Ms Schutzberg has also written a wrap-up of the conference for Directions Magazine. NSGIC MidYear Wrap Up: Frustration in Annapolis, published today, outlines some of the major issues discussed at the conference. While I was initially disheartened by the title, I can't fault Adena's reporting, and I was glad to see, and agree with, her conclusion:
What I conclude from these few days is not that the geospatial communities at the federal or state level or within the two organizations represented (NSGIC and MAPPS) are failures. I conclude that there are more geospatial pieces than ever that state and federal government and private industry must coordinate and track as geospatial becomes more pervasive in our world. That fact, along with my frustration, ironically, is a measure of the geospatial community's success in spreading the word about the value of our data and technology.
We learned the winners of CAP grants in two categories at the start of the NSGIC Mid-Year conference in Annapolis. Alabama, Alaska, Massachusetts, Mississippi, and Ohio received grants in Category 3 to develop strategic and business plans. Hawaii, Idaho, Maine, New York and Washington DC received grants in Category 4 to start implementing business plans.
Four of the remaining five CAP grant categories have been announced:
Category 1 (Metadata Trainer and Outreach Assistance)
Champaign County (IL) Regional Planning Commission
Marshall University
National Association of Regional Councils
Westat, Inc.
Category 2 (Framework Data Exchange through Automated Geo-Synchronization)
Indiana Geographic Information Council
Arkansas Geographic Information Office, with Carbon Project
New Hampshire Geological Survey, with CubeWerx USA
Category 6 (FGDC Standards Development and Implementation Assistance and Outreach)
The Association of State Wetland Managers, Inc.
California Emergency Management Association
Category 7 (Demonstration of Geospatial Data Partnerships across Local, State, Tribal, and Federal Government)
Minnesota Geospatial Information Office
Eastern Carolina Council of Governments
MassGIS - Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs
State of Oregon
Awards in Category 5 (Return on Investment (ROI) Methodology and Business Case Development for Multi-agency NSDI Projects) have not yet been announced.
Test Your Broadband Speed, Be Part of a National Picture
New FCC GIO Mike Byrne announced an on-line poll/application to test broadband speeds when he spoke at the NSGIC Midyear Conference in Annapolis, Maryland, this week. That application went live on the FCC's Broadband.gov site yesterday.
The application records a tester's location and then runs one of two existing speed-testing tools. The key part for the FCC is the tester's location; they will use the test results, and the geographic locations, as part of their larger task of mapping just what the nation's broadband capacity is, and where that capacity exists.
Broadband connection testing isn’t new, and is freely available online, but this might mark the first time that individual tests help to lead to informed policy making.
The FCC has also released mobile apps for iPhone and Android (search for FCC at your App Store) to allow smartphone users to test from where-ever they happen to be.
Michael Terner, of NSGIC sponsor Applied Geographics, tweeted his mobile test results from Boston this morning:
Downloaded FCC's broadband speed test app for Android. My downtown Boston loc doesn't have 3G. .05 mbps DOWN; 2.54 mbps UP. #nsgicmidyear
Aside from the collected twitterings of the NSGIC MidYear, there are several other versions of reporting from the event. We wrote-up Monday, March 8, while on location. This post is an attempt, a day-later and back at the home office, to do the same for March 9.
March 9 was largely dedicated to a joint session with the Management Association for Private Photogrammetric Surveyors (MAPPS) focused on reports from federal agencies. Links below are to reporting on the event from Directions Magazine's All Points Blog.
Another panel included three federal agency GIOs -- from the Department of the Interior, USDA, and EPA. One panel member noted that it is unusual to have three federal GIOs sit down together. (It's probably not a good thing for them to not get together).
A third panel comprised the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's National Ocean Service, the Census Bureau, the Corps of Engineers, and the Department of Transportation.
In the late afternoon, MAPPS and NSGIC split up into separate meetings and the NSGIC crew tried out a few "ignite-style" presentations and had more detailed discussions with a handful of federal agencies -- Census, USDA, and USGS -- with whom they often work.
It's no secret that the NSGIC members are, for the most part, geeky people who love to play with the latest information technology toys. So it's also no surprise that a significant -- and growing -- minority are tweeting.
