................... 95

Table 34: Element O.4.1 Implementation Activities ........................................................................ 98

Table 35: Element O.4.2 Implementation Activities ...................................................................... 101Table 36: Element O.4.3 Implementation Plan ............................................................................. 102Table 37: Risk Management Planning Approach .......................................................................... 103Table 38: Element P.4.1 Implementation Activities ....................................................................... 104Table 39: Element P.4.2 Implementation Activities ....................................................................... 105Table 40: Element C.5.1 Implementation Activities....................................................................... 108Table 41: Continuous Improvement Process Steps ...................................................................... 110Table 42: Element C.5.2 Implementation Activities....................................................................... 112Table 43: Element P.5.1 Implementation Activities ....................................................................... 113Table 44: Element P.5.2 Implementation Activities ....................................................................... 114

Table 45: Agency Policy and Guidance Reviewed by NWCG Geospatial Core Team ................... 115


8/149


1

Executive SummaryThe interagency wildland fire community is faced with increasing ly complex responsibilities inmanaging wildland fire. Geospatial systems1 have become critical to the operation of federal,state, and local wildland fire programs. The communitys business activities depend upon

geospatial technologies to assess resource relationships and fulfill vital National WildfireCoordinating Group (NWCG) mission requirements. To date, however, a comprehensiveinteragency geospatial approach has not been available for the wildland fire community tocollaborate on geospatial data creation, maintenance, or access. The community requires clearand streamlined processes for geospatial data development, management, and discovery toensure that key information is available when and where it is required.

NWCG membershipconsisting of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Bureau of LandManagement (BLM), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS), U.S. ForestService (USFS), USFS Fire Research, U.S. Fire Administration, National Association of StateForesters, and Intertribal Timber Council collectively provide geospatial leadership and

coordination to facilitate the business of the interagency wildland fire community.

This document provides a status of the interagency geospatial stakeholder community, anassessment of current NWCG mission strategies and capabilities, and best estimates of futurerequirements for wildland fire management related to geospatial technologies. The NWCGGeospatial Technology Strategic Framework defined in this document provides a model for theenhancement and efficient use of geospatial technologies and data by the interagency wildlandfire community. By highlighting interagency geospatial program requirements and initiativeswithin the wildland fire community, the strategic framework is designed to support the geospatialservices mission with key improvement mechanisms including leadership, governance, andfacilitation.

In support of the work described in this document, the members of the NWCG Geospatial TaskGroup (GTG) quickly realized that any interagency approach requires both management andimplementation elements that together would serve to support the communitys future directionand establish ownership for the path forward. The NWCG interagency wildland fire communitygeospatial mission, strategies, goals, and objectives are set forth in this document to provide anoverall direction for achieving improved geospatial capabilities; enhanced communication andintegrated geospatial policies, procedures, and data production; and streamlined activities alignedto stakeholder priorities and requirements.

At the same time, implementation of the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework willrequire the interagency wildland fire community to coordinate and collaborate on differencesamong various agency policies and strategic plans. Moreover, potential shifts in missionstrategies may require realigning current capabilities, developing additional workforce skillsacross functions and within the incident-management team organization, modernizing capitalassets, and identifying other innovative approaches in support of mission requirements.

1Geospatial systems consist of technologies and data used for visualization, measurement, and analysis oftopological features; they includes technologiesglobal positioning systems (GPS), geographical informationsystems (GIS), and remote sensing (RS) related to mapping of features on the surface of the earth.


9/149


2

Successful implementation of the strategic framework model will also require a culture shift thatincludes the optimization and standardization of interagency geospatial programs, systems, anddata assets among the interagency wildland fire community, processes, technology, andinfrastructure. As a result, the framework applied in the model describes what the interagency

wildland fire community needs to address across key dimensions of changei.e., people,processes, technology, and physical infrastructure.

Moreover, the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework is built upon an integratedapproach that includes three inter-related work streams (Capability Development, OwnershipBuilding, and Program Management) spread across five life-cycle phases (Envision, Design, Test,Implement, and Evaluate). The model as a whole provides a framework for focusing on what theinteragency community needs to address, how the community might address various elements ofthe work streams simultaneously, and how it might measure progress in sequential order throughan entire geospatial life cycle.

Other primary roles and responsibilities for meeting the communitys geospatial mission andobjectives are defined by the specific activities and tasks set forth in the strategic framework,especially as detailed through best practices for fulfilling program stewardship roles. Note thatthis document centers on creating a strategic shift in the delivery of future geospatial data andservices. Such an approach is intended to provide the foundation for sustainable implementation ofa service delivery model for the interagency wildland fire business and improvement of GISservices and products.


10/149


3

1.IntroductionThe interagency wildland fire community is faced with a complex mission in managing wildlandfire while protecting values at risk and meeting resource objectives. Geospatial technologies arecritical to decision-making support activities related to wildland fire planning and management.

The communitys business activities depend upon geospatial technologies to assess resourcerelationships and to fulfill the vital requirements of the interagency wildland fire mission.

The purpose of the National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) Geospatial TechnologyStrategic Framework is to provide for enhancement and efficient use of geospatial technologiesand data by the interagency wildland fire community. By highlighting interagency geospatialprogram requirements and initiatives within the wildland fire community, the strategic framework isdesigned to support the geospatial services mission with key mission elements, includingleadership, governance, and facilitation.

1.1. Current Status of the NWCG Geospatial Stakeholder Community

From the perspective of the interagency wildland fire stakeholder community, the wildland firemission unites the community with a common purpose. The strength of this bond drives a group ofdedicated individuals who are focused on accomplishing difficult tasks to get the job doneeffectively. In doing so, the community has proven to be resourceful in identifying workable andflexible solutions to frequently occurring problems. For instance, issues with informationcollection, data sharing, and the production of geospatial products have all been dealt with in anas-much-as-able, but nevertheless successful, way for some time.

