Open Data – Jill Saligoe-Simmel, Ph.D.

A Retrospective Return on Investment Study for Spatial Data Infrastructure

Posted on 13-September, 2020 | by Jill Saligoe-Simmel, Ph.D.

By its very definition, Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) has many different input providers and consumers, as well as emerging and unknown new uses and repeated uses over time. Therefore, placing a quantitative measure on the return on investment (ROI) of an SDI is an extremely complex problem.

In 2005, Indiana completed an ambitious project to map the entire state once over with high-quality orthophotography. These new maps became the foundation of the IndianaMap – our statewide SDI – a detailed map of Indiana to be used by government, business, and citizens. The 2005 orthophotography was part of a grant-funded project coordinated by the Indiana Geographic Information Council (IGIC). With known costs and nearly three years of usage, IGIC endeavored to conduct a retrospective ROI study to see how the investment paid off.

Our approach is similar to that taken by mineral economists’ Bhagwat and Ipe in their pioneering report Economic Benefits of Detailed Geologic Mapping to Kentucky [1]. Their approach is a retrospective study to first estimate the value to an individual map user and then to extend that value to all the possible map users over time to get an estimate of the aggregate benefits of a mapping program. Two separate methods were employed, aggregate value ROI and usage ROI, to evaluate the return on investment. The results of both methods are consistent and show a strong 34:1 return on investment in under three years. IndianaMap Orthophotography proves its worth as a good investment of public funds.

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Input was sought from a known user base (those who are registered with the IndianaMap download sites and email distribution lists) through an appropriately designed questionnaire that was implemented through an online survey tool. The response rate to the survey was encouraging and exceeded commonly accepted response rates in marketing surveys.

For the purposes of this study, we make an estimation of total users based on 1521 registered users on the University Information Technology Services at Indiana University’s download site for the IndianaMap orthophotography (http://gis.iu.edu). These users download and use IndianaMap data on their own systems. They include government regulators, engineers, utilities, realtors, appraisers, mining companies, researchers, planning officials, and teachers. Three hundred fourteen (314) responses were received during May and June 2008. This is a 20% response rate and is nearly four times the rate considered acceptable in the marketing business [2].

Statewide, the orthophotography maps consist of a series of photo “tiles” each measuring 4000 feet by 4000 feet. There are 68,592 total tiles in the statewide project. The total cost of the orthophotography project acquisition and initial data distribution was $7,432,625 (this does not include project management or secondary web distribution by the IndianaMap collaborating organizations). For this analysis, IGIC used two standard measures of return on investment (ROI), specifically “Aggregate Value ROI”, and “Usage ROI”. The results show an impressive 34:1 return on investment. The statistical calculations are derived as follows:

Aggregate Value ROI = Vpt * Dt / Ct

This can also be expressed as:

Usage ROI = Upt / BEpt

Tt	total tiles produced statewide	68,592 tiles
Ct	cost for initial production & distribution statewide	$7,432,625.00
Cpt	cost per tile expressed as an average for production and distribution	$108.00
Vpt	value per tile as defined by survey respondents	$28.00
BEpt	break-even per tile – the number of times a single tile must be used to break even	3.87
Upt	usage per tile – the average number of times each tile has been used	131
Dt	distribution total – the estimate of total tiles distributed for use, defined by survey results	8,969,130

Figure 1. Sample County Tile Grid Ohio County depicting “tiles” each measuring 4000’ by 4000’ on the ground. Each tile represents an aerial photograph. In all, it takes 66,966 tiles to complete a statewide orthophotography map.

Aggregate Value ROI

To calculate the return on investment, we must calculate the aggregate value and divide that by the total costs for data production and initial distribution. We used the survey results from 312 respondents along with known costs of production for this calculation. Although a theoretical framework for estimating the value of maps exists1, the relevant data required to estimate it may not be available in the real world. Therefore, we used an empirical approach to estimate the monetary value of the maps. First, the estimated value per tile was calculated, where:

Estimate value per tile (Vpt) = average (user-defined value per project / tiles used per project)

On the survey, users were asked, “Had the 2005 orthophotography maps not been available, given the parameters of your operations and/or project, what would have been an appropriate amount of money to spend on the data?” This question was based on the premise that, in the absence of the IndianaMap orthophotography, the users would have to spend money to collect the information themselves. Such data provide a measure of the user-defined value of the maps. 204 (65%) respondents indicated a value or range of values.

Not unexpectedly the responses vary widely, for as stated by Barr and Masser [3], “Information has no inherent value, it is only of value once used and that value is related to the nature of the use rather than the nature of the information. As a result, information has very different values for different users.” Of those responding, some people indicated a range in the amount of money they would have reasonably spent. To maintain a conservative perspective, we consistently used the lesser value in cases where a range in values was indicated. Many of those not responding indicated that the total monetary value was difficult for them to estimate. Of those not providing a value, several indicated they had no budget to spend on the map data—their project simply would not have been possible without the availability of the IndianaMap. We put the user-defined estimate of the monetary value of the maps in the context of a single project and/or government operation for each respondent.

Respondents listed the geographic coverage area of their project and/or operations. Project size ranges from single acre sites to statewide. That coverage area was used to estimate the number of map tiles used per respondent. For each respondent, the monetary value (as described above) was divided by the number of tiles used to arrive at an estimated value per tile for each respondent. To ensure the results provide a conservative perspective, these results were plotted, and outliers (in this case, all estimated value equal to or greater than $300 per tile) were removed from the calculation. Finally, we averaged the results for all respondents, arriving at the estimated value per tile (Vpt) of $28.

Vpt original response summary statistics:

Mean	70.7
Median	1.38
Standard Deviation	217.84

Vpt summary statistics after removing outliers:

Mean	28.17
Median	1.10
Standard Deviation	57.89

It is noteworthy that on a per-response basis, a broad range exists in Vpt. This range reflects distinct value differences in the size of projects. When the data are grouped by the size of the project, the average Vpt for statewide projects ($4.71) is considerably lower than either multi-county projects ($22.14) or single county or smaller projects ($84.14). This can be interpreted as a function of the number of tiles required for different sized projects, with vastly more tiles statewide lowering the average Vpt. While smaller sized projects generally report large Vpt, it is the aggregate value of distinct (and sometimes unpredictable) uses that impart its worth, be it an important highway project, emergency response to flooding, tornado, or earthquake, or the location of a company like Honda to Indiana.

Next, we estimated use. Using the survey data, IGIC calculated the number of orthophotography map tiles used per project and/or operation and then summed the total number of map tiles used by all respondents. The results indicate an estimated total distribution and usage (Dt) of 8,969,130 tiles—a conservative estimate of usage based on a 20% response rate of known users. We use these data along with known project costs ($7,432,625) to calculate the ROI:

Aggregate Value ROI = Vpt * Dt / Ct = ($28 * 8,969,130) / $7,432,625 i.e., a 34:1 ROI [/av_textblock] [av_textblock size=” font_color=” color=” av-medium-font-size=” av-small-font-size=” av-mini-font-size=” av_uid=’av-kf1lvty5′ admin_preview_bg=”]

Usage ROI

To test the reliability of our model, we look at the problem another way by examining the “Usage ROI” in which the return is based on an estimate of usage per tile divided by the number of times a tile must be used to break even. For this approach, we express the return on investment by the following calculations:

Usage ROI = Upt / BEpt

Where,

Upt = Dt / Tt = 8,969,130 / 68,592 = 131

And where,

BEpt = Cpt / Vpt = $108 / $28 = 3.87

First, we estimated the number of times each tile has been used by taking the estimate of use (8,969,130 tiles) divided by the total number of tiles for the statewide project (68,592). Using these data, we see that, on average, each tile has been used 131 times.

