![](media/image1.png){width="7.122916666666667in"
height="1.9736111111111112in"}

**Recommendations**

**for**

**National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)**

**Enterprise Data Management (EDM)**

Version 1.7

November 2008

James W. Sargent, Information Architect,

Dr. John Boreman, Director, Office of Science and Technology

and

The Fisheries Information Management Committee

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS)

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

+-------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
| > **Item**              | > **Description**                          |
+-------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
| > **Document Title**    | Recommendations For NMFS Enterprise Data   |
|                         | Management                                 |
+-------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
| > **File Name** (auto)  | > S:\\information                          |
|                         | > Architecture\\Recommendations\\          |
|                         | > Recommendations v.1.7.doc                |
+-------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
| > **Disposition**       | > Final                                    |
| > (Draft, Preliminary,  |                                            |
| > or Final)             |                                            |
+-------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
| > **Author(s)**         | > Jim Sargent, Dr. John Boreman, and the   |
|                         | > FIMC                                     |
+-------------------------+--------------------------------------------+
| > **Document            | > This document describes the proposed     |
| > Description**         | > recommendations for NMFS EDM             |
+-------------------------+--------------------------------------------+

+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| *     | >        | > **Changed   | > **Description**                |
| *Vers | **Date** | > By**        |                                  |
| ion** |          |               |                                  |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| 0.1-  | > 6      | Jim Sargent   | Initial draft                    |
| 0.4   | /20/2008 |               |                                  |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| 0.5   | > 7/24   | Jim Sargent   | Outline revised in response to   |
|       |          |               | FIMC comments                    |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| 0.6   | > 8      | Tom Fazio     | Completed drafts of section1 to  |
|       | /25/2008 |               | 4                                |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| 0.7   | > 8      | Tom Fazio     | Edits and revisions to draft     |
|       | /27/2008 |               |                                  |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| 0.8   | >        | Jim Sargent   | Four Pillars adaptation          |
|       | 9/6/2008 |               |                                  |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| 0.9   | > 9      | Jim Sargent   | Edits and revisions to draft     |
|       | /17/2008 |               |                                  |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| 0.91  | > 9      | Jim Sargent   | Add pix etc.                     |
|       | /28/2008 |               |                                  |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| .92   | > 9      | Jim Sargent   | Spelling grammar etc.            |
|       | /29/2008 |               |                                  |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| 1.0   | > 9      | Jim Sargent   | Final changes and edits          |
|       | /30/2008 |               |                                  |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| 1.2   | > 1      | Jim Sargent   | Accepted Dr. Boreman's markup;   |
|       | 0/2/2008 |               | added acronym appx.              |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| 1.3   | >        | Jim Sargent   | Accept Dr. Boreman's additional  |
|       |  10/7/08 |               | markups                          |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| 1.4   | > 1      | Jim Sargent   | Corrected punctuation            |
|       | 0/9/2008 |               |                                  |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| 1.5   | > 10     | Jim Sargent   | Minor edits and added            |
|       | /14/2008 |               | "Continuing with *Status Quo*"   |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| 1.6   | >        | Fran Pfielger | Grammatical edits                |
|       |  11/2/08 |               |                                  |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+
| 1.7   | > 1      | Jim Sargent   | Final edits by FIMC members, et  |
|       | 1/7/2008 |               | al                               |
+-------+----------+---------------+----------------------------------+

[Table of Contents]{.underline}

[Executive Summary 3](#executive-summary)

[1 Introduction and Background 6](#__RefHeading___Toc213842032)

[1.1 Purpose and Audience 6](#purpose-and-audience)

[1.2 Background 6](#background)

[1.3 The Challenge 6](#the-challenge)

[1.4 The Response 7](#the-response)

[1.5 Project Teams 7](#project-teams)

[1.6 References 7](#references)

[2 Current State of NMFS Information Management
8](#current-state-of-nmfs-information-management)

[2.1 Interview Results 8](#interview-results)

[2.2 Issues and Concerns 9](#issues-and-concerns)

[2.3 Other Drivers and Considerations for NMFS EDM
13](#other-drivers-and-considerations-for-nmfs-edm)

[2.3.1 Internal and External Data Management Programs and Initiatives
13](#internal-and-external-data-management-programs-and-initiatives)

[2.3.2 Data Management Committees and Organizations
15](#data-management-committees-and-organizations)

[2.3.3 Other Issues 16](#other-issues)

[3 Information Management Business Processes
18](#information-management-business-processes)

[3.1 Information Life-Cycle Management
18](#information-life-cycle-management)

[3.2 Discovery and Access 19](#discovery-and-access)

[3.3 Interfaces with External Systems
19](#interfaces-with-external-systems)

[4 The Target State of NMFS EDM 20](#the-target-state-of-nmfs-edm)

[4.1 Vision 20](#vision)

[4.2 Principles 20](#principles)

[4.3 Mission, Goals, and Objectives 21](#mission-goals-and-objectives)

[4.4 The Four Components of NMFS EDM
21](#the-four-components-of-nmfs-edm)

[4.4.1 Component One: Governance 22](#component-one-governance)

[4.4.2 Component Two: Trusted Data 27](#component-two-trusted-data)

[4.4.3 Component Three: The Authoritative Data Catalog
29](#component-three-the-authoritative-data-catalog)

[4.4.4 Component Four: The NMFS Information Depot
31](#component-four-the-nmfs-information-depot)

[5 Program Implementation Alternatives
37](#program-implementation-alternatives)

[5.1 Minimal Cost Option 38](#minimal-cost-option)

[5.2 Intermediate Cost Option 39](#intermediate-cost-option)

[5.3 Full Cost Option 40](#full-cost-option)

[5.4 Recommended Alternative 40](#recommended-alternative)

[5.5 Continuing with Status Quo 42](#continuing-with-status-quo)

[6 Other Recommendations 44](#other-recommendations)

[6.1 Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Business Process
44](#paperwork-reduction-act-pra-business-process)

[6.2 Administrative Systems 44](#administrative-systems)

[7 Risks and Constraints 45](#risks-and-constraints)

[Appendix A -- Fisheries Information Management Committee Roster
47](#appendix-a-fisheries-information-management-committee-roster)

[Appendix B -- Data Management Issues Questionnaire
48](#appendix-b-data-management-issues-questionnaire)

[Appendix C -- Objectives and Priorities
52](#appendix-c-objectives-and-priorities)

[Appendix D -- NMFS EDM Components Cross-Reference Tables
55](#appendix-d-nmfs-edm-components-cross-reference-tables)

[Appendix E -- Glossary of Terms 56](#appendix-e-glossary-of-terms)

[Appendix F -- Acronyms 58](#appendix-f-acronyms)

#  {#section .Blue-Heading-1}

# Executive Summary {#executive-summary .Blue-Heading-1}

In January 2008 the Director of the National Marine Fisheries Service
(NMFS) Office of Science and Technology (ST) proposed, and the NMFS
Science Board endorsed, a project to develop recommendations for
improving NMFS enterprise data management (EDM). The Information
Architect (IA), whose position was also established in January 2008 in
ST, and the existing Fisheries Information Management Committee (FIMC),
with representatives from each Regional Office (RO) and Science Center
(SC), were charged with the task.