Despite this collective, admirable effort, the interagency wildland fire community would benefit frommore structured solutions in support of continued success over an unpredictable future. As the2009 Quadrennial Fire Report (QFR) states, Given the threats and risks of the escalating wildfire

challenge, the path forward must seek to ensure that the efforts of all of the stakeholders in firemanagement reinforce and multiply each otherso the whole will be greater than the sum of theparts. The parent organizations of this community have begun to address these requirementsinternally in various ways. Seve ral of the organizations that participated in the NWCGGeospatial Task Group (GTG) have already created their own respective geospatial strategicplans. Moreover, the geospatial community has been working collectively to support mission andoperational requirements to adopt a comprehensive, and crosscutting, strategic framework.

The parent organizations maintain significant geospatial resources and have each investedsignificant amount of time and effort in the efficient use of tools and technologies related to theirrespective missions. In fact, various activities conducted across the interagency wildland fire

community have resulted in a need to promote consistent use of the most current technology and aneed for standard operating procedures (SOPs). Based on data collected over the past year, theNWCG GTG created snapshots, which are presented in the following paragraphs, of thegeospatial activities and geospatial context of each of the organizations that constitute theinteragency wildland fire community.

1.1.1. United States Forest Service Geospatial Fire Program

U.S. Forest Service (USFS) geospatial stakeholders are currently conducting a strategic planningprocess of their own with release of a future strategic vision planned for the near term. Within the


11/149


4

broader wildland fire community, the USFS maintains a leadership role in the development ofgeospatial applications, remote sensing capabilities, and field support. This leadership is focusedon facilitation and management of joint and cost-shared geospatial data development,management, and acquisition; planning and implementation of the spatial data clearinghouse anddata archiving; development and coordination of GIS and information management plans,

standards, and policies; coordination of geospatial data management educational and trainingopportunities; and facilitation of information and data sharing within the USFS wildland firegeospatial community.

1.1.2. Bureau of Land Management Geospatial Fire Program

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) stakeholders have been occupied similarly to the USFSgeospatial stakeholders. BLMsGeospatial Services Model: Serving the Geographic BusinessNeeds of the U.S. Department of Interior was created in July 2007 to define how geospatial dataand technology are being used to enhance the business activities of the U.S. Department of theInterior (DOI), especially for key linkages in the wildland fire community. BLM is moving toward acorporate-type information structure and away from localized data storage and analysis in

coordination with DOIs Enterprise Geographic Information Managemen t (EGIM) team. Theadoption of geospatial data standards will help to ensure that data is created and managed in amore effective manner and to provide key information across the agency. Finally, the BLMsrecommendations for DOI business transformation have created a precedent to managegeospatial investments as a cohesive set of assets and services.

1.1.3. National Park Service Geospatial Fire Program

The goal of National Park Service (NPS) geospatial wildland fire community leadership is toprovide usable spatial data required for the scientifically based management of park resourcesand park planning. The NPS Natural Resource Geospatial Program in the wildland fire communityworks to perform the following functions: (1) coordination of GIS implementation within the

Natural Resource Program Center (NRPC),Regions, and NPS Units and (2) coordination ofpartnerships with other agencies and organizations. The NPS geospatial wildland firecommunitys leadership facilitates management of joint and cost-shared geospatial datadevelopment with the DOI EGIM. In support of the NPS wildland fire mission, the number of NPSstaff members is increasing at the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) to assist in overallmanagement of geospatial technologies at all levels. Finally, the NPS manages a large volume ofpublic lands and has been applying geospatial technologies in this capacity for a number of years.

1.1.4. US Fish and Wildlife Geospatial Fire Program

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) wildland fire communitys leadership is currentlyexpanding its involvement in geospatial activities, with an emphasis on spatial data and keylinkages to its parent organization. In support of wildland fire mission, the number of FWS staffmembers at NIFC is increasing to assist in overall management of geospatial technologies at alllevels. Although the FWS wildland fire community does not currently have a GIS strategic plan,the FWS GIS community is currently developing a strategic planning process for future use.

1.1.5. US Bureau of Indian Affairs Geospatial Program

The U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Geospatial program is working to provide Bureau-widestandardization for geospatial staffing, planning, procedures, and core data sets. In support of its


12/149


5

wildland fire mission, the BIA historically utilized contract staff at a central location to performmuch of the internal management efforts. At its field geographies, staff creates and collectsgeospatial data and provides on-site incident support. Nevertheless, an overarching geospatialstrategy for the BIA wildland fire geospatial community is the subject of ongoing discussion.

1.1.6. US Department of Interior Office of Wildland Fire CoordinationThe business activity of the DOIs Office of Wildland Fire Coordination (OWFC) depends ongeospatial information to support the wildland fire community. The purpose of its ongoing GISefforts is to define how geospatial data and technology will be used to enhance DOI businessactivities and the achievement of mission and goals, with linkages to the DOI EGIM. Geospatialdata and technology are strategic, national assets involving major investments , and the OWFCreports on ongoing efforts to coordinate the wildland fire communitys GIS capability amongvarious information technology (IT) applications.

1.1.7. United States Geological Survey

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) provides expertise in investigations, resourceassessments, and development, analysis, and distribution of geospatial databases, maps, andderivative products. While USGS is not a member of the NWCG, it maintains wildfire-specific staffand operates fire-specific applications to provide support to fire suppression and recovery efforts.