Again, it should be noted this is a conservative estimate based solely on reported survey results and does not account for anonymous usage through the www.indianamap.org web site, Google Maps, public libraries, or other public access points not accounted for in this study. It also does not comprehensively account for the use of imagery by groups who have local data copies and typically do not download it, such as county GIS staff, state agencies, and the Indiana National Guard.

Next, we used known cost figures to calculate how many times the maps need to be used for the investment to break even. There are 68,592 total tiles in the statewide project. The production and initial distribution costs to the counties and the state was $7,432,625. Thus, the average production cost was $108 per tile. Using the estimated value per tile previously calculated ($28), we calculate the usage ROI:

Usage ROI = 131 / ($108 / $28) i.e., a 34:1 ROI

CONCLUSION

Two separate methods were employed to evaluate the return on investment. The results of both methods are consistent and show a strong return on investment in under three years. The retrospective analysis is possible given a discrete set of data with known costs and input from a known user base.

[1] Bhagwat, S.B., and Ipe, V.C. 2000. The economic benefits of detailed geologic mapping to Kentucky. Illinois State Geological Survey Special Report 3, 39 p.

[2] Van Bennekom, F. (2003) www.greatbrook.com

[3] Barr, R., and I. Masser. 1997. The economic nature of geographic information. In Z. Kemp (editor) Advances in GIS 4. London: Taylor and Francis.

Acknowledgments

The Indiana Geographic Information Council (IGIC) is a nonprofit organization whose mission is to lead the effective application of geographic information in Indiana. The IndianaMap not only advances this mission, it also contributes to the present and future work of numerous state agencies, local governments, private businesses, and academic institutions involved in economic development efforts, environmental management, transportation planning, public safety, land use planning, and much more.

IGIC owes a debt of gratitude to the State of Indiana and all our many collaborating organizations and individuals for the outstanding cooperation and support that has gotten the IndianaMap to where it is today.

The Economic Benefits of the IndianaMap Return on Investment Study was conducted by Saligoe-Simmel, LLC, and the Indiana Geographic Information Council (IGIC) originally published by IGIC in 2008. The study was supported by a grant from the Federal Geographic Data Committee Cooperative Agreements Program Grant Agreement Number: 07HQAG0042. Download the PDF [/av_textblock]

Geospatial Data Act of 2018 – full text

Posted on 18-October, 2018 | by Jill Saligoe-Simmel, Ph.D.

The US Geospatial Data Act (GDA) of 2018, as part of the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Reauthorization Act (H.R. 302), was signed into law on 5 Oct 2018. Below is the full text of the GDA of 2018, excerpted from H.R. 302:

[av_hr class=’default’ height=’50’ shadow=’no-shadow’ position=’center’ custom_border=’av-border-thin’ custom_width=’50px’ custom_border_color=” custom_margin_top=’30px’ custom_margin_bottom=’30px’ icon_select=’yes’ custom_icon_color=” icon=’ue808′ font=’entypo-fontello’ admin_preview_bg=” av_uid=’av-7oc2h’]

Subtitle F—Geospatial Data

SEC. 751. SHORT TITLE; FINDINGS.

(a) Short Title.—This subtitle may be cited as the “Geospatial Data Act of 2018”.

(b) Findings.—Congress finds that—

(1) open and publicly available data is essential to the successful operation of the GeoPlatform;

(2) the private sector in the United States, for the purposes of acquiring and producing quality geospatial data and geospatial data services, has been and continues to be invaluable in carrying out the varying missions of Federal departments and agencies, as well as contributing positively to the United States economy; and

(3) over the last 2 decades, Congress has passed legislation that promotes greater access and use of Government information and data, which has—

(A) sparked new, innovative start-ups and services;

(B) spurred economic growth in many sectors, such as in the geospatial services;

(D) promoted public access to Federally funded services and data; and

(E) improved access to geospatial data for the purposes of promoting public health, weather forecasting, economic development, environmental protection, flood zone research, and other purposes.

SEC. 752. DEFINITIONS.

In this subtitle—

(1) the term “Advisory Committee” means the National Geospatial Advisory Committee established under section 754(a);

(2) the term “Committee” means the Federal Geographic Data Committee established under section 753(a);

(3) the term “covered agency”—

(A) means—

(i) an Executive department, as defined in section 101 of title 5, United States Code, that collects, produces, acquires, maintains, distributes, uses, or preserves geospatial data on paper or in electronic form to fulfill the mission of the Executive department, either directly or through a relationship with another organization, including a State, local government, Indian tribe, institution of higher education, business partner or contractor of the Federal Government, and the public;

(ii) the National Aeronautics and Space Administration; or

(iii) the General Services Administration; and

(B) does not include the Department of Defense (including 30 components and agencies performing national missions) or any element of the intelligence community;

(4) the term “GeoPlatform” means the GeoPlatform described in section 758(a);

(5) the term “geospatial data”—

(A) means information that is tied to a location on the Earth, including by identifying the geographic location and characteristics of natural or constructed features and boundaries on the Earth, and that is generally represented in vector datasets by points, lines, polygons, or other complex geographic features or phenomena;

(B) may be derived from, among other things, remote sensing, mapping, and surveying technologies;

(C) includes images and raster datasets, aerial photographs, and other forms of geospatial data or datasets in digitized or non-digitized form; and

(D) does not include—

(i) geospatial data and activities of an Indian tribe not carried out, in whole or in part, using Federal funds, as determined by the tribal government;

(ii) classified national security-related geospatial data and activities of the Department of Defense, unless declassified;

(iii) classified national security-related geospatial data and activities of the Department of Energy, unless declassified;

(iv) geospatial data and activities under chapter 22 of title 10, United States Code, or section 110 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3045);

(v) intelligence geospatial data and activities, as determined by the Director of National Intelligence; or

(vi) certain declassified national security-related geospatial data and activities of the intelligence community, as determined by the Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Energy, or the Director of National Intelligence;

(6) the term “Indian tribe” has the meaning given that term under section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 U.S.C. 450b);

(7) the term “institution of higher education” has the meaning given that term under section 102 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1002);

(8) the term “intelligence community” has the meaning given that term in section 3 of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 U.S.C. 3003);

(9) the term “lead covered agency” means a lead covered agency for a National Geospatial Data Asset data theme designated under section 756(b)(1);

(10) the term “local government” means any city, county, township, town, borough, parish, village, or other general purpose political subdivision of a State;

(11) the term “metadata for geospatial data” means information about geospatial data, including the content, source, vintage, accuracy, condition, projection, method of collection, and other characteristics or descriptions of the geospatial data;

(12) the term “National Geospatial Data Asset data theme” means the National Geospatial Data Asset core geospatial datasets (including electronic records and coordinates) relating to a topic or subject designated under section 756;

(13) the term “National Spatial Data Infrastructure” means the technology, policies, criteria, standards, and employees necessary to promote geospatial data sharing throughout the Federal Government, State, tribal, and local governments, and the private sector (including nonprofit organizations and institutions of higher education); and

(14) the term “proven practices” means methods and activities that advance the use of geospatial data for the benefit of society.