The first step was to determine whether in fact, problems existed and,
if so, their nature. The FIMC identified 12 key issues and interviewed
management to determine their priorities for addressing them. Issues
rated as top priority to address were that NMFS:

-   had critical gaps in its data;

-   had no authoritative data inventory;

-   lacked sufficient metadata for its data;

-   experienced data quality and consistency challenges;

-   could not effectively integrate its data to answer key questions of
    the day;

-   had administrative systems that did not work well together; and

-   had delays in delivery of data to decision makers.

Other issues included:

-   data being lost;

-   data not being archived for perpetuity;

-   historical data in need of rescue;

-   inadequate sharing of applications and technologies; and

-   lack of buy-in across FMCs to address these issues.

Interestingly, the issue of not having buy-in across FMCs was ranked
practically lowest, which seems to indicate that management feels NMFS
does have the buy-in necessary to address these enterprise issues
collaboratively. Another overall consideration for developing NMFS EDM
identified by the FIMC was the need to share data with other NOAA
programs and initiatives, such as the Integrated Ocean Observations
System (IOOS) Data Management and Communications (DMAC).

The second step was for the FIMC to develop recommendations for the ST
Director and ultimately for the Leadership Council for addressing the
issues. To this end, they:

-   held a workshop and many web meetings;

-   worked with a variety of professional data management consultants;

-   developed consensus on a vision, proposed principles, mission,
    goals, and objectives for NMFS EDM;

-   developed specific recommendations for a NMFS EDM program;

-   developed activities and resources required to carry out the
    recommendations;

-   developed minimal cost, intermediate cost, and full cost options for
    consideration, and finally;

-   recommended a specific practical alternative for moving forward.

The vision of NMFS EDM is that ***"NMFS customers can confidently find,
access, and use our data."***

The third (current) step is to present minimal to full cost alternatives
for implementing the recommendations. In October 2008, this paper was
presented to the ST Director, who will present his findings and
recommendations to the Leadership Council at their fall meeting in
December 2008. The recommendations focus on establishing the following
*Four Components of NMFS EDM:*

-   **[EDM Governance]{.underline}** to include:

    -   A governance structure consisting of:

        -   The IA;

        -   Regional Information Management Coordinators (RIMCs) in each
            Regional Office and Science Center;

        -   Office Information Management Coordinators (OIMCs) in key HQ
            Offices;

        -   The Fisheries Information Management Advisory Committee
            (FIMAC), which is composed of the RIMCs and the OIMCs and
            chaired by the IA. The FIMAC provides advice and
            recommendations directly to the NMFS Leadership Council
            (LC).

    -   Policies and procedures addressing data stewardship, metadata
        collection and maintenance, security, confidentiality, and data
        quality.

    -   Policies and operational procedures for managing external
        requests for information and Headquarters' requests for
        information from the FMCs (data calls).

-   **[An Authoritative Data Catalog]{.underline}** -- An inventory of,
    and appropriate metadata for, all enterprise NMFS information
    assets, including databases, photograph collections, administrative
    records, and other digital, analog, and hard copy information
    assets.

-   **[Trusted Enterprise Data Assets]{.underline} --** High quality,
    reliable, and timely data managed by defined IM business processes
    and continually assessed for sufficiency and improvement.

-   **[The NMFS Information Depot]{.underline}** - A web portal that
    provides one-stop shopping for all NMFS enterprise data, based on
    the Amazon.com portal model, to enable NMFS' internal and external
    constituents to effectively discover, access, integrate, and use
    NMFS information resources to answer key current and future
    questions that may or may not be related to the original purpose for
    collecting the data.

The critical foundation for the four components is ongoing management
commitment to NMFS EDM.

The recommended alternative for moving forward is a combination of the
minimal cost and intermediate cost options that establishes the basics
of a sound EDM in FY 2009. It includes:

1.  Establishing the Authoritative Data Catalog, and collecting and
    populating the Catalog with discovery-level metadata for NMFS'
    largest and most sharable data assets. Discovery-level metadata
    includes: data asset title, description, organization code, name and
    address of data steward, and indicators of data quality and
    confidentiality.

2.  Improving trust in NMFS data by initiating the development of data
    quality plans for the largest NMFS data assets.

3.  Developing a lexicon and taxonomies of NMFS information and
    increasing corporate understanding of Service Oriented Architecture
    (SOA) and other emerging technologies as first steps for
    establishing the Information Depot.

4.  Developing a project plan and performance metrics for these tasks
    and keeping the LC apprised of progress with quarterly reports.

The marginal cost for this alternative consists of increasing the
percentage of the regional and HQ FIMC representatives' time dedicated
to enterprise data management from 10% to 25%, and an additional
\$500,000 for contract support for developing the policies, establishing
the data catalog, collecting metadata, and training. Not included are
hidden costs of FMC staff working to move the recommendations forward.
FMCs will be reimbursed for costs due to the increase their FIMC
representative's time from 10% to 25%, as additional funds are
available.

Although this alternative will not move things forward as quickly as the
FIMC desires, it will, along with management commitment, establish a
firm foundation for a sound EDM program in NMFS.

[]{#__RefHeading___Toc213842032 .anchor}**1 Introduction and
Background**

This section identifies the purpose of and audience for this document,
presents background information, and describes how this document will be
maintained and distributed.

## 1.1 Purpose and Audience {#purpose-and-audience .Blue-Heading-2}

This document specifies recommendations for NMFS Enterprise Data
Management (EDM) developed by the Fisheries Information Management
Committee (FIMC) to the Director of the Office of Science and Technology
(ST), National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), for establishing a
Program in ST. The intended audience of this document is the ST
Director, the NMFS Science Board, and the NMFS Leadership Council, whose
collective endorsement, support, and funding are required to establish a
successful EDM.

## 1.2 Background {#background .Blue-Heading-2}

NMFS data and information is the foundation for all the agency's
business processes employed to meet its mission of "stewardship of
living marine resources through science-based conservation and
management, and the protection and restoration of healthy ecosystems."
Data and information (which, in this context, include all types of
structured and unstructured documents, photographs, sonar images, sound
recordings, etc.) are the principal grist for the NMFS mill producing
information for regulatory and scientific communities.

We frequently hear concerns about NMFS data and information from
practically every sector of our constituent universe: high-level
external groups such as the Pew Commission and the National Research
Council; managers, scientists, and other users of our data; and
programmatic and technical data managers, database administrators, and
software developers. The concerns run the gamut---from not having the
right data at the right place at the right time, to not knowing what
data we have or where it is, to lack of metadata sufficient to integrate
and display our data and information to answer pressing questions. Many
of these concerns are based on anecdotes of data atrocities (such as the
proverbial harpooned scallop discovered in a decades-old research vessel
survey, upon which a critical stock assessment was based that led to
regulations imposed on the scallop fleet.

Is NMFS' fundamental mission of stewardship of living marine resources
at risk? Just how reliable and pervasive is the evidence of NMFS data
and information problems? Before making recommendations, the first task
was to substantiate that one or more problems exist and determine the
nature of the problems. Only after that could we develop a program to
address them.

## 1.3 The Challenge {#the-challenge .Blue-Heading-2}

The challenge presented by the ST Director was to determine whether NMFS
actually had information management challenges and, if so, to develop
recommendations to address them. The ST Director and the NMFS Chief
Information Officer jointly established the position of Information
Architect in ST to work with the Fisheries Information Management
Committee (FIMC). The FIMC was originally chartered by the NMFS Science
Board and was made up of representatives in each of NMFS Science
Centers; however, the scope of information to be addressed included all
NMFS scientific, regulatory, and administrative data and information.