There was twitter-discussion going on at the 2009 Annual Conference, but the 2010 MidYear Conference saw a new high-tide of tweeting as attendees and some following from home used the hashtag #nsgicmidyear to communicate during the three main days of the event in Annapolis, Maryland.
Who was tweeting? There were a total of 462 tagged tweets among 67 different twitter users (through about 9:00 a.m., March 10). Here are the top ten most active:
Several state GIS coordinators were moved to join twitter during the conference. Also, as the volume of mid-year tweets built, we started to see a few interlopers -- mostly other hotels in the area eager to put themselves forward for future conference locations. More helpfully, there were folks interested in GIS and spatial data governance chiming in from time to time.
We learned this week that Michael Byrne has left his post as GIO in California and taken up the challenge of being GIO at the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). This is good for the FCC and not great for California; Michael is a high-quality fellow. We hope to keep him connected with us in NSGIC, but we wish him well in his new post.
Of course, this means that California is in the market for a new GIO. Unfortunately, the job posting is only open for a short time. It closes on Wednesday, March 10.
We're lucky enough to be covered this year by Adena Schutzberg, of Directions Media's All Points Blog. Several of the links here are to her coverage.
Meanwhile, a healthy minority of attendees have been tweeting their thoughts with the hashtag #nsgicmidyear, providing a running commentary. And I have made my own notes (such as they are) available using Google documents.
In the afternoon, we heard an update on the broadband mapping project from new FCC GIO Mike Byrne (the former California GIS coordinator) and Anne Neville of the National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
Members of the Corporate Leadership Council gave a series of lightning talks outlining some of the new technologies that we'll be looking at in coming years. several members had some very exciting mobile LiDAR and similar 3D technologies to show.
The Midyear meeting will continue on Tuesday with a joint session between NSGIC and the Management Association for Private Photogrammetric Surveyors (MAPPS).
Nine States and Washington DC Receive FGDC "50 States" CAP Grants
Nine states and the District of Columbia have been awarded grants for strategic and business planning under the 2010 CAP Grant program from the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). The awards are under two categories from the 2010 CAP Grant program that are focused on the 50 States Initiative: Category 3 (Strategic and Business Plan Development) and Category 4 (Business Plan Development and Implementation).
Category 3 Recipients
With strong political support from their Governor, the Alabama GIS community is ready to use a Strategic Plan to move forward.
GIS professionals in Alaska note that their state is less well-mapped than the Moon. They will use their grant to start developing standards and partnerships to acquire new base map data.
Massachusetts has already developed a strategic plan. They will use their grant to develop a statewide base map, based on local tax maps and working closely with municipal governments.
In Mississippi the response to, and recovery from, Hurricane Katrina showed clearly the need to good statewide GIS data, and gaps in that data for the state. They will use their grant to start bridging those gaps.
Ohio will use their grant to develop standards and ways to work together among state and local government agencies.
Category 4 Recipients
Washington DC has completed a strategic plan and will use their grant to develop a business plan to take the next steps and adapt to a changing geospatial industry.
In Hawaii, the state GIS council will build on its strategic plan and business plan by focusing stakeholder efforts on the orthoimagery framework data layer -- assessing statewide assets and needs, and working across sectors to develop statewide standards.
In Idaho, the strategic plan calls for regional user-groups to organize statewide data in regional segments, The southeast GIS user group will use their grant to develop that new idea and blaze the way for the other regions.
The strategic plan developed in Maine suggested a project to develop a statewide cadastral data set based on local government efforts supported by the statewide GIS community. They will use their grant for a pilot project in a representative county.
The state of New York will also use their grant to build on a cadastral data concept developed as part of their strategic plan. The will explore ways to integrate data from many local governments and share that data at a state level.
Representatives from all of these states, DC, and from states that have been funded for strategic planning in the past, have gathered for a pre-conference workshop as part of the NSGIC Mid-Year meeting in Annapolis. Starting at 8:30 a.m. on Sunday, March 7, the workshop will review strategic and business planning processes and the states will share lessons-learned, ideas, and goals.
Sunday afternoon there will be a states-only caucus meeting to talk about issues of importance to state GIS coordinators and prepare for joint meetings with federal and private-sector partners. On Sunday evening, there will be meetings of several committees and working groups, including the group now focused on stimulus-funded broadband mapping projects.