SEC. 753. FEDERAL GEOGRAPHIC DATA COMMITTEE.

(a) In General.—There is established within the Department of the Interior an interagency committee to be known as the Federal Geographic Data Committee, which shall act as the lead entity in the executive branch for the development, implementation, and review of policies, practices, and standards relating to geospatial data.

(b) Membership.—

(1) CHAIRPERSON AND VICE CHAIRPERSON.—The Secretary of the Interior and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall serve as Chairperson of the Committee and Vice Chairperson of the Committee, respectively.

(2) OTHER MEMBERS.

(A) IN GENERAL.—The head of each covered agency and the Director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency shall each designate a representative of their respective agency to serve as a member of the Committee.

(B) REQUIREMENT FOR APPOINTMENTS.—An officer appointed to serve as a member of the Committee shall hold a position as an assistant secretary, or an equivalent position, or a higher ranking position.

(3) GUIDANCE.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act, and as needed thereafter, the Director of the Office of Management and Budget shall update guidance with respect to membership of the Committee and the roles of members of the Committee.

(1) lead the development and management of and operational decision making for the National Spatial Data Infrastructure strategic plan and geospatial data policy in accordance with section 755;

(2) designate National Geospatial Data Asset data themes and oversee the coordinated management of the National Geospatial Data Asset data themes in accordance with section 756;

(3) establish and maintain geospatial data standards in accordance with section 757;

(4) periodically review and determine the extent to which covered agencies comply with geospatial data standards;

(5) ensure that the GeoPlatform operates in accordance with section 758;

(6) direct and facilitate national implementation of the system of National Geospatial Data Asset data themes;

(7) communicate with and foster communication among covered agencies and other entities and individuals relating to geospatial data technology development, transfer, and exchange in order to—

(A) identify and meet the needs of users of geospatial data;

(B) promote cost-effective data collection, documentation, maintenance, distribution, and preservation strategies; and

(C) leverage Federal and non-Federal resources, such as promoting Federal shared services and cross-agency coordination for marketplace solutions;

(8) define roles and responsibilities and promote and guide cooperation and coordination among agencies of the Federal Government, State, tribal, and local governments, institutions of higher education, and the private sector in the collection, production, sharing, and use of geospatial information, the implementation of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure, and the identification of proven practices;

(9) coordinate with international organizations having an interest in the National Spatial Data Infrastructure or global spatial data infrastructures;

(10) make available online and update at least annually—

(A) a summary of the status for each National Geospatial Data Asset data theme, based on the report submitted by the applicable lead covered agency under section 756(b)(3)(E)(ii)(I), which shall include—

(i) an evaluation of the progress of each lead covered agency in achieving the requirements under subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D) of section 756(b)(3); and

(ii) a determination of whether, for each of subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D) of section 756(b)(3), each lead covered agency meets expectations, has made progress toward expectations, or fails to meet expectations;

(B) a summary and evaluation of the achievements of each covered agency, based on the annual report submitted by the covered agency under section 759(b)(1), which shall include a determination of whether the covered agency meets expectations, has made progress toward expectations, or fails to meet expectations for each of paragraphs (1) through (13) of section 759(a);

(C) a collection of periodic technical publications, management articles, and reports related to the National Spatial Data Infrastructure; and

(D) a membership directory for the Committee, including identifying members of any subcommittee or working group of the Committee;

(11) (A) make available to and request comments from the Advisory Committee regarding the summaries and evaluations required under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (10);

(B) if requested by the Advisory Committee, respond to any comments by the Advisory Committee; and

(C) not less than once every 2 years, submit to Congress a report that includes the summaries and evaluations required under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (10), the comments of the Advisory Committee, and the responses of the Committee to the comments;

(12) (A) make available to and request comments from covered agencies regarding the summaries and evaluations required under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of paragraph (10); and

(B) not less than once every 2 years, submit to Congress a report that includes the comments of the covered agencies and the responses of the Committee to the comments; and

(13) support and promote the infrastructure of networks, systems, services, and standards that provide a digital representation of the Earth to users for many applications.

(d) Staff Support.—The Committee shall establish an Office of the Secretariat within the Department of the Interior to provide administrative support, strategic planning, funding, and technical support to the Committee.

SEC. 754. NATIONAL GEOSPATIAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE.

(a) Establishment.—The Secretary of the Interior shall establish within the Department of the Interior the National Geospatial Advisory Committee to provide advice and recommendations to the Chairperson of the Committee.

(b) Membership.—

(1) COMPOSITION.—The Advisory Committee shall be composed of not more than 30 members, at least one of which will be from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, who shall—

(A) be appointed by the Chairperson of the Committee;

(B) be selected—

(i) to generally achieve a balanced representation of the viewpoints of various interested parties involved in national geospatial activities and the development of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure; and

(ii) with consideration of a geographic balance of residence of the members; and

(i) States;

(ii) local governments;

(iii) regional governments;

(iv) tribal governments;

(v) private sector entities;

(vi) geospatial information user industries;

(vii) professional associations;

(viii) scholarly associations;

(ix) nonprofit organizations;

(x) academia;

(xi) licensed geospatial data acquisition professionals; and

(xii) the Federal Government.

(2) CHAIRPERSON.—The Chairperson of the Committee shall appoint the Chairperson of the Advisory Committee.

(3) PERIOD OF APPOINTMENT; VACANCIES.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—Members shall be appointed for a term of 3 years, with the term of 1⁄3 of the members expiring each year.

(B) VACANCIES.—Any vacancy in the Advisory Committee shall not affect its powers, but shall be filled in the same manner as the original appointment.

(4) LIMIT ON TERMS.—Except for the member from the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency, an individual—

(A) may not be appointed to more than 2 consecutive terms as a member of the Advisory Committee; and

(B) after serving for 2 consecutive terms, is eligible to be appointed as a member of the Advisory Committee on and after the date that is 2 years after the end of the second consecutive term of the individual as a member of the Advisory Committee.

(5) ETHICAL REQUIREMENTS.—A member of the Advisory Committee may not participate in any specific-party matter (including a lease, license, permit, contract, claim, agreement, or related litigation) with the Department of the Interior in which the member has a direct financial interest.

(6) INCUMBENTS.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—An individual serving on the day before the date of enactment of this Act as a member of the National Geospatial Advisory Committee established by the Secretary of the Interior may serve as a member of the Advisory Committee until the end of the term of the individual under the appointment.

(B) LIMIT ON TERMS.—Any period of service as a member of the National Geospatial Advisory Committee established by the Secretary of the Interior shall be considered a period of service as a member of the Advisory Committee for purposes of paragraph (4).

(1) may be formed for the purposes of compiling information or conducting research;

(2) shall be composed of members appointed by the Chairperson of the Advisory Committee;

(3) shall act under the direction of the Chairperson of the Advisory Committee and the officer or employee designated under section 10(e) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) with respect to the Advisory Committee;

(4) shall report the recommendations of the subcommittee to the Advisory Committee for consideration; and

(5) shall meet as necessary to accomplish the objectives of the subcommittee, subject to the approval of the Chairperson of the Advisory Committee and the availability of resources.