## 1.4 The Response {#the-response .Blue-Heading-2}

To meet the challenge, the FIMC was expanded to include representatives
from all Regional Offices, Science Centers, and key HQ Offices. The FIMC
first established baseline understanding of the state of information
management at NMFS. This was accomplished through initial 15-minute
interviews with top NMFS management to frame the high-level concerns.
The FIMC then developed a list of 12 key IM issues and held structured
interviews with their managers to determine their priorities for
addressing each of the issues. The results of these interviews were
compiled and are discussed in Section 2 of this document.

With the baseline issues established, it was clear that a comprehensive
approach to NMFS EDM was needed. A workshop was held on July 8--10,
2008, to define a framework and recommendations for a NMFS EDM Program.
The results of that workshop are presented in Sections 3 through 6 of
this document.

## 1.5 Project Teams {#project-teams .Blue-Heading-2}

The following teams collaborated to develop the NMFS EDM
recommendations:

-   [Information Architect]{.underline} (IA) -- This position was
    established within ST to coordinate and lead activities related to
    NMFS information management. The IA served as the Project Manager
    for developing the recommendations.

-   [Fisheries Information Management Committee]{.underline} -- A
    NMFS-wide team, made up of representatives from each FMC, originally
    designated to answer information management related data calls and
    to make recommendations to the Science Board.

-   [Executive Sponsor]{.underline} - The Director, Office of Science
    and Technology.

## 1.6 References  {#references .Blue-Heading-2}

Daconta, Michael C., [Information As Product: How to Deliver the Right
Information, to the Right Person At the Right Time]{.underline}, 2007

Committee on Archiving and Accessing Environmental and Geospatial Data
at NOAA, National Research Council, [Environmental Data Management at
NOAA: Archiving, Stewardship and
Access](http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12017), National
Academies Press, 2007

McDonald, K. R., "NOAA\'s Global Earth Observation - Integrated Data
Environment (GEO-IDE), 2007

[The Data Reference Model Version 2.0,
2005](http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/documents/DRM_2_0_Final.pdf)

September 2004                                

#  2 Current State of NMFS Information Management {#current-state-of-nmfs-information-management .Blue-Heading-1}

This section presents an overview of the current state of information
management at NMFS, including interview results, key issues and
concerns, and areas of potential risk.

## 2.1 Interview Results {#interview-results .Blue-Heading-2}

Data and information are critical ingredients for all NMFS outputs. Over
the years, some internal and external constituents have observed that
NMFS faces challenges with its data and data management programs that
potentially impact our ability to meet our current and future mission
requirements. ST wanted to determine which problems existed, along with
their nature and severity, in order to develop steps to address them.

To develop a baseline understanding, the FIMC identified a number of
issues regarding data and information management. These issues were
captured during interviews with NMFS FMC and HQ management. The
respondents were asked to rate each issue based on their perception of
its relative priority for NMFS to address.

Figure 1 presents the key information management issues and priorities
as identified through interviews with NMFS management. The number to the
right of the horizontal bars represents the average priority based on a
scale from 0 to 3 (3 being the highest priority).

![](media/image2.png){width="6.488888888888889in"
height="4.866666666666666in"}

Figure 1. Priorities to Address IM Issues

## 2.2 Issues and Concerns {#issues-and-concerns .Blue-Heading-2}

This section describes the nature and meaning of the information
management issues and concerns identified in Figure 1. A summary of
comments from the interviews is also provided. The full name of the
concern is listed along with a short version (from Figure 1) shown in
parentheses.

**Our data has critical gaps that need filling (Critical data gaps)**

This issue relates to the concern that current data collections have
data gaps that impact management decision-making and scientific
assessment. Often, NMFS scientists have said we need more and better
data to predict outcomes with greater confidence. As we move toward
Integrated Ecosystems Assessment (IEA), is there a need to expand our
data collection programs to meet evolving stewardship requirements?

Most interview respondents felt there is definitely a problem with gaps
in data collection, especially given the expanding management
requirements of the reauthorized Magnuson-Stevens Act. However, it was
noted that while gaps certainly exist, we should not expand data
collections until we have taken full advantage of what we have. We need
to understand what data assets we have across the enterprise and
maximize their use. We also should take advantage of cooperative
research to augment the data NMFS collects.

**We don't know all the data sets we have**

This issue relates to the accessibility of NMFS data. NMFS has collected
a vast array of data over the past 100-plus years that may be important
in answering the questions of today and the future. Interviewees were
asked to assess the level of awareness of data across the enterprise and
the level of knowledge of how to access that data.

Many interviewees felt there is a lack of coordination between and among
offices. While most felt they had a good handle on local data needed to
support day-to-day operations, data assets outside their FMC are poorly
understood and not readily accessible. There was a feeling that users
need a roadmap to find out where data exists, how it is accessed, and
who the contacts are to help provide service. In addition, a
national-level inventory should be required to enable standardization of
data elements and allow data to be shared and combined.

**The plethora of administrative systems are not connected and don't
work well (Admin systems don't work well)**

This issue relates to the perception that administrative systems are not
connected and don't work well as support systems. One NMFS senior
official noted that we are confronted with a plethora of administrative
applications from NMFS, NOAA, DOC, and OMB that overlap, seldom work
together, have bugs, and often don't meet NMFS' needs. It is often
difficult to determine what applications should be used when, and it is
difficult to keep track of passwords. There may also be potential
conflicts and redundancy of information in multiple systems.

Most respondents felt there is a significant problem with administrative
systems, particularly the way the applications are rolled out with
minimal end-user testing. The burden of feeding the applications has
caused immense frustration and little benefit due to redundant data
entry and lost time. The lack of integration and the expanding need for
passwords have added to this frustration.

**We don't know enough about the data we have to use it effectively and
creatively (We don't know enough about the data)**

In order to use data effectively and relate it to other data sets, we
need to have adequate information about the data (metadata), such as
field names, coding structures, and formats, and how, when, and why the
data were collected. It is also important to understand the quality and
confidence level of the data so it is used appropriately. Interviewees
were asked whether this information exists or whether we need to collect
and document metadata to use our data more effectively.

While some organizations are actively developing metadata for their
datasets, most interviewees consider lack of metadata a significant
problem. In many cases, without proper metadata, data can be
misconstrued and thus erroneously applied or be rendered essentially
useless. There is a need to define the uses of the data, not just the
existing content. We may be collecting data, but missing important
components that represent economic and demographic factors essential for
policymaking. Some noted that limited metadata, numerous format
standards, and lack of exchange standards and common tools to query the
data make it difficult to access data across the agency. Data are often
in silos and difficult for the average user to access. Data sharing
agreements and data quality standards need to be implemented

**Data quality and versioning problems**

Several studies and reports have indicated that NMFS could improve the
quality of its data. The problem of constituents receiving inconsistent
data from two different sources is a challenge that can be traced to not
keeping track of different versions of data sets. This contributes to
reduced confidence in NMFS data and the decision-making the data
support.

All interviewees felt that maintaining data quality is essential for
NMFS to adequately perform its mission. There seems to be an even split
between those who think data quality is a major problem and those who
feel it is under control. Several noted that inconsistent data cause
problems for managers, particularly with regard to public perception,
thus giving the impression that we don\'t know what we are doing or that
we are making things up. This is also an important issue due to legal or
FOIA concerns.