1.2. Case for ChangeGeospatial technologies and data have become critical to the operation of federal, state, and localwildland fire programs. In support of their specific mission requirements, wildland fire managementstakeholders continue to evolve formal and informal solutions through geospatial tools in a mannerthat is largely uncoordinated and specific to the needs of individual agencies. The stakeholderinterviews revealed unanimous concern with a lack of Common Operating Data (COD) for the

interagency geospatial community. In moving forward with future activities, the participatingwildland fire management agencies must focus their collective efforts to avoid wasteful duplicationof products and geospatial data and provide a means of working together to provide more effectiveexecution of each agencys fire management program for geospatial technology.

Figure 1 illustrates several overarching themes drawn from the GTGs recent analysis of currentissues related to geospatial technologies and the results of that analysis plus the challenges theyrevealed.


13/149


6

Figure 1: Representative Issues and Challenges

Shifts in mission strategies will require realigning current capabilities, building additional skills inthe workforce across functions and within the incident management team organization,modernizing capital assets, and developing innovative approaches to support achievement of missionrequirements. These needs go well beyond simply reorganizing work processes and ref iningcoordination mechanisms. The 2009 QFR mentions efforts to meet future demands whilesustaining fire managements overarching commitment to firefighter and public safety. Thisstrategic shift calls for a shared common vision and strengthened collaborative processes in futureendeavors to satisfy increased expectations for the combined efforts of the agencies, the tribal,state, and local partners, and the private sector.

Four themes People, Process, Technology, and Physical Infrastructure were used tocategorize the results of the stakeholder input . These themes, discussed in detail in the followingsubsections, were used extensively to group information and to present overall findings. Table 1highlights some of the key weaknesses and threats related to these four themes as identified inthe stakeholder interviews.

Current Issues

No overall geospatial strategy is availablefor wildland fire community to collaboratearound data creation, maintenance, oraccess

Current geospatial standards are spec ific toindividual agency policy, project, orapplication

Geospatial data is frequently created andmodified to meet the individualrequirements of various wildland fire-relatedactivities

No environment exists to handle thegeospatial data needs of the entireinteragency fire community

Data is being created but not vetted throughinteragency fire business channels

Results/Challenges

Inefficient data management and

development processes

Duplicative efforts between agencies, offices,

and projects

No central location for wildland agencies toaccess and retrieve (share) geospatial data

Significant time spent creating and acquiringkey data in support of fire incidents even

though it may exist in undiscovered partneragency systems

Project funds often spent on creating andacquiring data to meet specific project needs

even though it might be available elsewhere

Inconsistent focus on technology can takeaway from mission accomplishment


14/149


7

Table 1: Stakeholder-Identified Threats and Weaknesses


15/149


8

1.2.1. People

As the frequency, size, intensity, and complexity of wildland fire incidents increase, geospatial staffneed to be organized, directed, and trained effectively to be prepared to meet the demands placedupon them. As one of the most important aspects of any geospatial solution, the human componentis at once the most dedicated, dynamic, and fragile.

OrganizationWhile the wildland fire geospatial community is enormously creative and self-motivated, individualpersonnel within the community continue to seek guidance on, and organization options for,geospatial activities at all levels of support and within all geographies (e.g., Ranger Districts, ForestSupervisor Offices, Regional Offices, National Offices). As geospatial support missions look moretoward collaborative solutions and less to standalone systems, focus needs to remain on a national,interagency-wide, co-located geospatial team. This focus would promote wildland firebasedcoordination activities at an enterprise level in an effort to minimize duplication and make better useof limited resources and funding.

DirectionThe stakeholders interviewed cited specific requirements for the interagency geospatial communityto develop a management and implementation approach to assist in building strategic capabilities.Those capabilities would in turn serve to support future efforts and to establish ownership andacceptance of change in support of those efforts. Specifically, the community is unanimously lookingfor guidance and support related to data development, access storage, and dissemination.

StaffingConcerns were voiced with the limited and dispersed staffing for geospatial roles at the NIFC andother facilities in support of wildland fire management. While individuals in these facilities work quitewell together, they report to many various home-agency units. Stakeholders voiced their desire to

expand and consolidate geospatial staff at NIFC and at other facilities supporting wildland fireprograms. A recurring observation was that many members of the support staff are willingparticipants in activities relevant to their missions rather than simply staff directed to supportspecific geospatial activities. In discussions on staffing at incident sites, it was revealed thatcurrently only a single credentialed position, the GIS Specialist (GISS), is used on incidents.Requirements were identified to expand specialized positions to accommodate work streams inimage analysis, data management, and other such activities.

TrainingGeospatial training opportunities are abundant and cover almost every imaginable topic related togeospatial technologies. Most of these courses are software-focused and geared to general

solutions for specific business domains. To address the dynamic aspect of wildland fire missions,training options need to incorporate applications in software, wildfire response, incidentmanagement, critical decision-making, leadership, and project management. Currently, only oneNWCG geospatial training course, GIS Specialist for Incident Management (GISS) NWCG CourseS-341, is offered for incident response staff and minimal coordination exists among other NWCGgeospatial training programs. Training for the geospatial staff is key to building and maintaining theskills required for the unique aspects of wildland fire.


16/149


9

1.2.2. Process

To date, an overall interagency geospatial approach has not been available to the wildland firecommunity to address the creation of, maintenance of, and access to geospatial data and relatedservices. While each agency supports its specific mission requirements with geospatial policies, thepolicy documents do not adequately serve to support the activities of the interagency wildland fire

community. The demanding aspects of the interagency wildland fire mission require that attentionbe directed specifically to harmonizing these policies and standards into a consistent and holisticoperating strategy.

Policies and ProceduresThe interagency wildland fire community requires formal procedures for geospatial datadevelopment, management, and discovery to ensure that key information is available when andwhere required. The development of standards for core procedures would quickly enhance overallabilities and boost productivity across the user community, where minimal interagency guidancecurrently exists in support of gathering data to support wildland fire programs.