(d) Meetings.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Advisory Committee shall meet at the call of the Chairperson, not less than 1 time each year and not more than 4 times each year.

(2) QUORUM.—A majority of the members of the Advisory Committee shall constitute a quorum, but a lesser number of members may hold meetings or hearings.

(e) Duties Of The Advisory Committee.—The Advisory Committee shall—

(1) provide advice and recommendations relating to—

(A) the management of Federal and national geospatial programs;

(B) the development of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure; and

(2) review and comment on geospatial policy and management issues; and

(3) ensure the views of representatives of non-Federal interested parties involved in national geospatial activities are conveyed to the Committee.

(f) Powers Of The Advisory Committee.—

(1) MEETINGS.—The Advisory Committee may hold meetings (which shall be open to the public) and sit and act at such times and places as the Advisory Committee considers advisable to carry out this subtitle.

(2) INFORMATION FROM COVERED AGENCIES.—

(A) IN GENERAL.—The Advisory Committee, with the concurrence of the Chairperson of the Committee, may secure directly from any covered agency such information as the Advisory Committee considers necessary to carry out this subtitle. Upon request of the Chairperson of the Advisory Committee, the head of such agency shall furnish such information to the Advisory Committee.

(B) NONCOOPERATION.—The Advisory Committee shall include in the comments of the Advisory Committee submitted under section 753(c)(11) a discussion of any failure by a covered agency to furnish information in response to a request under subparagraph (A) of this paragraph.

(3) POSTAL SERVICES.—The Advisory Committee may use the United States mails in the same manner and under the same conditions as other agencies of the Federal Government.

(g) Advisory Committee Personnel Matters.—

(1) NO COMPENSATION OF MEMBERS.—

(A) NON-FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.—A member of the Advisory Committee who is not an officer or employee of the Federal Government shall serve without compensation.

(B) FEDERAL EMPLOYEES.—A member of the Advisory Committee who is an officer or employee of the Federal Government shall serve without compensation in addition to the compensation received for the services of the member as an officer or employee of the Federal Government.

(2) TRAVEL EXPENSES.—The members of the Advisory Committee shall be allowed travel expenses, including per diem in lieu of subsistence, at rates authorized for employees of agencies under subchapter I of chapter 57 of title 5, United States Code, while away from their homes or regular places of business in the performance of services for the Advisory Committee.

(3) DETAIL OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES.—Any Federal Government employee may be detailed to the Committee to support the Advisory Committee without reimbursement, and such detail shall be without interruption or loss of civil service status or privilege.

(4) STAFF SUPPORT.—The Office of the Secretariat established by the Committee under section 753(d) shall provide administrative support to the Advisory Committee.

(h) Applicability Of FACA.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall apply to the Advisory Committee.

(2) NO TERMINATION.—Section 14(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.) shall not apply to the Advisory Committee.

(i) Termination.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), the Advisory Committee shall terminate 10 years after the date of enactment of this Act.

(2) CONTINUATION.—The Advisory Committee may be continued for successive 10-year periods by action taken by the Secretary of the Interior to renew the Advisory Committee before the date on which the Advisory Committee would otherwise terminate.

SEC. 755. NATIONAL SPATIAL DATA INFRASTRUCTURE.

(a) In General.—The National Spatial Data Infrastructure shall ensure that geospatial data from multiple sources (including the covered agencies, State, local, and tribal governments, the private sector, and institutions of higher education) is available and easily integrated to enhance the understanding of the physical and cultural world.

(b) Goals.—The goals of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure are to—

(1) ensure—

(A) that geospatial data are reviewed prior to disclosure to ensure—

(i) compliance with section 552a of title 5 (commonly known as the “Privacy Act of 1974”); and

(ii) that personally identifiable information is not disclosed, which shall include an assessment of re-identification risk when determining what data constitute personally identifiable information;

(B) that geospatial data are designed to enhance the accuracy of statistical information, both in raw form and in derived information products;

(C) free and open access for the public to geospatial data, information, and interpretive products, in accordance with Office of Management and Budget Circular A–130, or any successor thereto;

(D) the protection of proprietary interests related to licensed information and data; and

(E) the interoperability and sharing capabilities of Federal information systems and data to enable the drawing of resources from covered agencies and partners of covered agencies; and

(2) support and advance the establishment of a Global Spatial Data Infrastructure, consistent with national security, national defense, national intelligence, and international trade requirements, including ensuring that covered agencies develop international geospatial data in accordance with international voluntary consensus standards, as defined in Office of Management and Budget Circular A–119, or any successor thereto.

(c) Strategic Plan.—The Committee shall prepare and maintain a strategic plan for the development and implementation of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure in a manner consistent with national security, national defense, and emergency preparedness program policies regarding data accessibility.

(d) Advisory Role.—The Committee shall advise Federal and non-Federal users of geospatial data on their responsibilities relating to implementation of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure.

SEC. 756. NATIONAL GEOSPATIAL DATA ASSET DATA THEMES.

(a) In General.—The Committee shall designate as National Geospatial Data Asset data themes the primary topics and subjects for which the coordinated development, maintenance, and dissemination of geospatial data will benefit the Federal Government and the interests of the people of the United States, which shall—

(1) be representations of conceptual topics describing digital spatial information for the Nation; and

(2) contain associated datasets (with attribute records and coordinates)—

(A) that are documented, verifiable, and officially designated to meet recognized standards;

(B) that may be used in common; and

(b) Lead Covered Agencies.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—For each National Geospatial Data Asset data theme, the Committee shall designate one or more covered agencies as the lead covered agencies for the National Geospatial Data Asset data theme.

(2) GENERAL RESPONSIBILITY.—The lead covered agencies for a National Geospatial Data Asset data theme shall be responsible for ensuring the coordinated management of the data, supporting resources (including technology and personnel), and related services and products of the National Geospatial Data Asset data theme.

(3) SPECIFIC RESPONSIBILITIES.—To assist in fulfilling the responsibilities under paragraph (2) with respect to a National Geospatial Data Asset data theme, the lead covered agencies shall—

(A) provide leadership and facilitate the development and implementation of geospatial data standards for the National Geospatial Data Asset data theme, with a particular emphasis on a data content standard for the National Geospatial Data Asset data theme, including by—

(i) assessing existing standards;

(ii) identifying anticipated or needed data standards; and

(iii) developing a plan to originate and implement needed standards with relevant community and international practices—

(I) in accordance with Office of Management and Budget Circular A–119, or any successor thereto; and

(II) consistent with or as a part of the plan described in subparagraph (B);

(B) provide leadership and facilitate the development and implementation of a plan for nationwide population of the National Geospatial Data Asset data theme, which shall—

(i) include developing partnership programs with States, Indian tribes, institutions of higher education, private sector entities, other Federal agencies, and local governments;

(ii) meet the needs of users of geospatial data;

(iii) address human and financial resource needs;

(iv) identify needs relating to standards, metadata for geospatial data within the National Geospatial Data Asset data theme, and the GeoPlatform; and

(v) expedite the development of necessary National Geospatial Data Asset data themes;

(C) establish goals that support the strategic plan for the National Spatial Data Infrastructure prepared under section 755(c);