**We can't integrate our data to determine the effects of climate change
on living marine resources (We can't integrate our data)**

Most legacy NMFS information systems were built to meet specific
business needs and were not designed with the "hooks" needed to
integrate or link systems. The result is siloed data that is difficult
to combine with related data sets. In some cases, data sets we would
like to relate (e.g., combining research vessel trawl survey data with
fisheries catch data, and combining habitat data with marine mammal
sightings) cannot be integrated to meet the needs of IEA. Interviewees
were asked to assess whether we are able to integrate our data well
enough to meet our needs.

Most feel that integration is a problem---systems have grown up in stove
pipe manner, each with their own set of codes and data formats. Species
codes are a particular problem. There are different names for the same
information and similar names for different information. Some noted that
integration is difficult because there is no true architectural view of
how everything meshes. There needs to be a detailed data architecture
map that defines standards for process, data, and systems.

**NMFS needs to improve communications regarding the development and use
of its applications and technologies (Communications re: Apps and IT)**

Does NMFS need to improve communications regarding the development and
use of its applications and technologies? NMFS develops and deploys new
applications and technologies, such as electronic reporting of fisheries
statistics, but often in a stove-piped manner. Interviewees were asked
whether we need to share IT development efforts, successes, and
challenges more frequently among the NMFS community.

Several interviewees felt there is no shared vision of technology at
NMFS. FMCs tend to work almost entirely independently. Collaboration and
sharing of ideas, solutions, and technology are increasingly important
in a time of limited or shrinking budgets. Science is the driver and
technology is often an afterthought. Some felt it would be useful to
have a general NMFS/NOAA online clearinghouse for science, technology,
and administrative solutions. This should be searchable so someone
looking for an electronic fisheries reporting tool, for example, could
find available information along with contact data.

**Data delivery is not timely enough to implement new management
strategies (Timeliness of data delivery)**

Is data delivery timely enough to meet the requirements of new
management strategies such as individual transferable quotas (ITQs) and
dedicated access privileges (DAPs)? In addition, with the advent of web
technologies, the demand for timely data has increased. For example,
information about marine mammal events is now expected to be available
in near real time. Interviewees were asked whether critical data are
being audited, analyzed, and delivered to managers and scientists in a
timely manner to meet our current and future mission requirements.

Opinions on timeliness were highly variable, dependent on the management
need against which the data are being applied. While timeliness is
critical for activities such as in-season monitoring, it is not as
important when looking at trends (e.g., habitat research). Some managers
indicated there is a major time lag (on the order of at least 3 months)
between the collection of data and the QA/QC that needs to be done
before data can be analyzed and delivered. There is also a major lag
between QA/QC and dissemination of that data. Several interviewees
thought we are not making adequate investments in electronic data
collection and reporting technologies that could improve timeliness of
data. For example, the technology exists to collect real-time catch and
effort data from U.S. tuna longline vessels by way of the Vessel
Monitoring System (VMS).

**Data is not being archived for perpetuity as per NARA requirements
(Data not being archived)**

Is NMFS archiving data for perpetuity as per the National Archives
Administration (NARA) requirements? NMFS data represent a corporate
resource that needs to be preserved for use in the future. NARA
regulations require that all federal records be preserved in archives
conforming to their standards. The only archives in NOAA that adhere to
these standards are NODC, NCDC, and NGDC. Interviewees were asked
whether they thought our data were at risk due to a lack of archive
policies and standards.

In general, there was a feeling that staff are not clear on what the
requirements are. There is a lack of understanding of NARA requirements,
and the issue is not on the radar screen of local management. There are
also limited resources to maintain long-term archives. It was noted that
some data sets might not warrant preservation for perpetuity. Analysis
needs to be conducted to determine which data sets to keep and which to
discard.

**We don't have buy-in for addressing information management across FMCs
(Buy-in to address IM issues across FMCs)**

Initiatives that attempt to address information management across FMCs,
such as the Fisheries Information Systems (FIS), encounter resistance.
Sharing data beyond the jurisdiction where they were collected, and for
different purposes, involves risk with little perceived benefit to the
originating FMC. Interviewees were asked whether there is a perceived
lack of support for establishing NMFS-wide policies and initiatives to
address some of these information management issues.

Most felt that everyone recognizes this as a problem but aren\'t willing
to devote the fiscal and human resources needed to solve it. There needs
to be a well-communicated campaign to sell the value of good data
management and integration across the agency. Everyone benefits from
good data management, and getting coordination and cooperation among
FMCs is key to successful integration.

**Historical data need to be rescued to provide a context for the future
(Historical data needs to be rescued)**

Historical data provide an important context for the future. There is a
concern that data may exist on perishable media and be subject to loss.
Is there a need to rescue legacy data and migrate to more modern formats
and systems before they are lost?

Interviewees felt that historical data may be at risk of being lost, but
not all historical data are necessarily valuable. A review of historical
data and a critical evaluation of whether it is needed, complete, and
worthwhile need to be undertaken. Obsolete software and hardware are the
biggest risk for loss of data. Some historical data are on floppy disks
and may be difficult to retrieve. We need a plan to convert data to the
latest storage media and a mechanism by which data would be updated to
new media as they become available.

**Data is being lost without our knowing it**

This concern is based on observations that specific data sets and models
on which some NMFS scientific publications were based were not preserved
and were eventually lost. In addition, employees may keep data on
personal machines, resulting in loss of data when employees leave or
retire. Interviewees were asked whether they perceive potential loss of
data as a problem that needs to be addressed.

All interviewees agreed that if data is being lost, then it is a
significant problem. Many felt this is not a major problem. Some pointed
out that data are also lost with full knowledge, in the sense that lack
of adequate storage facilities, expanding needs for space, and new
safety requirements have prompted the intentional disposal of
irreplaceable biological samples from long ago. Consistent standards
regarding archival of raw or ancillary data are critical, not only for
purposes of scientific publications but also (frequently) as the basis
upon which fishery management decisions or policies are based.

## 2.3 Other Drivers and Considerations for NMFS EDM {#other-drivers-and-considerations-for-nmfs-edm .Blue-Heading-2}

In addition to the issues raised by the FIMC and prioritized by NMFS
management, a number of other considerations need to be taken into
account when developing recommendations for NMFS EDM. This section
discusses the more salient ones.

### 2.3.1 Internal and External Data Management Programs and Initiatives {#internal-and-external-data-management-programs-and-initiatives .Blue-Heading-3}

NMFS information is in very high demand as we address issues such as
overfished stocks, global climate change, and integrated ecosystems
assessments in addition to our legacy mission requirements. These
demands arise from global, international, national, state, and local
organizations; from DOC and NOAA; and from within NMFS. Listed below are
some prominent initiatives, programs, studies, and reports that require
access to NMFS data and metadata, and/or the attention of NMFS
information management staff.

2.3.1.1 Global Programs and Initiatives

**[Earth Observing Systems (EOS) Global Earth Observation System of
Systems (GEOSS)]{.underline} -** Producing and managing better
information about the environment has become a top priority for the
United States and nations around the world. In July 2003, the [Earth
Observation Summit](http://www.earthobservationsummit.gov/index.html)
brought together 33 nations plus the European Commission and many
international organizations to adopt a declaration that signified a
political commitment toward the development of a comprehensive,
coordinated, and sustained Earth Observing System to collect and
disseminate improved data, information, and models to stakeholders and
decision makers.