Monday: State and Federal Cooperation
On Monday morning, the main speaker for the opening session will be the head of the State of Maryland’s StateStat office. Maryland has pioneered the use of GIS tools and spatial data as a performance-measurement and management tool. They call it StateStat. We’ll also hear updates on several NSGIC-inspired “For the Nation” data projects, an overview of the Department of Homeland Security’s Virtual USA information-sharing initiative, and a discussion of how we can use social media tools to improve coordination and communication.
At Lunchtime on Monday, there will be an informal gathering of the coastal states that make up the NSGIC Coastal Caucus to talk about the NOAA Digital Coast project.
In the afternoon, we plan to hear updates from the Federal Communications Commission’s new GIO, from the National Telecommunications and Information Administration (on broadband mapping), from the Congressional Research Service, and from leaders of the National Geospatial Advisory Council.
We’ll also hear from a number of leaders in the geospatial industry on new technologies and offerings from the private sector.
Tuesday: Joint Meeting with MAPPS
Tuesday will be dedicated to a joint meeting with the members of the Management Association for Private Photogrammetric Surveyors (MAPPS) who include many important partners of the state GIS coordinators. The joint session will focus on updates from a number of federal agencies, including the US Census Bureau, Homeland security, the National Geospatial Intelligence Agency, FEMA, USDA, USGS, EPA, the Army Corps of Engineers, Transportation, and NOAA.
In the late afternoon, we plan to try a new thing: an Ignite session. Ignite is a style of short, sharp, quick presentations designed to get to the point and cut out extraneous power-point bloat. Those who were lucky enough to attend the University of Delaware’s Geospatial Research Day, back in November, got a taste of this approach. Several NSGIC folks have been eager to try an Ignite-style session for some time. So we’re pretty excited about this.
Closing out the afternoon will be a roll-call of federal agency representatives and a closing state caucus session. In the evening, along with several committee meetings, will be a NSGIC Board meeting.
Wednesday: On Capitol Hill
For those state GIS Coordinators who can do so, Wednesday is set aside for visiting with their state’s congressional delegations or staff on Capitol Hill. Others will attend a briefing on the Homeland Security Information Program (HSIP).
NSGIC President Will Craig (of Minnesota) has been asked to testify on Wednesday morning before the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition, and Forestry. He’ll be speaking about the National Agriculture Imagery Program (NAIP).
Taken as a whole, it will be a busy few days. Watch the NSGIC News blog and the @NSGIC twitter account for updates. You may want to monitor the #nsgicmidyear hashtag as well; there are a number of active tweeters among the NSGIC crowd and the #nsgicmidyear back-channel discussion can be fairly interesting.
NSGIC Member, and Some Friends, Found Among GovTech's "Top 25"
Long time NSGIC member Eric Swanson (Michigan) is among the Top 25 Doers, Dreamers and Drivers for 2010 selected by the editors of Government Technology magazine. Each march, the magazine fociuses on 25 people who"cut through the public sector's infamous barriers to innovation -- tight budgets, organizational inertia, politics as usual, etc. -- to reshape government operations for the better."
Eric Swanson is noted for his work at Michigan's Center for Shared Solutions and Technology Partnerships.
The center's mission is "to transform government with IT being the catalyst, fostering collaboration across government lines," and Swanson and his team have worked hard to make that possible over the years.
Among the rest of the Top 25 are a number of friends of NSGIC and state and local technology leaders who have helped state GIS coordination along the way. They include:
Utah CTO David Fletcher -- According to Bert Granberg, and Matt Peters, of Utah, Mr. Fletcher is "a great champion of GIS and is very supportive of AGRC." They add that he is working on location based services for state and local government in Utahand has spearheaded the drive for a data.utah.gov portal.
Virginia deputy secretary of technology Karen Jackson -- Virginia's Dan Widner reports that Ms. Jackson is leading the charge on Broadband in Virginia and is doing some great behind the scenes work with the industry and the feds on “connectivity” issues.
Colorado CIO Mike Locatis -- I thought I must have met Mr. Locatis at some point, but itr turns out that I have simply heard him mentioned whenever Jon Gottsegen speaks about success at GIS Coordination in Colorado. Thet wo apparently have worked closely together.
