Building the Geospatial Platform Status Update and Discussion NGAC Meeting September 22, 2010

2 Overview IntroductionAnne Miglarese8:45 – 8:55 Geospatial Platform UpdateKaren Siderelis8:55 – 9:15 Discussion Topics: - Managing Partner - Intergovernmental Coordination Steve Wallach Jerry Johnston 9:15 – 9:50 9:50 – 10:30 BREAK10:30 – 11:00 Discussion Topics, cont’d: - Stakeholder EngagementStephen Lowe11:00 – 11:30 Panel DiscussionFGDC ExCom11:30 – 12:00

3 June NGAC Meeting Platform Roadmap V2 distributed to NGAC for review. 10 individual members provided comments; 120 individual comments received Reviews by NGAC subcommittees: Emerging Technologies  Review of Shared Data, Services and Apps; Infrastructure; and Segment Architecture Governance  Review of governance and metrics approaches Partnerships  Review of business model approaches Platform  Compiled comments from all NGAC members

4 Geospatial Platform NGAC Platform Subcommittee Comments 1) Who is the audience for this document? State it and stick to it. 2) Be aggressive, be forward looking. What will be different in 5 years? In 10? 3) Considerable comment on the roles of state/locals – how are they to be incentivized? How do they get a meaningful seat at the governance table? 4) What is the role of the private sector? Why should they get involved? 5) Questions about the role of and eventual home of the Platform Managing Partner – More focus on the authority and role of the MP is required. 6) Funding and business model sections seem to be agreed upon as a good start, but many pointed out the complexities and difficulties that lie ahead 7) Questions about existing initiatives and their relationship to the Platform 8) Management tools – change management, content management, customer relations management… Need to ensure we are leveraging best approaches 9) Generally… could stand to be a little more positive in tone (not stressing redundancy and wastefulness in intro, stressing incentives over enforcing compliance throughout document)

5 NGAC Resolution The NGAC approved the following resolution at the June 2010 NGAC meeting: “The NGAC endorses the Geospatial Platform concept as described in the Platform Roadmap and encourages the Administration, along with federal agency leadership, to adopt, support, and implement this initiative in partnership with State, local, regional and Tribal governments.”

Building the Geospatial Platform Status Update Karen Siderelis

7 Call to Action "In 2010 and 2011, Federal data managers for geospatial data will move to a portfolio management approach, creating a Geospatial Platform to support Geospatial One-Stop, place-based initiatives, and other potential future programs. This transformation will be facilitated by improving the governance framework to address the requirements of State, local and tribal agencies, Administration policy, and agency mission objectives. Investments will be prioritized based on business needs. The Geospatial Platform will explore opportunities for increased collaboration with Data.gov, with an emphasis on reuse of architectural standards and technology, ultimately increasing access to geospatial data." President’s Budget, Fiscal Year 2011

8 Respond to FY2011 President’s Budget Direction to develop a Modernization Roadmap to implement the Geospatial Platform Roadmap Purpose: Define geospatial platform and establish vision and purpose Describe future state technology architecture Identify processes and organization elements to ensure success Describe strategic path forward to implement vision Identify actionable projects and activities for short- and mid-term implementation; including operations Roadmap Purpose

9 Champions and Chairs

10 Definition The Geospatial Platform will be a managed portfolio of common geospatial data, services, and applications contributed and administered by authoritative sources and hosted on a shared infrastructure, for use by government agencies and partners to meet their mission needs and the broader needs of the Nation Vision All government agencies and their partners have access to geospatial capabilities to meet mission needs, ensure transparency and accountability, and geo-enable the business of government Geospatial Platform

11 The Offering Value Proposition Business Institution Managing Partner Partner Network Business Processes Customers Target Customers Customer Relations Financial Approach Capital Investments and Operating Expenses Funding Sources Business Model

12

13 Provides common data, services, and applications for decision making and problem solving Promotes partnerships with state, local and tribal governments, as well as the private sector and academia Yields high return on investment due to shared capabilities with increased access and usage Provides an operational framework to plan and leverage resource and manage performance Results in cost avoidance and cost savings Leads to more transparent, open and accountable government Platform Value Proposition