Currently, the only significant interagency documents in use were developed in 2004 by the GTGunder the NWCG. The GIS Standard Operating Procedures (GSTOP) and GISS Position TaskBook/training products are used across the stakeholder community and were referenced often in thestakeholder interviews as the prevailing reference materials for the community. These materialsshould serve as examples for development of future guidance materials for the wildland firecommunity.

New materials might address gaps between national policies and standards and interagency andlocal and incident operations. Efforts are required to determine the specific mission requirements fornational data sets and to explore the current efforts pertaining to these data needs and the gapsbetween what is provided and what is needed. In addition, interviewees voiced the need for internal

forums within the GTG to address future concerns and issues and a system for review andcomment on opportunities with emerging technologies.

StandardsMany of the geospatial programs and applications across the community have identified minimalstandards specifically focused at their missions or projects. To minimize duplication of efforts,stakeholder noted that these documents should be published in a common location to enable thestandards to be formally adopted by the community as standards. These materials would build uponthe home agency documents that relate to the agencies broader responsibilities, while placingsignificantly greater attention on the needs of the wildland fire community.

Similar scenarios exist for wildland fire geospatial staff in support of their roles and projects. Manyindividuals develop and maintain procedures, job aids, and SOP-type documents for their personaland/or team use. These informal materials may overlap with those developed by others performingsimilar tasks. Formalizing these documents and any other ad hoc standards or other materialswould contribute to development of consistent geospatial support, which in turn would improveinformation sharing and streamline data access.


17/149


10

Common Operating Data (COD)The interviews revealed that stakeholders were interacting with many interagency programs with ahigh potential of duplicating efforts in data collection, storage, and maintenance (see Figure 2).Currently, geospatial data across the community is most often managed by individuals in support ofspecific projects as opposed to being used with broader solutions in support of an enterprise-wide

effort. These practices have led to a data-sharing environment largely dependent on personalrelationships (i.e., an informal social network), thereby creating an environment in which users dontknow what they dont know. The current delays in accessing critical geospatial data provide anobstacle to effective support of interagency customers.

Figure 2: Duplicate Program Support of the Wildland Fire Community

The compilation of a core set of COD focused at meeting the requirements of the entire interagencygeospatial wildland fire community would contribute greatly to minimizing largely duplicated efforts.A simple assessment of the requirements posed by each formal system, followed by a review andcomment period for key users, could be used to define the baseline requirements and provide thebasis for the creation of the core dataset. The next step would be to make the data available to theentire community from a centralized and shared data-management environment. Over the long-term, a forum or group would be required to lead efforts to ensure that new data requirements arefulfilled and that authoritative data is available to vetted stakeholders and the public as required.

Reduction of Duplication and Improved EfficienciesThe overall goal of the Process theme is to formalize procedures to reduce duplicative activities and

create a more efficient geospatial data environment. Figure 2 above demonstrates the overlappingsupport that stakeholders provide to several interagency applications. Due to the significant storageand processing requirements of imagery data, the development of an improved strategy formanaging responsibility for storing, distributing, and maintaining the communitys imagery data isrecommended. Under some circumstances, simply purchasing imagery data with a collaborativelicensing agreement might serve to make this information available to the entire NWCG community.In addition, efforts to reduce repetitive data analysis and the creation of products and services willenhance the positive impact of these goals and lead to a more effective and functional community.

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Stake

holderEngagement

Application Program


18/149


11

Application IntegrationMuch of the COD required by geospatial applications can be made available through web servicesor other means. In addition, a formal process needs to be developed for sharing systemrequirements, analytical methodologies, and computing space to maximize the overall efficiency ofthe geospatial community. In some cases, independent geospatial components are being utilized,

and no process exists to integrate them into a centralized solution.

The interagency wildland fire communitys geospatial investments, assets, and services are in needof cohesive oversight and direction. In formalizing new strategies, the NWCG agencies can work inconcert with the DOI Enterprise Architecture and the USFS Information Strategic Framework.Both efforts are coordinated within the Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) with the goal ofmaking best use of available funds to achieve strategic goals and objectives through interagencyefforts. These documents will assist in defining an approach to program stewardship to help thecommunity identify, manage, and ultimately refine geospatial policy and standards.

1.2.3. Technology

The term technology is used here to define the technological concepts and abilities of systems andsoftware supporting the wildland fire community. These systems are intended to provide access tothe information and data required by the interagency geospatial stakeholder community.

Network-Related ConcernsThe stakeholders who were interviewed identified numerous network security restrictions that limitability to maximize their capabilities and efficiencies when providing geospatial support tocustomers. While the interviewees understand the security concerns behind the restrictions, theynevertheless voiced concerns with respect to the impact of these policies across their community.Limitations on the installation of approved software, the inability to install printers, and basic networkrestrictions are manageable in an office environment with on-site staff to support the users. The

situation is much different with mobilized human resources and urgent operations.

To address the many issues cited in the interviews, the community needs to review the policies ofthe NWCG partner agencies further to define and formalize unique requirements. All stakeholdersagreed that many of the current data-sharing solutions were intended only to be temporary (i.e.,ftp.nifc.gov) but have become patches that are relied upon to solve data-sharing problems. Manyexamples of multi-agency data sharing solutions exist within other areas of the federal government,such as with NASAs Earth Observing System (EOS) Data and Information System (EOSDIS),which serves hundreds of thousands of users with more than 4 petabytes of earth observations fromsatellites, ground stations, and analytical outputs. This system and other systems have addressedsolutions for the sharing of large volumes of raster and vector data with a diverse and dispersed

user community.