2.3.1.2 National Programs and Initiatives

**[Integrated Ocean Observing System (IOOS) Regional Associations
(RAs)]{.underline} -** The RAs provide the primary framework for
orchestrating the required collaboration within each region and are
responsible for the design and coordinated operation of regional coastal
ocean observing systems. They consist of:

-   Northeast: [GoMOOS](http://www.gomoos.org/) (GoMOOS)

-   Mid Atlantic :[Mid-Atlantic Coastal Ocean Observing Regional
    Association](http://www.macoora.org/) (MACOORA)

-   Southeast: [Southeast Coastal Ocean Observing Regional
    Association](http://www.secoora.org/) (SECOORA)

-   Caribbean: [Caribbean Regional Association](http://cara.uprm.edu/)
    (CaRA)

-   Great Lakes: [Great Lakes Observing System](http://www.glos.us/)
    (GLOS)

-   Gulf of Mexico: [Gulf of Mexico Coastal Ocean Observing
    System](http://www-ocean.tamu.edu/GCOOS/) (GCOOS)

-   Pacific Northwest: [Northwest Association of Networked Ocean
    Observing Systems](http://www.nanoos.org/) (NANOOS)

-   Central and Northern California: [Central and Northern California
    Ocean Observing System](http://www.cencoos.org/) (CeNCOOS)

-   Southern California: [Southern California Coastal Observing
    System](http://www.sccoos.org/) (SCCOOS)

-   Alaska: [Alaska Ocean Observing System](http://www.aoos.org/)
    ([AOOS](https://db.aoos.org/wiki/index.php/AOOS))

-   Pacific Islands: [Pacific Islands Ocean Observing
    System](http://www.soest.hawaii.edu/pacioos/index.htm) (PacIOOS)

2.3.1.3 NOAA Programs and Initiatives

-   **[Environmental Data Management at NOAA Report]{.underline}** --
    The National Academies Press was commissioned by the NOAA Science
    Advisory Board to study NOAA data management, and wrote the book
    [Environmental Data Management at NOAA: Archiving, Stewardship and
    Access](http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=12017), which is
    available via the above link. The principles from the book are:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   \"*Environmental data should be archived and made accessible*\"

-   \"*Data-generating activities should include adequate resources to
    support end-to-end data management*\"

-   \"*Environmental data management activities should recognize user
    needs*\"

-   \"*Effective interagency and international partnerships are
    essential*\"

-   \"*Metadata are essential for data management*\"

-   \"*Data and metadata require expert stewardship*\"

-   \"*A formal, ongoing process, with broad community input, is needed
    to decide what data to archive and what data not to archive*\"

-   \"*An effective data archive should provide for discovery, access,
    and integration*\"

-   \"*Effective data management requires a formal, ongoing planning
    process*\"

-   **[Global Earth Observation Integrated Data Environment (GEO-IDE)
    Conops]{.underline}** was developed by the NOAA Observing Systems
    Council's (NOSC) Data Management Integration Team (DMIT). The
    GEO-IDE is envisioned as a "system of systems"---a framework that
    provides effective and efficient integration of NOAA's many
    quasi-independent systems, which individually address diverse
    mandates in areas of resource management, weather forecasting, safe
    navigation, disaster response, and coastal mapping, among others.
    NOAA Line Offices will retain a high level of independence in many
    of their data management decisions, encouraging innovation in
    pursuit of their missions, but will participate in a well-ordered,
    standards-based data and information infrastructure that will allow
    users to easily locate, acquire, integrate, and utilize NOAA data
    and information.

-   **[NOAA Observing Systems Architecture (NOSA)]{.underline} --**
    NOSA, developed by the NOAA Observing System Architecture (NOSA)
    Action Group, directed by the NOSA Senior Steering Group, was
    established to develop an observational architecture that helps
    NOAA:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Design observing systems that support NOAA\'s mission and provide
    maximum value;

-   Avoid duplication of existing systems; and

-   Operate efficiently and in a cost-effective manner.

> NOSA includes:

-   NOAA\'s observing systems (and others) required to support NOAA\'s
    mission;

-   The relationship among observing systems including how they
    contribute to support NOAA\'s mission and associated observing
    requirements; and

-   The guidelines governing the design of a target architecture and the
    evolution toward this target architecture.

-   **[Regional Ecosystem Data Assembly Portals]{.underline} --** The
    NESDIS National Coastal Data Development Center (NCDDC) provides a
    coordinated data management system and data discovery mechanism for
    atmospheric, oceanographic, and terrestrial physical sciences to
    facilitate sustained economic growth, scientifically sound
    environmental management, and public safety to the nation and the
    international community. The NCDDC is a leader in Regional Ecosystem
    Data Management (REDM) and the establishment of Regional Ecosystem
    Data Assembly Portals that provide access to data and information
    through the cataloging, formatting, archiving, and dissemination of
    the data streams in collaboration with federal and state agencies,
    regional observing system associations, academic researchers, and
    non-governmental organizations.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   **[Comprehensive Large Array Data Stewardship System
    (CLASS)]{.underline} -** CLASS is an electronic library of NOAA
    environmental data. This website provides capabilities for finding
    and obtaining those data. CLASS is NOAA\'s on-line facility for the
    distribution of NOAA and U.S. Department of Defense (DoD)
    Polar-orbiting Operational Environmental Satellite (POES) data,
    NOAA\'s Geostationary Operational Environmental Satellite (GOES)
    data, and derived data.

-   **[NMFS Fisheries Information Systems (FIS)]{.underline} --** The
    FIS provides a context for the design, development, and
    implementation of data collection and data management for
    fishery-dependent statistics nationwide to improve the timeliness
    and accuracy of data. The FIS is a portal that identifies the
    existing federal and state fisheries information systems or
    databases (data collections) and provides integrated business
    solutions for effective information sharing. The FIS supports
    fisheries management decisions by developing a virtual application
    environment.

### 2.3.2 Data Management Committees and Organizations  {#data-management-committees-and-organizations .Blue-Heading-3}

As the web matures and access to federal data becomes commonplace, there
are many committees that address the needs for agencies to respond.
Listed below are some of the more salient committees and organizations
that demand the attention of NMFS IM personnel, and should be considered
in the development and administration of NMFS EDM initiatives.

**[NOAA Observing Systems Council (NOSC)]{.underline} -** The NOSC
serves as the principal advisory body to the NOAA Administrator and the
focal point for the agency\'s observing system activities and interests.
The purpose of the Council includes coordinating observational and data
management activities across NOAA; proposing priorities and investment
strategies for observation-related initiatives; and identifying programs
that might benefit most from integration.

**[NOAA Data Management Committee (DMC)]{.underline} -** The DMC is the
NOSC agent for coordinating the development and implementation of data
management policy across NOAA. The DMC has broad latitude and authority
for data management decisions for NOAA. It addresses issues and
opportunities that require coordination among the Goal Teams, Line
Offices, and Data Centers to implement data management responsibilities.
The Committee provides guidance and recommendations to the NOSC for
managing and integrating data within NOAA.

**[Data Management Integration Team (DMIT)]{.underline} -** The DMIT
Integration Team provides expertise and advice on the near-term (5-year)
actions needed to write and implement a plan for integrating data
management within NOAA. The team has representation from all of the NOAA
Line Offices and Goals to ensure that all NOAA interests and
requirements are represented.