Beth Noveck, of the Obama Administration, is well-known among the NSGIC community for her spearheading of government transparency initiatives.
The following is a guest post from Tim De Troy (SC) and Bill Burgess (Washington Liaison) who represent NSGIC in the Digital Coast Partnership. The Digital Coast Partnership, led by the NOAA Coastal Services Center, is intended to be an information delivery system to efficiently serve not only data, but also the training, tools, and examples needed to turn data into useful information for the coastal states.
The Coastal Inundation Toolkit
The Coastal Inundation Toolkit has continued to evolve with many new materials provided by the partners. In addition, County Snapshots are now complete for the continental United States and Hawaii. But please note that some counties are missing. The data does not exist for these counties and it may be quite some time before the missing counties are included.
One example of a new resource in the Toolkit is an issue brief from the National Association of Counties (NACO) — Building Resilient Coastal Communities: Counties and the Digital Coast (PDF). Other members of the Partnership, such as The Nature Conservancy (TNC) and the Association of State Flood Plain Managers (ASFPM) have also added new materials to the Toolkit.
Land Cover Atlas
A great new land cover tool has been released. It is the C-CAP Land Cover Atlas. When you launch the viewer, it allows you to go to any coastal county to see how land cover has changed over time between the identified classes. It also allows you to obtain a written report of the changes by clicking on the “Stats and Downloads” tab next to the image area. With a little practice, we’re sure your coastal managers will find this to be a very valuable tool.
Training Opportunities
Habitat Priority Planner Web Demonstrations — The Habitat Priority Planner is a GIS-based decision support tool that helps to identify priority locations for conservation and restoration planning. Web demonstrations that highlight the tool’s functionality are offered on the last Monday of each month. To sign up, send an e-mail to nos.csc.hpp@noaa.gov.
CanVis Virtual Workshops — CanVis is a visual simulation tool that enables users to add objects to images in order to visualize impacts of future management decisions. Virtual workshops are offered the third Wednesday of each month. The workshops provide an introduction to CanVis with hands-on activities. Register by e-mailing nos.csc.canvis@noaa.gov.
Introduction to N-SPECT Training — Land use professionals use the Nonpoint-Source Pollution and Erosion Comparison Tool (N-SPECT) to investigate potential water quality impacts from land use and land cover changes, including development, and from environmental disturbances such as storms and climate change. The hands-on GIS-based workshop will cover how N-SPECT is commonly used, relay helpful tips, and give participants the opportunity to ask questions. Advance registration is required as seating is limited. Visit the N-SPECT training page to learn more. The next session is scheduled for April 15, 2010.
Editor’s Note: In addition, we are told that there is a planned Digital Coast session at the 2010 National Planning Conference (April 10 – 13, in New Orleans). All of the members of the Partnership will be represented. And Miki Schmidt of the Coastal Services Center will be a featured Keynote Speaker at the 2010 Delaware GIS Conference, March 30, in Dover, Delaware.
Ian Von Essen, of the state of Washington, is now a member of the NSGIC Board of Directors. He was Appointed by NSGIC President Will Craig and approved by the Board at their February 23, 2010, meeting to complete the term of California's Michael Byrne, who has stepped down to take a job in Washington DC.
Mr. Von Essen, who is on the Washington Geographic Information Council (WAGIC), works for Spokane County and brings a fine balance of local and state government viewpoints that will add to the mix in NSGIC Board discussions. He currently serves as Chair-Elect for WAGIC and will become that group's Chair in June of this year. This will be his fifth term as WAGIC Chair since 2000.
The NSGIC Board term that Mr. Von Essen has been appointed to ends this fall when the seat is up for re-election at the 2010 NSGIC Annual Conference, in Minneapolis, Minnesota.
The President's budget for USGS proposes a $3.5 million cut in the National Geospatial Program. This cut means the loss of 13 state liaisons. With some liaison serving more than one state, this could affect one-third of the states.
"The USGS liaisons have provided the best single conduit for partnerships between the states and the Federal government," said NSGIC President Will Craig in a letter to the leaders of the House Appropriations Subcommittee that will be the first to review the President's budget.
The budget cut will also reduce federal partnership dollars that have leveraged significant investment in state and local data development projects. Craig went on to say, "If anything, we request that Congress significantly increase these partnership dollars, not cut them."