Data Availability and ManagementThis strategic framework effort revolves around the availability of geospatial data for the wildland firecommunity. Current technology shortfalls are leading to limited access and duplicative datacollection, creation, and maintenance. Table 1 of this document highlights that stakeholdersidentified data availability as a concern in every area for multiple reasons. The technology short-fallslead directly to added expense, delays in information access, and conflicting information, as well asduplicative efforts. To remedy the situation, the community needs to determine the core-data


19/149


12

requirements for existing models and applications and then begin to develop the appropriate datawarehouse. The warehouse must accommodate the rapid utilization of large imagery sources,access to existing unique data sources, and sharing of COD, and it must ensure accessibility acrossthe community. Accessibility should be available through multiple relevant formats to meet therequirements of a diverse user base.

Incident SupportSuccess in data sharing on incidents is the direct result of the individuals assigned to the incidentsites and the desire of their mission partners to share information. This sub-community is effectiveat accomplishing their mission within worst-case technology scenarios in which what can go wrongoften does go wrong. In such as setting, quick, ad hoc solutions are able to keep the technologyoperating while maintaining a basic level of functionality. Ideally, the organizations need to collectlessons learned from this area and build upon that information to formalize deployable solutions toensure a constant level of support, to include access to COD.

While the people who provide support to the wildland fire community are able to deal with the

dynamics of information-sharing across multiple agencies in support of multiple missions, it isincreasingly apparent that the technology is not. For the community to be able to access theinformation it needs fully, a system must be available to them that is not limited by the current userconstraints. All parties need to be able to access the same data from a central location and haveaccess to the core information their roles and responsibilities require.

1.2.4. Physical Infrastructure

The physical infrastructure supporting this community provides both numerous information storageand retrieval benefits and a number of limitations intended to protect the systems from accidental orintentional disruption. The interagency structure of the NIFC and the larger NWCG communitiescreates difficulties in interactions among team members working in various disciplines.

In examining the extensive requirements the geospatial community has for data sharing, manyareas for improvement have been found, some that could have significant positive outcomes.Providing the stakeholders with a single source of COD and making that data fully available at alllevels of support would fulfill the greatest demand of the stakeholder community. Access to CODwould minimize duplication of efforts and expenditures and ensure that every part of the communitywill be using the same data for modeling, ad hoc analysis, and map-based visualization.

NetworkThe NIFC campus in Boise operates on two different parent networks (USDA and DOI) withsignificant issues in existence regarding effective information sharing. Conflicts among email

systems, external-media data sharing, file transfer protocol (FTP) access, and administrativecomputer rights (and the inability to share data directly between systems) limit the ability to accessinformation and support redundant information maintenance. At the same time, these issues delaythe provision of services to the wildland fire community. In the present situation, the use ofcollaborative geospatial tools across the mission space is hindered, if not prohibited altogether. TheNIFC and NWCG communities would benefit greatly through the resolution of any, if not all, of theseissues. The exploration of solutions based on Cloud Computing and/or the accepted use of blindInternet Protocol (IP)-type technologies could provide needed opportunities for defining an effectiveand efficient information-sharing environment.


20/149


13

Centralized Data Storage and AccessAs noted above, the interagency geospatial community should pursue a core set of COD to meetthe core requirements of the stakeholder community. A key component to achieving this goal iscentralized data storage and dissemination. At this time, centralized fire-centric data is not available

through any single location. The geospatial data required for the various applications and programsis generally shared through email, FTP, and portable media as a sole option.

During incident support, these mechanisms provide temporary solutions and prevent incident-specific data generated on site from being available to outside parties. In addition, these solutionscan prevent data from being archived after incident operations close, making the data unavailableduring future events. As the physical infrastructure evolves, the antiquated FTP services are beingmaintained as a long-term-temporary mechanism for information-sharing, consuming time andresources that might be available for more useful solutions. In looking to newer technologies,individual partner entities are developing duplicative, single-purpose web services solely fordisseminating their geospatial data. While this is a step in the right direction for data dissemination,

it should be a formalized and consolidated effort. As a final note, opportunities exist with currentfederal partners to assist in housing a centralized geospatial data solution that is not subject tocurrent system constraints. These options could lead to decreased costs and increased dataavailability.

Classified Geospatial InformationClassified information has the potential to be beneficial in many situations and even invaluable insome. Presently, few opportunities exist for the wildland fire geospatial community to accessclassified information sources, because use of those sources requires specific types of facilities andstaff with security clearances. While many of the stakeholders said that secure information was ofminimal use to them (see Figure 3), it is possible that many of them are not aware of the (classified

and unclassified) information that is actually available. This topic deserves additional research todetermine the specific information requirements of the community and to develop a plan for how tobest fill those requirements with the proper facilities.

Figure 3: Use of Classified Information

Stakeholder

Engagement

0

10

20

30

40

50

Level of US Government Classification

Relevance

Not Important

Somewhat

Important

Very Important

Essential


21/149


14

1.3. Challenges to ImplementationTo meet the goal of providing more effective execution of each agencys fire managementprogram for geospatial technology, a more cohesive interagency organization will need to addressIT, workforce management, and budget policies and procedures, and other challenges. Current

mission strategies will need to support realignment of current capabilities, build out of additionalskills in the workforce across functions and within the incident management teams, modernizationof capital assets, and development of new and innovative approaches to meet mission requirements.

The following subsections highlight some of the implementation challenges that will need to bebetter understood and mitigated as the geospatial strategic framework (presented later in thisdocument in Figure 9) is developed.

1.3.1. NWCG Infrastructure

The interagency wildland fire communitys history of rapid and decisive wildfire response havedemonstrated its role in incident management. As a result, the nation is looking to the emergencymanagement communityand NWCG in particularto maintain effective and efficient emergencyresponse services while implementing new and innovative geospatial technologies. Nevertheless,the NWCG strategic planning infrastructure (e.g., a cohesive mission, vision, goals, objectives,and performance measures) are not yet fully understood throughout the interagency wildland firecommunity.