14 DATETASK MarchInitial discussion on Platform with NGAC April/May Workgroups formed, draft conceptual Roadmap (V1) developed June 11Draft Platform Roadmap (V2) completed June 22-23Discussed Roadmap V2 at NGAC meeting June 30Platform Roadmap (V3) completed July-September Roadmap reviewed by DOI; OMB conducted interagency review; Roadmap cleared for stakeholder engagement July-SeptemberBegan implementation of tasks in Roadmap Time Box 1 September NGAC meeting; discussion on three key elements of the Platform October-DecemberConduct stakeholder engagement January 2011Complete Roadmap Version 4 Timeline

15 OMB led Federal interagency review process between August 25 and September 8 Received approximately 70 comments from 9 agencies on the Roadmap Comments received fell into five main categories 1. Concurrence on the document 2. Governance: Questions around identification of the Managing Partner and authorities 3. Implementation: Questions around timelines, feasibility, and priorities 4. The Offering: Questions and comments about defining requirements and identifying priorities 5. Resources and funding available to the Federal Government and the Managing Partner for implementation of the Geospatial Platform Review Comment Summary

16 Execute Outreach Strategy Designate Managing Partner and Project Manager Develop Near-term and Long-term Funding Strategies Implement Governance and Portfolio Management Platform Next Steps

17 Focusing NGAC discussion on three critical Geospatial Platform components: Managing Partner Options (Steve Wallach) Potential Intergovernmental Coordination Approaches (Jerry Johnston) Stakeholder Engagement Process (Stephen Lowe) NGAC Discussion Topics

18 Managing Partner Potential Roles & Responsibilities:  Project Sponsor / Executive Champion  Project Stakeholders / Board of Directors  Project Manager  Budget / Contract / Grants / Interagency Agreements Manager

19 Managing Partner NGAC Discussion Topics: What are the core operational functions required for a successful Managing Partner function? Are there innovative organizational options that should be considered when developing the model for the Managing Partner organization? Are there essential criteria that must be factored into the decision on the Managing Partner organization?

20 Intergovernmental Coordination Potential Roles & Responsibilities of Interim Intergovernmental Coordination Body: Provide advice and recommendations to facilitate the development of the Geospatial Platform Help define a longer-term shared governance model Assist in defining requirements for the data, services and applications offered on the GeoPlatform.gov website. Engage stakeholders from inside and outside the federal government Advise on operational aspects of the Platform

21 Intergovernmental Coordination Options for Interim Platform Intergovernmental Coordination Body: 1. NGAC Intergovernmental Subcommittee (FACA) Pros: Quick stand-up; NGAC already exists; Can add additional subcommittee members with specific expertise Cons: NGAC is primarily a policy-oriented committee; Members may have limited time 2. FGDC Intergovernmental Subcommittee (non-FACA) Pros: Subcommittee would be specifically created for this purpose; members would selected to work on this specific issue Cons: Slow start-up; More difficult to establish; Members must be elected officials (or their employees designated to act on their behalf)

22 Intergovernmental Coordination NGAC Discussion Topics: Are there modifications to the two approaches or other options that should be considered? What should the relationship of the federated governance structure be with respect to existing FGDC bodies (Executive Committee, Coordination Group, NGAC)? What measures of success should be utilized to monitor the effectiveness of the approach selected?

23 Stakeholder Engagement Platform Stakeholder Engagement Process – Objectives: Foster cooperation and manage the information communicated in order to ensure consistency amongst stakeholders Develop mechanisms to acknowledge, discuss, and respond to stakeholder concerns at all levels of government Share success stories to empower stakeholders and encourage further success Fully leverage existing communication tools, processes, and pathways within the interagency geospatial community

24 Stakeholder Engagement NGAC Discussion Topics: How do we collaborate to promote stakeholder interest and engagement in the Platform? What tools can we use to foster a dialogue about the Platform? In what ways might NGAC members serve as Platform “ambassadors” to help share information with their organizations and communities and serve as conduits for receiving and organizing feedback?

25 Panel Discussion FGDC Executive Committee Members