(D) as necessary, collect and analyze information from users of geospatial data within the National Geospatial Data Asset data theme regarding the needs of the users for geospatial data and incorporate the needs of users in strategies relating to the National Geospatial Data Asset data theme; and

(E) as part of administering the National Geospatial Data Asset data theme—

(i) designate a point of contact within the lead covered agency who shall be responsible for developing, maintaining, coordination relating to, and disseminating data using the GeoPlatform;

(ii) submit to the Committee—

(I) a performance report, at least annually, that documents the activities relating to and implementation of the National Geospatial Data Asset data theme, including progress in achieving the requirements under subparagraphs (A), (B), (C), and (D); and

(II) comments, as appropriate, regarding the summary and evaluation of the performance report provided by the Committee under section 753(c)(12);

(iii) publish maps or comparable graphics online (in accordance with the mapping conventions specified by the Committee) showing the extent and status of the National Geospatial Data Asset data themes for which the covered agency is a lead covered agency;

(iv) encourage individuals and entities that are a source of geospatial data or metadata for geospatial data for the National Geospatial Data Asset data theme to provide access to such data through the GeoPlatform;

(v) coordinate with the GeoPlatform; and

(vi) identify and publish proven practices for the use and application of geospatial data of the lead covered agency.

SEC. 757. GEOSPATIAL DATA STANDARDS.

(a) In General.—In accordance with section 216 of the E-Government Act of 2002 (44 U.S.C. 3501 note), the Committee shall establish standards for each National Geospatial Data Asset data theme, which—

(1) shall include—

(A) rules, conditions, guidelines, and characteristics for the geospatial data within the National Geospatial Data Asset data theme and related processes, technology, and organization; and

(B) content standards for metadata for geospatial data within the National Geospatial Data Asset data theme;

(2) to the maximum extent practicable, shall be consistent with international standards and protocols;

(3) shall include universal data standards that shall be acceptable for the purposes of declassified intelligence community data; and

(4) the Committee shall periodically review and update as necessary for the standards to remain current, relevant, and effective.

(b) Development Of Standards.—The Committee shall—

(1) develop and promulgate standards under this section—

(A) in accordance with Office of Management and Budget Circular A–119, or any successor thereto; and

(B) after consultation with a broad range of data users and providers;

(2) to the maximum extent possible, use national and international standards adopted by voluntary standards consensus bodies; and

(3) establish new standards only to the extent standards described in paragraph (2) do not exist.

(c) Exclusion.—The Secretary of the Interior shall withhold from public disclosure any information the disclosure of which reasonably could be expected to cause damage to the national interest, security, or defense of the United States, including information relating to geospatial intelligence data activities, as determined in consultation with the Director of National Intelligence.

SEC. 758. GEOPLATFORM.

(a) In General.—The Committee shall operate an electronic service that provides access to geospatial data and metadata for geospatial data to the general public, to be known as the GeoPlatform.

(b) Implementation.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—The GeoPlatform—

(A) shall—

(i) be available through the internet and other communications means;

(ii) be accessible through a common interface;

(iii) include metadata for all geospatial data collected by covered agencies, directly or indirectly;

(iv) include download access to all open geospatial data directly or indirectly collected by covered agencies; and

(v) include a set of programming instructions and standards providing an automated means of accessing available geospatial data, which—

(I) harmonize sources and data standards associated with geospatial data, including metadata; and

(II) to the maximum extent practicable, as determined by the Chairperson of the Committee, shall be made publicly available;

(B) may include geospatial data from a source other than a covered agency, if determined appropriate by the Committee; and

(C) shall not store or serve proprietary information or data acquired under a license by the Federal Government, unless authorized by the data provider.

(2) MANAGING PARTNER.—The Chairperson of the Committee shall designate an agency to serve as the managing partner for developing and operating the GeoPlatform, taking direction from the Committee on the scope, functionality, and performance of the GeoPlatform.

(c) Clarification.—Although the GeoPlatform is intended to include all National Geospatial Data Asset and other Federal datasets, nothing in this subtitle shall be construed to prevent a covered agency from also presenting, providing, or disseminating data that is—

(1) specific to the functions of the covered agency; or

(2) targeted to information consumers that directly interface with the services, portals, or other mechanisms of the covered agency.

SEC. 759. COVERED AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES.

(a) In General.—Each covered agency shall—

(1) prepare, maintain, publish, and implement a strategy for advancing geographic information and related geospatial data and activities appropriate to the mission of the covered agency, in support of the strategic plan for the National Spatial Data Infrastructure prepared under section 755(c);

(2) collect, maintain, disseminate, and preserve geospatial data such that the resulting data, information, or products can be readily shared with other Federal agencies and non-Federal users;

(3) promote the integration of geospatial data from all sources;

(4) ensure that data information products and other records created in geospatial data and activities are included on agency record schedules that have been approved by the National Archives and Records Administration;

(5) allocate resources to fulfill the responsibilities of effective geospatial data collection, production, and stewardship with regard to related activities of the covered agency, and as necessary to support the activities of the Committee;

(6) use the geospatial data standards, including the standards for metadata for geospatial data, and other appropriate standards, including documenting geospatial data with the relevant metadata and making metadata available through the GeoPlatform;

(7) coordinate and work in partnership with other Federal agencies, agencies of State, tribal, and local governments, institutions of higher education, and the private sector to efficiently and cost-effectively collect, integrate, maintain, disseminate, and preserve geospatial data, building upon existing non-Federal geospatial data to the extent possible;

(8) use geospatial information to—

(A) make Federal geospatial information and services more useful to the public;

(B) enhance operations;

(D) enhance reporting to the public and to Congress;

(9) protect personal privacy and maintain confidentiality in accordance with Federal policy and law;

(10) participate in determining, when applicable, whether declassified data can contribute to and become a part of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure;

(11) search all sources, including the GeoPlatform, to determine if existing Federal, State, local, or private geospatial data meets the needs of the covered agency before expending funds for geospatial data collection;

(12) to the maximum extent practicable, ensure that a person receiving Federal funds for geospatial data collection provides high-quality data; and

(13) appoint a contact to coordinate with the lead covered agencies for collection, acquisition, maintenance, and dissemination of the National Geospatial Data Asset data themes used by the covered agency.

(b) Reporting.—

(1) IN GENERAL.—Each covered agency shall submit to the Committee an annual report regarding the achievements of the covered agency in preparing and implementing the strategy described in subsection (a)(1) and complying with the other requirements under subsection (a).

(2) BUDGET SUBMISSION.—Each covered agency shall—

(A) include geospatial data in preparing the budget submission of the covered agency to the President under sections 1105(a) and 1108 of title 31, United States Code;

(B) maintain an inventory of all geospatial data assets in accordance with OMB Circular A–130, or any successor thereto; and

(C) prepare an annual report to Congress identifying Federal-wide geospatial data assets, as defined in OMB Circular A–16, as set forth in OMB memo M–11–03, Issuance of OMB Circular A–16 Supplemental Guidance (November 10, 2010), or any successor thereto.

(3) DISCLOSURE.—Each covered agency shall disclose each contract, cooperative agreement, grant, or other transaction that deals with geospatial data, which may include posting information relating to the contract, cooperative agreement, grant, or other transaction on www.USAspending.gov and www.itdashboard.gov, or any successors thereto.