1.3.2. Workforce Management

The interagency wildland fire community faces serious challenges in maintaining its workforce.According to a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, within the next five years,approximately 70 percent of the interagency wildland fire workforce will be eligible for retirement. Of

that 70 percent, more than 4,300 individuals are qualified for 54 positions that are most critical tofirefighting because they involve essential fire command (e.g., incident commanders) and supportactivities (e.g., logistics section chiefs.) Currently, very few positions are directly aligned to supportgeospatial technology needs within the interagency wildland fire community. The job descriptions forthose positions typically involve responsibilities and alignment other than those related to geospatialduties. As a result, if the NWCG hopes to achieve its strategic goals for geospatial applications,a focus on growing the number of positions with the right type of geospatial expertise will beessential. In addition, training the workforce to develop geospatial technology capabilities alsowill be critical. Interagency wildland fire leadership must, therefore, remain committed torecruiting, training, and retaining a top-notch workforce and developing staff with the talent, skills,competencies, and dedication necessary to meet the demands of emerging geospatialtechnology.

1.3.3. Limited Resources

The interagency wildland fire community faces a problem common to government organizations ingenerallimited resources. Resource constraints force the interagency wildland fire community tomake the most of the resources it already has at its disposal. The interagency organization mustmake a clear and persuasive business case for additional funding and for allocating resources toaddress its highest priorities in the GIS program. A detailed and comprehensive business case that


22/149


15

describes specific functions that overlap among the various geospatial technology applicationsalready in existence will be critical to the success of the geospatial strategic framework.

1.3.4. Technology

The interagency wildland fire community must guard against pitfalls that may result from

fragmented IT efforts, including duplication of core capabilities, overlapping application systems,increased cyber security risk, and inefficient use of talent and experience. To avoid theseproblems, the interagency wildland f ire community must orchestrate its IT efforts and assets asdirect linkages to its geospatial technology applications. Moreover, to make the most of thecapabilities that IT can provide, the interagency wildland fire community must commit to using itsenterprise architecture to guide the re-engineering of interagency wildland fire businessprocessesand IT solutions. Re-engineering calls for using technology as an agent of change andcould include consolidation of like functions, elimination of duplication, improvement of work flows, andinteragency-wide information sharing. In short, the interagency wildland fire community must applyinformation systems and geospatial technologies in a better and smarter way (e.g., in a seamless,net-centric environment).

1.3.5. Change Management

To meet the challenges ahead, the interagency wildland fire community must be willing to changeand grow. Change can be difficult, and growth will require new approaches and ways of doingbusiness that must be embraced at every level of the interagency wildland fire community. At thesame time, growth and change must not be allowed to interfere with the interagency wildland firecommunitys ability to carry out its mission on a daily basis. The interagency wildland firecommunity, with support from NWCG, has performed its mission successfully for many yearsand enjoys a high level of public confidence in its emergency incident response capabilities.Overcoming a natural resistance to change and the tendency to rest on the laurels of pastsuccess may pose the greatest implementation challenge of all.

1.4. Scope of NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic FrameworkThis document is focused on defining an integrated geospatial strategic framework for theinteragency wildland fire community. This was accomplished under the guidance of the NWCGinteragency geospatial core team comprised of key members of the GTG. To arrive at arecommended model, our approach entailed the following tasks:

1. Assessing wildland fire data needs2. Conducting a stakeholder analysis3. Analyzing agency policies and guidance4. Developing a strategic framework.

Associated implementation elements and action items are embedded in the NWCG GeospatialTechnology Strategic Framework and are intended to be used in an iterative fashion as thecommunity gains additional fluency with the model.

The stakeholder community expects that, on a regular basis, the NWCG Geospatial TechnologyStrategic Framework will require maintenance and modification to ensure that action elementsand responsibilities remain current and relevant.


23/149


16

1.4.1. Needs Assessment

A Wildland Fire Data Needs Assessmentwas accomplished through review of essential referencedocuments, interviews with key stakeholders (see Figure 4), and conversations with GTG teammembers and executive sponsors. Most of the stakeholders represented state and regional offices

of federal agencies that constitute the interagency wildland fire community. Respondentsrepresented the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (USFS); DOI (BLM, NPS, FWS, and BIA);USFS Research; and other entities such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration(NOAA), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), academia, and the general public.

Figure 4: Stakeholder Participation

The Wildland Fire Data Needs Assessment identified the frequency and type of stakeholderinteraction that is in alignment with current NWCG business areas; identified how this interactionleads to alignment of key geospatial data requirements; supported a summary analysis of theinteragency stakeholders alignment with current NWCG business areas; validated recommendedbusiness areas to support the interagency geospatial community; and provided a focus for bothnear- and long-term organizational objectives. Table 2 lists the current NWCG business areas.

It is important to emphasize that the elements highlighted in Table 2 represent business areas,not organizational elements. Furthermore, these elements reflect those areas in which interviewedstakeholders said they work, regardless of whether or not geospatial technology is applied or not.

Figure 5 depicts the alignment (by the number of job functions for each stakeholder organization)to each of the current NWCG wildland fire business areas.