**[The Data Archiving and Accessing Requirements Working Group
(DAARWG)]{.underline}** - The DAARWG was commissioned by the Science
Advisory Board (SAB) to provide recommendations to the SAB regarding
accessing and archiving NOAA data. The Group is currently chaired by Dr.
Ferris Webster, College of Marine Studies University of Delaware, and
meets approximately semi-annually.

**[NOAA Integrated Products Team (IPT)]{.underline} -** The IPT, as part
of the IOOS Data Management and Communications (DMAC) Subsystem at the
NOAA Ocean Service, is charged with developing the Data Interchange
Framework (DIF) for IOOS.

**[NOAA Enterprise Architecture (EA) Committee Working
Group]{.underline} -** The NOAA Enterprise Architecture (EA) Committee
serves the CIO Council as a resource to establish Enterprise
Architecture (EA) policies and standards, and to develop and promote
subject matter expertise in areas/programs assigned to the committee.
The EA Committee includes representatives from all NOAA Line Offices and
leads NOAA in the implementation and sustained use of EA as a strategic
information management and decision-making practice.

**[Fisheries Information Systems (FIS) Architecture
Committee]{.underline} -** The FIS Architecture Committee is developing
the technical architecture for the FIS.

### 2.3.3 Other Issues {#other-issues .Blue-Heading-3}

A number of other areas of concern or potential risk must be considered
to make NMFS data more accessible.

**[Information Requests from External Sources]{.underline}**

NMFS receives a variety of requests for information from the fishing
industry; state, federal, and local governments; the press; and the
general public. Some requests are very simple and are responded to in
minutes over the phone or e-mail. Others require significant staff time
to assemble and compile data in incompatible formats. Some of the
requests are formally tracked by Headquarters' correspondence tracking
systems, but the majority are informal and may not be tracked at all,
which can potentially lead to duplicative calls resulting in different
responses to similar questions. As a result, NMFS may be criticized for
providing conflicting information and conducting inconsistent science.

**[Information Requests from Internal Sources (Data
Calls)]{.underline}**

Another area of potential challenges, often cited by staff and managers,
is the many data calls that HQ issues to the regions. The calls are
often considered to be poorly defined with unrealistic time schedules,
and may duplicate previous requests. Currently, the calls are not
tracked by any central system or governed by any policies or best
practices.

**[Internet Culture Maturation]{.underline}**

The maturation of the internet, in particular the move to Web 2.0,
presents both opportunities and challenges for NMFS. There is
unprecedented opportunity for information sharing, networking, and
establishing communities of practice. At the same time, there are many
challenges related to increased expectations for readily available
products and services. There is the potential that NMFS data will be
misused or used in ways we never intended. Our data may be shared beyond
our control and served up by the use of taxonomies we did not devise. We
need to consider these concerns carefully as we develop plans to expose
more NMFS data via the web.

**[Legal Issues]{.underline}**

As NMFS data is made more accessible, there will be an increasing need
to ensure it is protected and shared appropriately. Personally
Identifiable Information (PII) must be secured against intentional or
unintentional disclosure. Beyond PII, policies regarding the use and
dissemination of confidential data must be followed. However, a balance
needs to be struck between the needs of confidentiality and the
requirement for sharing within NMFS and partner organizations to ensure
access to detailed data by authorized individuals.

There is also a need to maintain records and administrative data in
support of litigation and FOIA concerns. This requires that data and
information are well-documented, searchable, and easily accessible.
Currently, data calls for FOIA or other requests are often extremely
time-consuming due to the difficulty in compiling the data needed to
complete the request.

# 3 Information Management Business Processes {#information-management-business-processes .Blue-Heading-1}

This section provides a brief overview of the functional components of
IM business processes that collectively comprise the scope of NMFS EDM.
These components are:

-   Information Life-Cycle Management

-   Discovery and Access

-   Interfaces with External Systems

## 3.1 Information Life-Cycle Management {#information-life-cycle-management .Blue-Heading-2}

![](media/image3.wmf){width="2.25in"
height="1.9666666666666666in"}Information life-cycle management involves
the end-to-end management of information, from initial collection
through long-term preservation and archiving.

It starts with the determination of what data and information to
collect, which involves determining the requirements needed to support
NMFS business processes. If collection involves requesting information
from the public, it requires OMB approval according to the Paperwork
Reduction Act (PRA). The PRA requires that the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB) approve each collection of information by a federal agency
before it can be implemented. The statute defines \"collection of
information\" broadly. It covers any identical questions posed to 10 or
more members of the public---whether voluntary or mandatory, and whether
written, electronic, or oral. If the collection does not involve PRA,
then the survey is designed and developed by the business process
responsible for the collection.

Once a data collection has been approved, it is captured by various
means (logbooks, VMS, dealer reports, etc.) and stored in electronic
form as raw data. Following data collection, the information enters into
the transformation and control phase, which is usually performed in
conjunction with Information Technology (IT). This involves performing
quality control and quality assurance (QA/QC) processes, establishing
confidentially assessments, and ultimately storing the information in a
data asset such as a database, Electronic Document Management System
(EDMS), web page, or other electronic formats.

Information resources are maintained throughout their useful life.
Maintenance activities are governed by best practices for information
quality, security, metadata, access, and preservation.

As a corporate resource, NMFS information assets must be preserved for
the long term. Information not needed on a regular basis may be
archived, but in a manner that still makes it readily accessible. A
special case regarding long-term storage is the preservation (and
perhaps rescue) of data residing on obsolete or inaccessible media.

## 3.2 Discovery and Access {#discovery-and-access .Blue-Heading-2}

Information discovery and access involves users discovering, accessing,
and using NMFS information assets.

![](media/image4.wmf){width="3.625in" height="2.4583333333333335in"}Once
a data asset is stored, it becomes available for discovery, access, and
use. Information is accessible through a variety of NMFS applications,
websites and database queries, table lookups, etc. Access to NMFS
information is also provided by NMFS staff responding to specific
requests through phone calls, e-mails, and other modes of communication.
Responding is often a complex process, involving significant staff time
to assemble and compile data sets that are sometimes in incompatible
formats. Another class of information requests is internal data calls,
which usually are generated in an *ad hoc* fashion by NMFS HQ staff for
the regions.

## 3.3 Interfaces with External Systems {#interfaces-with-external-systems .Blue-Heading-2}

![](media/image5.jpeg){width="3.25in" height="2.4375in"}

# 4 The Target State of NMFS EDM  {#the-target-state-of-nmfs-edm .Blue-Heading-1}

In reviewing the challenges presented by the current situation at NMFS
(see Section 2), it was clear that a comprehensive approach to EDM was
needed. The FIMC recommends establishing an ongoing NMFS EDM program.
The program will bring focused attention, resources, and coordination to
bear in resolving the critical IM issues and concerns facing NMFS. The
FIMC developed foundational concepts to help guide the direction and
focus of NMFS EDM. This section describes the vision, core principles on
which the program is based, the mission statement, and the goals and
objectives of NMFS EDM. The four components of the target program are
then discussed.