(4) OMB REVIEW.—In reviewing the annual budget justifications submitted by covered agencies, the Office of Management and Budget shall take into consideration the summary and evaluations required under subparagraphs (A) and (B) of section 753(c)(10), comments, and replies to comments as required under paragraphs (11) and (12) of section 753(c), in its annual evaluation of the budget justification of each covered agency.

(5) REPORTING.—The Office of Management and Budget shall include a discussion of the summaries and evaluation of the progress in establishing the National Spatial Data Infrastructure in each E-Government status report submitted under section 3606 of title 44, United States Code.

(c) Audits.—Not less than once every 2 years, the inspector general of a covered agency (or senior ethics official of the covered agency for a covered agency without an inspector general) shall submit to Congress an audit of the collection, production, acquisition, maintenance, distribution, use, and preservation of geospatial data by the covered agency, which shall include a review of—

(1) the compliance of the covered agency with the standards for geospatial data, including metadata for geospatial data, established under section 757;

(2) the compliance of the covered agency with the requirements under subsection (a); and

(3) the compliance of the covered agency on the limitation on the use of Federal funds under section 759A.

SEC. 759A. LIMITATION ON USE OF FEDERAL FUNDS.

(a) Definition.—In this section, the term “implementation date” means the date that is 5 years after the date on which standards for each National Geospatial Data Asset data theme are established under section 757.

(b) Limitation.—Except as provided otherwise in this section, on and after the implementation date, a covered agency may not use Federal funds for the collection, production, acquisition, maintenance, or dissemination of geospatial data that does not comply with the applicable standards established under section 757, as determined by the Committee.

(c) Exception For Existing Geospatial Data.—On and after the implementation date, a covered agency may use Federal funds to maintain and disseminate geospatial data that does not comply with the applicable standards established under section 757 if the geospatial data was collected, produced, or acquired by the covered agency before the implementation date.

(d) Waiver.

(1) IN GENERAL.—The Chairperson of the Committee may grant a waiver of the limitation under subsection (b), upon a request from a covered agency submitted in accordance with paragraph (2).

(2) REQUIREMENTS.—A request for a waiver under paragraph (1) shall—

(A) be submitted not later than 30 days before the implementation date;

(B) provide a detailed explanation of the reasons for seeking a waiver;

(D) provide the date by which the covered agency shall achieve compliance with the applicable standards established under section 757.

(e) Best Efforts To Comply During Transition.—During the period beginning on the date on which standards for a National Geospatial Data Asset data theme are established under section 757 and ending on the implementation date, each covered agency, to the maximum extent practicable, shall collect, produce, acquire, maintain, and disseminate geospatial data within the National Geospatial Data Asset data theme in accordance with the standards.

SEC. 759B. SAVINGS PROVISION.

Nothing in this subtitle shall repeal, amend, or supersede any existing law unless specifically provided in this subtitle.

SEC. 759C. PRIVATE SECTOR.

The Committee and each covered agency may, to the maximum extent practical, rely upon and use the private sector in the United States for the provision of geospatial data and services.

Passage of the Geospatial Data Act

Posted on 4-October, 2018 | by Jill Saligoe-Simmel, Ph.D.

Reposted from the NSGIC GeoJava News

State Geospatial Policy Organization Lauds “Geospatial Data Act” Language Included in FAA Reauthorization Bill

By Bronwyn Walls | October 3, 2018 | Duluth, MN

Participants at the National States Geographic Information Council (NSGIC) Annual Conference cheered at the news that the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) reauthorization bill passed the Senate this morning.

The legislation contains provisions critical to building the national spatial data infrastructure by establishing a clear vision, assigning responsibility, providing authority and ensuring oversight of federal activities by Congress. The bill includes language previously winding its way through both houses as a standalone bill called the Geospatial Data Act.

“This is a major win for the entire geospatial community. We thank and commend our nation’s lawmakers for enacting this meaningful legislation,” said Dan Ross, geospatial information chief for the state of Minnesota and NSGIC president. “NSGIC members coordinate geospatial policy, technologies, and services across our states. We have the unique perspective of seeing across states – and, together, across the nation – to evaluate the substantial and significant unmet needs stemming from a failure to harness and coordinate efforts. ”

The bill, having cleared both the House and the Senate, will now be sent to the White House to be signed into law.

“The Geospatial Data Act has been a top legislative priority for NSGIC for several years. We have worked with state governments, Congressional offices, federal agencies, and many other stakeholder groups committed to building more resilient communities by ensuring they will have access to the consistent high-quality data they need to do their jobs,” said Molly Schar, NSGIC’s executive director.

“Map-based digital information is critical to government work from transportation to natural resources to homeland security. We need an efficiency and accountability framework to build, sustain, and share geographic data assets for the entire nation,” she said.

The new law will impact the framework data layers and other resources that constitute the national spatial data infrastructure:

Codify the existing executive orders and other guidance documents that direct work by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC)
Provide FGDC with the authority to make other agencies follow existing common sense rules
Provide Congressional oversight over geospatial activities of FGDC members and other agencies
Require reporting that will allow Congress to track progress on the national spatial data infrastructure and ensure funding is spent wisely
Provide a great deal more clout to input developed by the multi-sector membership of the National Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC) and require the FGDC to address NGAC’s concerns — not just dictate what NGAC should work on
Require federal agencies to coordinate and work in partnership with other federal agencies, agencies of state, tribal and local governments, institutions of higher education, and the private sector to efficiently and cost-effectively collect, integrate, maintain, disseminate and preserve geospatial data

“NSGIC and our members are ready to support the implementation of the geospatial provisions of H.R. 302,” said Schar. “We’re looking forward to working with our colleagues in other geospatial organizations, as well as state and federal governments. At the end of the day, this is a law that will exponentially benefit taxpayers.”

IndianaMap Running at 100%

Posted on 15-May, 2015 | by Jill Saligoe-Simmel, Ph.D.

Indiana Geographic Information Office Hits 100% with Data Sharing Project

With a vote of its County Board of Commissioners in early April, Marshall County become the last of ninety-two Indiana Counties to share four critical geospatial data sets with the Indiana Geographic Information Office. This exceptional level of County-State cooperation, and the important statewide data created by the project, validates the concept of a local-to-state-to-national approach to building and maintaining a National Map. Geographic Information System (GIS) technology and data generally, and these four county level data sets in particular, support public safety and economic development, and provide geographic context for a myriad of government policy decisions about everything from natural resources to voting precincts. Beginning in 2008, the Indiana Geographic Office joined with other GIS partners to develop, integrate, and publish the following four statewide geographic data layers using existing county data:

Land Parcels
Address Points (that connect a street address with a geographic coordinate)
Street Centerlines (with street name and address ranges)
Local Administrative Boundaries (such as school and election districts)

With the addition of Marshall County, Indiana has complete statewide coverage of these data, thereby increasing the value and usefulness for all Indiana citizens.

“I love working with Hoosiers!” said Jim Sparks, Indiana’s Geographic Information Officer, a position created by state statute in 2007 and responsible for coordinating GIS across all levels of government, academia, and the private sector. “One-hundred percent voluntary participation in this important County-State project is a testament to our active and engaged Indiana GIS community. We are all working collaboratively to improve the quality of life for Hoosiers by supporting economic development, public safety, transportation, and government and private sector efficiency through the availability of these critical data.”