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Other

Field Operations

Region / State

NWCG / NIFC

Stakeholder Engagement

LevelofS

upport

Wildland Fire Interagency Community


24/149


17

Table 2: NWCG Wildland Fire Business Areas

Figure 5: Alignment of Key Stakeholder Job Functions to Wildland Business Areas

While respondents from the BLM and USDA reported minimal activity in Business Area 2,Business Operations, and Business Area 4, Vegetation Management, for those two agencies, theresponses suggest a more equal distribution of activity among the agencies for the other businessareas. The key stakeholders who were interviewed had difficulty in aligning their job functions withthe wildland fire geospatial community. Respondents generally expressed that the current NWCG


25/149


18

business areas do not accurately capture the typical job activities of a wildland fire geospatialcommunity key stakeholder. As a result, through considerable discussion, a revised set ofbusiness areas was identified (see Table 3) to serve as a platform for the strategic frameworkelements that are highlighted in this document. These revised business areas are intended tohelp inform both the outcome (i.e., vision, goals, and objectives) and output (i.e., actions and

initiatives) of the strategic framework.Moreover, these business areas will in turn drive focusareas for capability development, ownership building, and program stewardship (aspects of thestrategic framework which are presented and explained in more detail below) .

Table 3: Recommended Revised Geospatial Fire Business Areas

1.4.2. Stakeholder Analysis

A Stakeholder Analysisprovided a means with which to determine key issues within theinteragency wildland fire communitys environment, especially those affecting the communitysability to set a strategy, execute its mission, and achieve results. The analysis was conducted viasurvey by the NWCG Program Office. Follow-up interviews were conducted to solicit additionaldetails from key stakeholders and to discuss the future vision for geospatial technology activitiesin support of the interagency wildland fire community. The stakeholder analysis categorizes theresponses into categories according to strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (i.e.,SWOT analysis). Stakeholder feedback was broken down by best practices within thedimensions of change (i.e., people, processes, technology, and infrastructure). This

NWC G GEOSPATIALFIRE BUSINESS

AREASDEFINITION

STRATEGY Identification and development of geospatial technology and data

strategy to articulate the mission, vision, goals and objectives and

measurements of the interagency wildland fire geospatial community

DESIGN Implementation of the geospatial technology and data governance

design to enhance the interagency communitys capability development

and use of geospatial technology

TESTING Managerial testing to help with prioritization, capability design and

development

CHANGE MANAGEMENT Identification and development of change management plans and

stakeholders to participate in the design and deployment of change

initiatives

COMMUNICATIONS Detailed communication planning and monitoring for each stakeholder

group, provide addi tional communication vehicles customized to

stakeholder needs

TRAINING

Managerial training to help with prioritization, capability,communication, and change management skills (customized by

organizational role)

BUDGET Organizational mechanisms that the internal control structure

contributes to i) effective and efficient operations (i.e. data strategy), ii)

reliable financial reporting, and iii) compliance with applicable laws andregulations

PROGRAM MANAGEMENT Framework of strategic planning for processes and procedures used to

initiate, plan, execute, control and closeout internal operations projects


26/149


19

categorization is essential for the community to tie the stakeholder analysis results to theproposed strategic framework.

The stakeholder analysis survey included the following key information:

Section 1, Participant Profile: Level, Products, Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs),Concept of Operation (CONOPS), Job Aids, and Past Situation ReportsSection 2, Mission Responsibilities: NWCG Business Areas, Definitions, and KeyGeospatial Data RequirementsSection 3: Information Requirements: Geospatial Products (samples), Imagery Sources,Critical Information by Security Levels, Required Data Sources, Exchange Stakeholders,Information Sharing Mechanisms, Agency Resources, and Fire Management ProgramCollaborationSection 4: Reporting Requirements: Geospatial Product Requests, CONOPS / SOPs,Geospatial Products Produced, and Investment Strategy.

Upon completion of the interviews with 40 key stakeholders and conversations with core teammembers and executive sponsors, more than 250 documents of various types were collected intoa central repository and reviewed to gain a better understanding of the current issues andchallenges facing the interagency wildland fire geospatial community.

1.4.3. Agency Policy and Guidance Analysis

An Agency Policy and Guidance Analysison geospatial data and information highlights similaritiesand differences while focusing on the dimensions of change (people, process, technology, andinfrastructure). Because policy and guidance vary considerably from agency to agency (seeFigure 6 for a depiction of federal guidance), a gap analysis was conducted to focus on commonrequirements. Although an overarching Federal Geospatial Data Committee (FGDC) is in place

(which has incorporated policy and developed broad direction and guidance for a geospatialframework that includes a focus on enterprise architecture), the interagency wildland firecommunity has yet to embrace and/or implement an enterprise architecture. The DOI EnterpriseArchitecture process and the USFS Information Strategic Framework are both aligned with theFEA goal of making the best use of available funds to achieve strategic goals and objectivesfrom interagency efforts. As part of the DOI Enterprise Architecture, the DOIs Geospatial Blueprinteffort was coordinated with theFGDCand the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) GeospatialLine of Business (GeoLoB). This coordination was conducted in an attempt to prevent duplicationof work and to ensure a clear division of labor across other federal agencies through an improvedapproach, coordinated enterprise planning, and an investment strategy.


27/149


20

Figure 6: Federal Government Policy and Guidance

1.4.4. Strategic Framework Development

The development of the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework(see Figure 7) was

performed with an end result in mindi.e., to support the mission, vision, goals, and objectives(MVGO) of the interagency geospatial community. The group also determined that the frameworkmust leverage the geospatial business areas discussed above. Equal attention was also paid toneeds related to geospatial capability development, communication & change managementactivities, and program stewardship. As a result, the strategic framework, which is consistent withbest practice, provides an integrated basis for support ofthe interagency communityscapabilities, acceptance of the underlying program, and defin ition of the day-to-day stewardship ofgeospatial activities Moreover, the framework is built upon the wildland fire communitys naturallifecycle of (1) preparedness, (2) response, and (3) stabilization , as indicated in Figure 7.