## 4.1 Vision {#vision .Blue-Heading-2}

The vision for NMFS EDM developed by the FIMC:

**[NMFS Customers]{.underline}** means all NMFS internal and external
customers.

**[Can Confidently]{.underline}** means they have confidence (i.e.,
trust) in the data.

**[Find]{.underline}** means that by using an Amazon.com-type portal or
portals, they can

-   Browse through an ordered hierarchy or taxonomy;

-   Search by using discipline-specific key words (taxonomies) (for
    example, a 9-year-old child uses a different lexicon than a
    scientist or a Hill staffer) and/or their own user tags
    (folksonomies); and

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Review metadata, including user feedback and customer experience
    evaluation (CXE) ratings.

**[Access]{.underline}** means they can view data through
confidentiality and security filters, by using standard tools and
formats.

**[Use]{.underline}** means they can download selected data, if
appropriate, with sufficient metadata to effectively use the data,
including quality indicators, warnings, and information about data
elements (coding structures, formats, etc.)

**[Our Data]{.underline}** means all NMFS enterprise data we choose to
share.

## 4.2 Principles {#principles .Blue-Heading-2}

The FIMC developed and reached consensus on the following guiding
principles that form the basic precepts for NMFS EDM:

-   Data and Information are an important NMFS corporate resource and
    need to be managed over their lifecycles (Management, Information
    Lifecycle Management, and Preservation).

-   Our data and information are a global resource and need to be shared
    appropriately (Discovery and Access).

-   Our data and information inspire public trust and confidence
    (Transparency, Reliability, and Accountability).

-   Our data and information are continuously assessed for quality,
    objectivity, timeliness, and sufficiency to meet the NMFS mission
    (Sufficiency and Necessity, Integrity, and Completeness).

## 4.3 Mission, Goals, and Objectives {#mission-goals-and-objectives .Blue-Heading-2}

The mission of NMFS EDM is to:

**"*Deliver the right data, information, and services when and where
they are needed.*"**

In support of the NMFS information management mission, the following
goals were developed by the FIMC:

1.  **Manage information with appropriate governance, focus, and
    accountability.**

2.  **Manage information cooperatively to promote sharing of
    information, solutions, and information management investments.**

3.  **Establish and maintain policies, best practices, procedures, and
    metrics to ensure good stewardship and preservation of NMFS
    information resources.**

4.  **Empower internal and external constituents to effectively
    discover, access, integrate, and use the information to answer key
    current and future questions.**

5.  **Continually assess and improve the availability, timeliness, and
    quality of data resources to support NMFS mission.**

The objectives for each of these goals are presented in Appendix C.

## ![](media/image6.wmf){width="4.5in" height="2.3930555555555557in"}4.4 The Four Components of NMFS EDM {#the-four-components-of-nmfs-edm .Blue-Heading-2}

In the following sections, the four components are detailed in terms of
what they are, how they will be implemented, and their expected value
and benefits for NMFS. The critical foundation of sound EDM is ongoing
management commitment.

### 4.4.1 Component One: Governance  {#component-one-governance .Blue-Heading-3}

The Governance component serves as the main support for NMFS EDM by
providing the organization components including the IA, Regional IM
coordinators, data stewards for enterprise data assets, and the
Fisheries Information Management Advisory Committee (FIMAC). It also
involves establishing IM policies, procedures, and best practices, and
provides the administration and management to support NMFS through the
cultural shift to EDM. Some key sub-components are discussed below.

The Governance Model

![](media/image7.wmf){width="2.6770833333333335in"
height="1.4270833333333333in"}

To maintain sound information management within NMFS, governance will be
an ongoing and evolving process that supports sound project management
and mechanisms to communicate progress, success, value, and benefits.
The governance effort will be shared between the Regions and
Headquarters, with consideration of the need for regional flexibility.
Buy-in and commitment from management will be critical to implementing a
successful governance model.

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

A key aspect of EDM governance is to define the organizational structure
as it relates to management and decision-making for the program. Each
organizational element will be designed to ensure appropriate
representation between HQ and the Regions, and will be defined in terms
of roles and responsibilities. We anticipate the following
organizational elements will be needed for NMFS EDM:

-   Enterprise Information Architect (IA)

    -   Responsible for the overall EDM and administering IM policy at
        NMFS

    -   Serves as the single point of contact for representing NMFS with
        outside entities such as IOOS, NOAA data management issues and
        concerns, NESDIS Data Centers, and others

-   Regional Information Management Coordinators (RIMCs)

    -   Responsible for EDM and administering IM policy in the FMCs

    -   Serve as single points of contact in FMC regarding information
        management issues

-   HQ Office Information Management Coordinators (OIMCs)

    -   Responsible for EDM and administering IM policy in the HQ
        Offices

    -   Serve as single points of contact in HQ Offices regarding
        information management issues

-   FIMAC

    -   Serves as Configuration Management Board for NMFS IM policies
        and procedures

    -   Composed of RIMCs plus subject matter experts (SMEs) and chaired
        by the IA

    -   Develops recommendations to the Leadership Council for IM
        policies and procedures

    -   Evaluates the applicability of SOA and makes deployment
        recommendations

-   Data Stewards -- Individuals who are responsible for establishing
    and maintaining the quality, integrity, documentation, and
    preservation of the data asset

Policies and procedures are needed to define how EDM will be managed and
executed. At a minimum, policies and procedures will be developed and
implemented for:

-   Portfolio Management -- organizes program projects and initiatives
    into logical groupings to better facilitate their management and
    leverage investments.

-   Project Selection -- a formalized process to review and select
    project initiatives for funding under the program.

-   Project Management -- defines a standard, best practices approach to
    executing program initiatives to ensure that expected outcomes are
    realized. Included within this is definition of processes for
    quality, configuration, risk, and communications management.

-   Performance Management -- defines the methods and measures we will
    use to assess progress against program goals and objectives.
    Performance metrics will be put in place, enabling us to continually
    assess and improve upon the success of the program. Performance
    plans for information managers and data stewards will be vital in
    terms of accountability. Periodic reviews of service-level metrics
    related to the delivery of NMFS products and services will also be
    critical to measuring the success of the information management
    effort.

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

A well-designed governance model will provide the following value and
benefits:

-   Representative decision-making with input being considered from all
    interested stakeholders.

-   Effective decision-making leading to wise investment of limited
    human and budget resources.

-   Best practices approach to managing NMFS EDM to ensure desired
    outcomes.

Stewardship

Effective data stewardship involves the full lifecycle management of
information assets, from initial collection through long-term
preservation and archiving. It defines the standards, policies,
procedures, and best practices that should be used consistently
throughout the agency. This consistency is essential to ensure that NMFS
information assets use common vocabulary and share formats to allow them
to be combined and integrated.

A number of policies and procedures regarding the effective management
of data, metadata, and information will be developed, providing for a
comprehensive approach to information lifecycle management that will be
applied to all assets through creation/receipt, distribution, use,
maintenance, and archiving.

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

As part of the governance model, policies and standards relating to data
stewardship throughout the information management lifecycle will be
developed and implemented. Policies are needed that address the
following aspects of data stewardship:

-   Stewardship roles and responsibilities.

-   Data inventory and metadata.

-   Access and information sharing.

-   Security and confidentiality.

-   Long-term preservation and archive.

In an effort to make data the center of the business, the following
standards will be developed, agreed to, and implemented:

-   Metadata at various levels; i.e., discovery, detailed, element
    levels.

-   Minimum required elements for each type of data collection.

-   Common definitions, formats, and business rules for data elements.

-   Data quality and auditing procedures.