Craig is urging NSGIC members and friends to contact their Members of Congress, especially in the House and Senate Appropriations Committees. "Tell them about the value of the USGS liaisons and partnership funds. States need these resources."
The latest agenda for the Midyear meeting has been posted to NSGIC 2010 Midyear web page. Although there may be last minute changes, this agenda is finalized at this time.
Registration for the Midyear remains open. Please visit the NSGIC website to download a copy of the registration brochure or access the online registration page.
We’ve been able to get an extension on the cut-off date at the Loews Annapolis Hotel! The hotel will continue to offer the NSGIC discounted rate of $120 per night until Wednesday, February 24th. This is the approved Federal Government Per Diem rate. Don’t wait to make your reservations. Call the hotel directly at (410) 263-7777 to make your reservation and be sure to ask for the NSGIC group rate. Be sure to call before February 22nd, as this rate will NOT be available after that date.
Registration for the 2010 Midyear Conference is available. Please visit the NSGIC website (http://www.nsgic.org/events/2010_midyear.cfm) to download a copy of the registration brochure or access the online registration page.
As always, please don’t hesitate to contact me if you should need any additional information. I’m looking forward to seeing all of you in Annapolis!
Tony Spicci Tony.Spicci@mdc.mo.gov 573.882.9909 ext 3295
A workshop on Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI) was held in Herndon VA, January 12-13. The workshop was sponsored by USGS with a goal of exploring the potential use of VGI as part of The National Map.
Some fascinating presentations were made by people who use VGI for gathering and sharing information: folks from Open Street Map, Wikimedia, and the Library of Congress. Their Point Presentations and notes from the meeting are now available as part of the Workshop Results.
Will Craig, NSGIC president, attended the conference and facilitated the breakout section on Business Perspectives - what does it take to organize and administer a VGI? He comments on the workshop:
I was fascinated by the energy in the room. Many folks were eager to get started NOW. "Jump in with both feet. People will forgive you if you make a mistake. Seize the day." Others worried about costs, administrative issues, and losing credibility.
Unfortunately a presentation by Muki Haklay, University College London, is not among the PPTs. He analyzed VGI quality compared to the Ordnance Survey authoritative street maps and found very high levels of alignment.
Local governments and states have geographic information they'd like to volunteer to The National Map. That is the real vision of the NSDI. NSGIC would love to see procedures in place to accept our VGI.
Update (2/15/10): Haklay's work comparing Open Street Maps to Ordnance Survey Maps can be found on-line (courtesy Adena Schutzberg, Directions Magazine)
This draft is the result of five years of work by the URISA Address Standard Working Group (ASWG), an effort that has been watched and supported by many in NSGIC and the larger GIS community, including NSGIC President Will Craig, of Minnesota, who helped lead a NSGIC Address Work Group. The need for national address data is part of the current NSGIC Advocacy Agenda (PDF).
Will Craig notes that Ed Wells, from URISA, was a member of the NSGIC working group and was a leader in developing the draft standard.
We early-on recognized that it would be hard open the Census Bureau's Master Address File (MAF) for public use to fulfill our need for a nation-wide address resource. Title 13 of the US Code and Census Bureau sensitivities would require an act of Congress to overcome. If we are going to have a nation-wide address resource, it will be build from the ground up by cities and counties.
To make it work nation-wide, we need this standard. I am delighted to see it delivered to the FGDC for formal review. I trust the review will be quick and thorough. We need this now.
The following is a guest-post from national metadata advocate Lynda Wayne. In January, she put out a request to the NSGIC Community for input on her project to document "a set of practical measures to encourage/facilitate data sharing." This was part of an effort to assist to Dr. Tim De Troye and the Geospatial Administrators Association of South Carolina (GAASC) in developing the Process Framework for Developing Local Government Data Access Policies document (shared by Tim on this blog in January) and to add some "real world" content to a follow-up SC GIS conference presentation and discussion. Here is what she found out.
Issue: Variable Data Sharing Agreements
Data sharing agreements vary greatly in their complexity, effectiveness and requirements. When trying to share data among multiple organizations, managing differences and conflicts among agreements can be overwhelming.