As a result of the data sharing project, these layers are already being used by the Indiana State Police, Department of Homeland Security, Department of Natural Resources, and the Secretary of State’s office, as well as colleges, universities, the private sector, and the counties from which the data originated.

Public safety was a key incentive for many of the counties to participate in the statewide project. David Vice, Executive Director of the Indiana Integrated Public Safety Commission remarked, “When agencies share data, lives are saved and public offices become more efficient. Sharing data encourages collaboration among agencies, provides for informed decision-making and reduces redundancy of data production. Further, planning and policy groups become better informed, particularly in terms of emergency calls and disaster response. We can be proud that all 92 counties are now sharing their map data, a major milestone that will benefit all Indiana taxpayers.”

These data layers, along with other geographic information are freely available to the public from the IndianaMap (www.IndianaMap.org), a web-based data portal, viewer, and download tool which has demonstrated a 34 to 1 return on investment (http://www.igic.org/projects/indianamap/IndianaMapNews.pdf). Given that 80% or more of government data has a geographic component, it is not surprising that Indiana government agencies, universities, and private sector companies have received significant benefit from the 240-plus layers of publicly available, highly accurate, and current geospatial information offered for viewing and download at the IndianaMap. The data contributed by all 92 Indiana counties adds even more value to the IndianaMap.

The Indiana Geographic Information Office is located within the Indiana Office of Technology and was created by state statute in 2007 to facilitate GIS data cooperation between units of the federal, state, and local governments; integrate GIS data and framework data into a statewide base map; develop and maintain statewide framework data layers; provide public access to GIS data and framework data in locations throughout Indiana; and serve as Geographic Information Officer for state agencies.

The GIS Office contributes to the quality of Indiana as a place to live and work by cultivating statewide geographic information resources (relationships, data and technology) so that individuals and organizations across the state have appropriate access to accurate and relevant geographic information and technology.

www.in.gov/gis

Indianapolis’ Most International Public Schools

Posted on 7-May, 2015 | by Jill Saligoe-Simmel, Ph.D.

Central Indiana is the epicenter of an explosion of English language learners (ELL). Where I live in Nora, our neighborhood elementary school is one of those hit hardest by rapid change. In April, The Star, Chalkbeat Indiana and WFYI Public Media collaborated on a week-long series of articles documenting the impact of the rising ELL population in Indianapolis’ schools. If you are interested to learn more, this well written article provides a back story to where we are today: As immigration reshapes Indianapolis, schools struggle to keep up.

To be sure, there are many interesting questions about the who and the why. But of course my favorite question is, “Where are those schools?” Using CartoDB’s web mapping tools, I created a simple multivariate map that displays the percentage of English language learners (ELL) school population and their relative size of enrollment. It is interesting to see the distribution of these high ELL schools, particularly noting those in Nora and Indy’s west side.

What the map doesn’t show is school performance. A few of the schools in red, those with the very highest ELL population in the state, also demonstrate high achievement. For example, on the west side of Indianapolis, in 2013-14, Carl Wilde School 79 received an “A” as its final letter grade for school accountability from the Indiana Department of Education. This is a school that consistently shows exemplary performance year after year. Nearby, Meredith Nicholson School 96 received a B as its final letter grade, a two letter grade increase from the previous year. With extremely high ELL populations, these school merit further study as examples of successful integration of ELL students without sacrificing school performance.

Support the Geospatial Data Act

Posted on 16-March, 2015 | by Jill Saligoe-Simmel, Ph.D.

UPDATE:
S.1253 – Geospatial Data Act of 2017
https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/1253 ##

The Geospatial Data Act of 2015 was introduced in Congress today. This bipartisan bill will go a long way toward correcting inadequacies of the federal government regarding management geospatial data and National Spatial Data Infrastructure. This bill was assigned to a congressional committee, which will consider it before possibly sending it on to the House or Senate as a whole.

Geospatial professionals can support the Geospatial Data Act by contacting your senators and congressional representatives today to let them know why the Act is important both to your state and the nation, and if possible to offer your expertise helping them interpret the technical aspects of the Act.

— —

Date: Monday, March 16, 2015
Subject: JOINT RELEASE: Hatch, Warner Introduce Bipartisan Geospatial Data Act

UNITED STATES SENATE

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

March 16, 2015

Media Contacts:
Matt Whitlock (Hatch): 202-228-0210
Rachel Cohen (Warner): 202-228-6884

JOINT RELEASE – Hatch, Warner Introduce Bipartisan Geospatial Data Act

Washington, D.C.— U.S. Senators Orrin Hatch, R-UT, and John Warner, D-VA, issued the following statements after introducing the bipartisan Geospatial Data Act.

Sen. Hatch said, “The federal government wastes vast amounts of taxpayer dollars by not properly managing and coordinating our federal investments in geospatial data. This commonsense legislation will improve coordination, reduce duplication, and promote data transparency.”

“Geospatial data has endless possibilities for transforming both the private and public sectors — from helping local governments develop emergency preparedness plans to fueling the creation of apps that let you find parking spots, restaurants, and even homes for sale based on where you’re standing,” said Sen. Warner. “The federal government is the largest purchaser of geospatial data but some very basic questions about how and where agencies are already investing in this data can’t be answered. Our bill would bring transparency and accountability to the collection of this data and ensure that taxpayer dollars are not being wasted on duplicative efforts.”

Shelby D. Johnson, President of the National States Geographic Information Council (NSGIC) said, “People believe that the United States of America has a robust system of maps and digital data. We don’t, but we should. The federal government was never given the tools to do the job right. This Act is a good step toward solving the problems, and our members strongly support it. We also applaud Senator Hatch and Senator Warner for their foresight in dealing with this problem.”

Matthew Chase, executive director of the National Association of Counties, said, “GIS data is an important tool for counties when it comes to making land use decisions, maintaining infrastructure, and responding to emergencies. We support this bill because counties need accurate, modern mapping data to perform key duties and deliver services to their residents. We commend Senators Hatch and Warner for introducing this legislation and urge their colleagues to join them in supporting it.

Background

Geospatial data is the information that identifies the geographic location and characteristics of natural or constructed features, such as wells, roads, or forests. The federal government has recognized the need to organize and coordinate the collection and management of this data since at least 1990, when the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) most recently revised Circular A-16 to establish the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and to promote the coordinated use, sharing, and dissemination of geospatial data nationwide. Unfortunately the progress made over the last two decades has been inadequate. The federal government needs to improve management of geospatial data across the board.

The Geospatial Data Act will codify and strengthen OMB Circular A-16 and require federal agencies to implement international consensus standards, assist in eliminating duplication, avoid redundant expenditures, accelerate the development of electronic government to meet the needs and expectations of citizens and agency programmatic mandates, and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of public management.

Additionally, the bill will provide a clear definition for geospatial data and metadata, will require an accounting of the costs associated with the acquisition or creation of geospatial data, and will improve government transparency and availability to public information.

Following requests from Senators Hatch, Warner, Risch, and Carper, the Government Accountability Office recently published their third report on the issue, entitled “Geospatial Data—Progress Needed on Identifying Expenditures, Building and Utilizing a Data Infrastructure, and Reducing Duplicative Efforts.” The report outlined the intrinsic value of geospatial data, and recommended various measures for better coordination of geospatial activities.