28/149


21

Figure 7: Recommended Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework

1.5. Approach to Development of the NWCG Geospatial TechnologyStrategic Framework and the Framework OrganizationOver the past year, the NWGG Geospatial Core Group considered a number of frameworkalternatives ranging from pre-existing Federal Government models (e.g., from the Pentagon,Department of Homeland Security, Office of Personnel Management, Internal Revenue Service,U.S. Air Force Safety Center, and other agencies), commercial sector approaches, and ageospatial-specific model. Based on stakeholder analysis and best-practice considerations, thegroup decided upon a hybrid approach that (1) is consistent with the intent of geospatial bestpractices; (2) provides a strategic focus on capability development, change management &communications, and program stewardship, and (3) represents the unique wildland fire life cyclemost appropriately. The resulting model provides an optimal vehicle for decision-making, defines

methods of interaction and related rules, supports creation of mission objectives and capabilities,enables collaboration, establishes expectations and develops ownership, grants decisionrights and responsibilities, and verifies performance for effective program stewardship.

The strategic framework provides an integrated approach for developing the new geospatialcapabilities across the interagency community through three work streams and across five life-cycle phases. At the intersections of these work streams and phases, the model describes thoseitems the community needs to address among the key dimensions of change (i.e., people,


29/149


22

process, technology, and infrastructure) and how associated work can enhance capabilitiesrepresented each work stream across the ent ire framework life cycle.

1.5.1. Work Streams

The work streams are the core drivers of the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework.

They comprise three separate sets of activities as listed below. Each work stream includes relatedelements that, when performed in an integrated fashion, will help the interagency wildland firegeospatial community to achieve its goals more effectively and efficiently . The work streamsinclude:

Capability Development Defines, builds, and deploys future geospatial technologycapabilities to achieve the wildland fire interagency geospatial community visionOwnership Building Secures executive sponsorship, management participation, andstakeholder involvement and commitment to drive necessary change throughout theinteragency wildland fire communityProgram Stewardship Provides overall program management that drives, integrates, and

coordinates geospatial activities.

1.5.2. Phases Aligned with the Life-Cycle Time Periods

The Strategic Framework is built around five phases (Envision, Design, Test, Implement, andEvaluate) that are aligned with the wildland fire communitys three life cycle periodsPreparedness, Response, and Stabilization. For each of these five phases, stakeholders makedecisions and perform critical activities.

Preparedness:This is the period during which the program vision and key value propositions forthe future of integrated geospatial technologies are established. Further definition and planningare integrated into the preparedness period for the interagency wildland fire geospatialcommunity. This period is represented by three framework phases:

Envision Initiates the program and engages key interagency stakeholders, establishes theenterprise-level future state vision for the wildland fire interagency geospatial program, andinitiates the overall program management plan for achieving the vision.Design Develops a concept of operations for future geospatial technology capabilities, adetailed requirements specification, and a top-level solution architecture; provides aninteragency community change-management plan that promotes interagency stakeholderownership; and provides a framework that identifies and sequences projects for the wildland firegeospatial community.Test Builds and reviews the geospatial technology components; gauges the value of newcapabilities, assesses the organizations readiness for change, and prepares deployment of thenew geospatial capabilities.

Response: In this period, the actions that agencies take during incident response also includekey activities related to the strategic framework of the program. This is the time period duringwhich implementation of geospatial technologies takes place. Further implementation isintegrated into the response period for the interagency wildland fire geospatial community.


30/149


23

Implement Deploys new geospatial technology capabilities and deploys detailed strategicframework design (including a number of constituent elements).

Stabilization:Finally, post-fire decision-making during which the outcomes of the earlier phasesare examined, the program is evaluated, and necessary changes are assessed or re-assessed.

Evaluate Monitors and evaluates implementation activities and interagency geospatialcommunity performance and identifies and implements improvements to the strategicframework and geospatial capabilities.

Implementation of this proposed model for the interagency wildland fire community is intended toensure that information that is collected and used by the community is non-duplicative, stored incommon formats, and accessible by multiple stakeholders to satisfy mission needs. Theframework is based on a strategic shift in delivery of geospatial data and services. Theimplementation of this strategic framework will also provide a foundation for sustainableimprovement in delivery of geospatial services and products .

Note: The status of each implementation element in the framework is indicated in theImplementation Activities tables that appear in the following sections. The meaning of eachstatus icon in the tables is shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8: Implementation Status Icon Key

Note: The following sections of this document are divided according to the five key frameworkphases (Envision, Design, Test, Implement, and Evaluate). Within each section are numberedsubheads that track to the element numbers within the strategic framework.

The complete strategic framework is shown in Figure 9 on the following two pages.


31/149


24


32/149


25

Figure 9: NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework


33/149


34/149


27

avoid the collection of data that may not be related to the required capabilities of the wildland firegeospatial community. Capability Development also provides a constant reminder that communitymission, vision, goals, and objectives can best be achieved through continuous improvement in thecapabilities available (whether those be people, process, technology, or physical infrastructure related).

The Envision Phase, however, is about more than jus t Capability Development; rather, thegroundwork for planned change via the Ownership Building work stream also needs to beestablished. Ownership Building activities encompass communications and training that informand enable individuals to operate effectively in the new geospatial environment.An essentialelement, therefore, of this phase is identifying and engaging key stakeholders. If performed in the rightway, Ownership Building institutionalizes the improvements brought about through capabilitydevelopment and structured/managed through Program Stewardship.

More specifically to Program Stewardship, the Envision Phase focuses on traditional programmanagement activities, team structure, decision-making roles and responsibilities, and resource-allocation decision-making. For instance, the senior leadership team may determine that the

interagency decision-making process is ineffective and that additional information-sharing andcollaboration are needed for decision-making (and/or roles

Documents

NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework Final Draft 20101203