What works:
Handshakes making share Admin is on board
Collaboratively developed, effective, standardized data sharing agreements
What doesn’t:
Formal agreements because they typically include imprecise language that can serve as road blocks and add unnecessary overhead to the effort
Over-involvement on the part of Administration and Legal personnel that leads to overly burdensome language in an effort to cover all the bases and possible scenarios
Issue: Missing or Out of Date Data Documentation
If data are not well-documented then they cannot be applied as fully or appropriately and competing/conflicting data sets can emerge.
What works:
Providing metadata creation, review and management support in return for data access
Support for a community-wide metadata training and support organization/resource
What doesn’t:
Trying to create metadata by guessing at how the data were created
Issue: Maintaining Personal Privacy and Public Safety
Data developers have an obligation to protect the privacy and safety of their constituents.
What works:
Utilizing the FGDC Guidelines(PDF) as to what data should be shared
Utilize available standards (e.g. URISA/FGDC Addressing standard) that address privacy and security issues
Generalizing data such that non-sensitive content is still available
Public Record Laws and ‘policies from above’ that explicitly include geospatial data and establish clear guidelines as to who can access the data and how to request access
Recognizing that very little data is truly ‘sensitive’
What doesn’t:
Wholesale approaches that eliminate sharing of all ‘potentially’ sensitive data
Over-involvement on the part of Administration and Legal personnel that attempt to cover all the bases
Issue: Maintaining Control of the Data
Data, like any resources, is subject to personal, professional and/or political control issues.
What works:
Earnest dialog to identify precise concerns and brainstorm on innovative solutions
Data management models that allow the use of data that is maintained in your system
Data steward / trusted source models
What doesn’t:
Treating public data as a private resource
Issue: Data Misuse and Exploitation
Once data is in the hands of others in can be inappropriately applied or resold for profit.
What works:
Metadata, metadata, metadata that includes valid ‘Use Constraints’, ‘Distribution Liability’ and ‘Purpose’ statements
Clear, not ‘legalese’, explanation of license/copyright requirements and mandatory acknowledgement by the consumer
Making data freely accessible so that consumers easily use current version rather than trying to milk the older data
What doesn’t:
Stifling the use of data in new and innovative ways – if somebody makes a product somebody else is willing to pay for that drives the economy and enterprise.
Issue: Reduced Capacity and Infrastructure to Support Data Serving and Exchange
Most organizations have a mission to serve their own constituents and are staffed/resourced specifically to that mission.
What works:
Money - especially if designated to build and maintain data sharing capacity – new data collection, hardware, software, training
A simplified process that adds no burden to the data provider
Documenting the return on investment that data sharing can yield to warrant capacity building
What doesn’t:
One time payments for data that are not targeted to capacity growth
What say you, gentle readers? Feel free to add any thoughts in the comments section.
NSGIC is making progress on the goals set out in its 2009 - 2011 Strategic Plan. An updated version of the plan(PDF) has been posted on the NSGIC web site. It includes the findings of a team tasked by the NSGIC Board to review the plan and measure progress, so far, on all 23 goals in the plan.
The group used a 4-point scoring criteria, ranging from 0, for goals which are no longer relevant and that the group felt should be dropped, to 3, for goals that have been met.
Three of the goals were judged to be no longer relevant. Four others were found to have limited progress, so far. Of the remaining 16 goals, good progress was found on nine and seven others have already been met.
"Over two-thirds of the goals are met or are progressing well," writes NSGIC President Will Craig, of Minnesota, in a cover letter. "Adjusting for the three goals the team recommended dropping, the level of good progress amounts to 80 percent."
But, he added, "That still leaves significant work to be done."
The review was officially adopted by the Board at its November 24, 2009 meeting.
The following is stolen shamelessly from an e-mail from USGS Metadata Guru Sharon Shin, who gives credit to National Metadata Champion Lynda Wayne (and family): Metadata in the Movies!
It seems Lynda and her family watched the movie Beyond a Reasonable Doubt the other day and, as Sharon puts it, "there is a scene that made her sit up straight – two very nerdy guys discuss metadata and image pattern recognition."
It's more than that. The scene has a small sample of dialogue that all (conscientious) GIS pros have found themselves reciting at some point, though not in a major motion picture and not (at least for me, so far) in the service of solving crimes.
By the way, if you plan to watch this film sometime, don't watch this clip. It contains a spoiler.