Report Card on the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI)

Posted on 12-February, 2015 | by Jill Saligoe-Simmel, Ph.D.

The Coalition of Geospatial Organizations (COGO) announces the release of its Report Card on the U.S. National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) that depicts the condition and performance of the nation’s geospatial “infrastructure” which includes surveyed, mapped and remotely-sensed information.

This initial Report Card by the Coalition of Geospatial Organizations (COGO) is a qualitative assessment of the status of the Framework data components of that program. This evaluation specifically examines the status of the seven data themes that serve as the backbone required by users to conduct most mapping and geospatial analysis tasks. While Framework data have been collected and made available for use over the past two decades, a digital geospatial Framework that is national in scope, is not yet in place and may never exist. Based on the following analysis, the overall grade assigned to the comprehensive NSDI Framework is C-.

The clear objective of the NSDI was to create a dependable utility that would provide accurate, consistent, and current data to all users. The goals of the program were to:

• Reduce duplication of effort among agencies.

• Improve the quality of data and reduce costs related to the acquisition of geographic information.

• Make geographic data more accessible to the public.

• Increase the benefits of using available data.

• Establish key partnerships with states, counties, cities, tribal nations, academia, and the private sector, to increase the availability of geographic data.

The NSDI includes a number of connected components, including the technology, policies, standards, and human resources necessary to acquire, process, store, distribute, and improve the utilization of geospatial data. However, the cornerstone of the program is a common digital base map that would aggregate the best representations of fundamental data from all levels of government.

In light of the two decade history of the NSDI, and this realistic assessment of the current situation, the Expert Panel concludes that the Framework requires attention, and that several actions need to take place:

The concept of the Framework needs to be reaffirmed.
A new model for Framework data needs to be adopted, and this new model must acknowledge the importance of local partners.
The Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) needs to emphasize that the Framework is part of its Strategic Plan, and that it will work in collaboration with non-federal and non-governmental partners to build an effective NSDI Framework.

Bossler, Dr. John D., Dr. David J. Cowen, James E. Geringer, Susan Carson Lambert, John J. Moeller, Thomas D. Rust, Robert T. Welch. Report Card on the U.S. National Spatial Data Infrastructure – Compiled for the Coalition of Geospatial Organizations. February 6, 2015.

National GIS Inventory

Posted on 9-January, 2015 | by Jill Saligoe-Simmel, Ph.D.

The GIS Inventory is a system maintained by the National States Geographic Information Council (NSGIC) as a tool for the entire GIS Community. It allows users to quickly search for GIS data to meet their business requirements. It also helps government agencies to effectively coordinate and build Spatial Data Infrastructures.

Its primary purpose is to track data availability and the status of geographic information system (GIS) implementation in state and local governments to aid the planning and building of statewide spatial data infrastructures (SSDI). The system moves its FGDC-compliant metadata (CSDGM Standard) for each data layer to a web folder and a Catalog Service for the Web (CSW) that can be harvested by Federal programs and others. This provides far greater opportunities for discovery of your information.

The GIS Inventory (a.k.a. “Ramona”) was originally created in 2006 by NSGIC under award NA04NOS4730011 from the Coastal Services Center, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. The Department of Homeland Security has been the principal funding source since 2008 and they have supported the development of subsequent versions. Currently, funding is being provided through DHS contract HSHQDC-12-00104. The Federal Emergency Management Agency and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration have provided additional resources to maintain and improve the GIS Inventory.

The GIS Inventory is maintained by individual users that document their own organizational information and data holdings. The National Cadastral Inventory is maintained by key cadastral contacts in each state to support their unique business requirements. The long-term goal is to merge both systems to provide even better services and features for their users.

As a former Board Member of the National States Geographic Information Council, Jill Saligoe-Simmel helped conceptualize this nationwide project and secure initial grant funding. Project design, requirements assessment and management at various stages by BurGIS LLC, Saligoe-Simmel LLC, A.J. Wortley and Fairview Industries. Jill continues to provide technical assistance to the project. GIS Inventory website, system, and database design by RunSkip, LLC.

IndianaMap Awarded First Prize at FOSS4G for Open Data

Posted on 9-September, 2014 | by Jill Saligoe-Simmel, Ph.D.

The IndianaMap was awarded first place at the 2014 FOSS4G, September 11, 2014 Portland, Oregon.

The IndianaMap is composed of over 300 laters of open geospatial data. It was recently recognized as a “Notable Document” by the American Library Association and serves as an example of local, regional, and state data sharing. Web Feature Services are harvested monthly from counties and assembled as statewide layers distributed through the IndianaMap. The data partnership has resulted in nearly statewide coverage of parcels, address points, local jurisdiction boundaries, and street centerlines where data stewardship remains at the local authoritative level.

The IndianaMap won in the category of best open source data integration:

16 notable maps were called out in 8 different categories.

Best open source data integration. Awarded to the map which makes the most innovative use of open source data. the map need not use a wide variety of sources or be entirely composed of open data sources but the open source component must be well marshaled, purposeful and a core component of the final map.

View the IndianaMap

IndianaMap submission by Justin Peters (Indiana Geological Survey), Indiana Geographic Information Council, State of Indiana GIO.

Building a National Data Sharing Infrastructure

Posted on 18-August, 2014 | by Jill Saligoe-Simmel, Ph.D.

In March, 2014, URISA published the first in what is intended to be a series of occasional GIS Management Institute® discussion papers. “A Distributed Model for Effective National Geospatial Data Management: Building a National Data Sharing Infrastructure,” by Jim Sparks (State of Indiana GIO), Philip Worrall (Indiana Geographic Information Council Executive Director), and Kevin Mickey (Indiana University Polis Center Geospatial Education Director).

While Indiana’s history with building a spatial data infrastructure has been short relative to several other’s, its track record is impressive. In the late 1990’s the Federal Geographic Data Committee awarded a small grant to a small group of likeminded GIS professionals in Indiana in hopes of starting something – anything really – to boost GIS coordination in the state. The 2000’s brought sweeping change, including developing a not-for-profit council, voluntary standards, GIS data sharing and metadata initiatives, statewide data collection programs, multi-level governmental support, and instituting the IndianaMap. In 2009, the IndianaMap partners quietly released the first view of a multi-county parcel database. Today the IndianaMap hosts and freely delivers the nearly complete framework – map data sourced from local agencies – along with dozens of other statewide and regional data sets (more than 230 layers of GIS data, Indiana Geological Survey). These data are served for viewing and free download to the public and rolled-up all the way to the federal level into The National Map.

This important paper examines a number of impediments to effective data development and data sharing and offer solutions that reflect the employment of effective coordination, carefully directed funding, and the application of current information technology tools and strategies. It summarizes the best practices that the authors believe should be applied nationwide to maintain local control of processes while achieving the broad goals of the National Map. The authors provide a summary of how Indiana has met one of its biggest challenges over the years – how to create a viable, sustainable technical data collection, storage, and distribution infrastructure and the human resources to manage and maintain it.

While the NSDI concept has spanned decades, the realization of a nationwide local-to-statewide-to-national NSDI has been elusive. This paper presents case studies from across the nation. It evaluates what practices have proven to work, and also those that have proven not to work. With it, we may yet get closer to realizing an NSDI.

Read the full paper here.