As the information management effort grows and evolves, independent
reviews of compliance with policies and standards related to
stewardship, as well as revisions of policies and standards, will enable
leadership to continually assess the success of the program.

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Effective data stewardship will provide the following value and
benefits:

-   Data and information are managed consistently throughout NMFS
    ensuring their availability, quality, and integrity.

-   Standards are adopted across the agency, thereby allowing related
    data sets to be easily combined when needed.

-   Agreements involving information sharing and appropriate use are in
    place and followed by all users of NMFS information resources.

[Budgeting Strategy]{.underline}

Appropriate budget resources are needed to develop, implement, and
maintain an information management program at NMFS. While there are many
potential alternatives and levels of investment for implementing NMFS
EDM (see Section 5), each involves trade-offs in terms of the scope of
the effort, the time to completion, and the expense. Management will
need to assess the level of investment that best meets the ongoing
business needs of NMFS.

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

The budgeting strategy consists of both a short-term and a long-term
approach. In the short term (the next 2 to 3 years), the program will
need to subsist on existing budget resources. This includes:

-   Utilizing existing funds for program activities, e.g., FIS, NIMB
    funds, IOOS, and REDB.

-   Minor reprogramming.

-   Potential use of cost recovery strategies.

In the long term, the EDM program should have its own budget line to
allow full-scale development and implementation of the program. This
entails developing an FY 2012 PPBES budget submission including the
following activities:

-   Working with EGT programs.

-   Including the EDM in most or all EGT programs.

-   Developing an IT initiative and driving it through the CPIC process:

    -   Creation of an Exhibit 300

    -   Submission to the NOAA IT Review Board

    -   Submission to the Commerce Review Board

    -   Championing of the initiative through the rounds of pass-backs

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Appropriate levels of funding for NMFS EDM will provide the following
value and benefits:

-   Effective management of NMFS information assets is viewed as a
    critical priority within the agency.

-   NMFS EDM is established and funded at levels that allow steady
    progress to be made and significant benefits to accrue to the
    agency.

[Communication and Technology Sharing]{.underline}

The NMFS information management program will encourage ongoing
communication and coordination with the FMCs and related programs such
as FIS to leverage efforts, exchange information on common needs and
services, and promote sharing of information, solutions, and information
management investments.

[Implementation]{.underline}

The following approach is recommended to promote communication and
technology sharing:

-   Develop a program communications plan

    -   Describes stakeholder needs, methods, and frequency of
        communications and outreach

    -   Create a program website to promote activities

    -   Develop and distribute communication materials (newsletters,
        posters, fact sheets)

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Establish a program collaboration portal

    -   Supports management of program activities and schedule

    -   Supports review of all program materials

    -   Provides collaboration space for teams working on individual
        projects or initiatives

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Establish a central repository for EDM information to support:

    -   Communities of excellence

    -   Active forums to exchange information and technology solutions

    -   Leveraging of knowledge and investments that may be extended
        from one partner to another

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

A well-developed communications and technology sharing mechanism will
provide the following value and benefits:

-   Program activities are transparent to stakeholders promoting
    discussion and buy-in on initiatives

-   Forums are established where NMFS internal and external constituents
    can exchange knowledge and solutions with practitioners in their
    areas of interest

[Cultural Shift]{.underline}

The collaboration and coordination of information management efforts may
prove to be difficult as regions will want to focus on their own issues.
It will be necessary to inspire a cultural shift by selling the EDM
paradigm to the regions and making our activities legitimate at a
regional level. Achieving a successful cultural shift requires that all
stakeholders have a voice in program decisions, that new policies and
procedures are properly vetted, and that necessary levels of outreach
and training are provided to help institutionalize changes.

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

Achieving a cultural shift in the business practices of the agency will
involve the following activities:

-   Integrating information management best practices into all business
    processes. Information management needs to become a routine part of
    how NMFS executes its mission. The IA will be established as the
    enduring champion of EDM in order to provide the focus and
    consistency needed to achieve change.

-   Moving primary interfaces with customers to the web, and defining
    our business rules for the web and allow customers to self-serve
    with NMFS information resources and services.

-   Harnessing social networking as a means to promote information
    exchange and foster communities of practice.

-   Adopting electronic rulemaking to identify and address e-Discovery
    issues.

-   Incorporating electronic document management systems (EDMS) into
    day-to-day business, thereby reducing dependence on paper-based
    records.

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Shifting the current culture at NMFS to one more focused on information
management will provide the following value and benefits:

-   Effective information management is adopted as a standard business
    practice throughout the agency.

-   NMFS personnel recognize the value and importance of common
    standards, policies, and practices.

-   The agency maximizes use of web-based technologies enabling
    customers to self-serve with NMFS products and services on a 24/7
    basis.

[Information Request and Data Call Management]{.underline}

Information requests from external constituents and internal data calls
are received frequently and need central coordination, tracking, and
management (see Section 2.3.3 for a more complete discussion of this
sub-component).

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

It is recommended that the following approach be taken to manage
information requests and data calls:

-   Establish policies and best practices for managing requests and
    responses

-   For information requests

    -   Establish the IA (or designee) as the single point of contact
        for all external information requests

    -   Create a web-based tracking system to manage the lifecycle of
        request and response

    -   Establish regular reports for common requests

    -   Analyze requests to determine what information should be served
        up on the web

-   For data calls

    -   Establish the IA (or designee) as the single point of contact
        for all internal data calls

    -   Create a web-based tracking system to manage the lifecycle of
        data calls

    -   Document the schedule of regular or routine data calls

    -   Analyze data calls to determine what information should be
        centrally retained to avoid redundant calls

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Central management of information requests and data calls will provide
the following value and benefits:

-   All information requests and data calls are tracked through their
    lifecycle to help ensure timely responses are made.

-   Central administration will help reduce or eliminate time spent an
    redundant effort.

-   Potential inconsistent responses to constituents will be eliminated.

### 4.4.2 Component Two: Trusted Data {#component-two-trusted-data .Blue-Heading-3}

NMFS' mission is almost entirely dependent on the trust our internal and
external constituents have in the quality, reliability, security,
timeliness, and sufficiency of our data. By and large, our excellent
data management inspires that trust. And yet, occasionally, we question
whether we are collecting the right data to answer today's questions, or
whether we may be divulging some confidential or sensitive data, or
whether we could increase the quality of our data. This section
discusses strategies for institutionalizing trust in NMFS' information
resources.

![](media/image8.wmf){width="2.875in" height="1.5208333333333333in"}

Analysis of Data Sufficiency and Necessity

Data and information must be continuously assessed to ensure they are
sufficient to meet the NMFS mission of providing the right data,
information, and services when and where they are needed, as well as
meeting the needs of internal and external constituents. Analysis is
needed to ensure that the right data is being collected to answer
current and future questions. Part of this analysis should include
evaluating whether all collected data is truly needed.

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

The following major activities are recommended to determine the level
and degree of data sufficiency and necessity:

-   Support assessment efforts with inventories, metadata, and data
    models of existing data collections

-   Map data models to business requirements and determine gaps

-   Promote project management strategies that have proven successful in
    assessing data collection requirements (e.g., with HMS data)

-   Promote data assessment workshop formats and facilitators with a
    proven track record

-   Provide direct project management and workshop support

-   Develop recommendations on how to close any gaps in data sufficiency
    or to eliminate unneeded elements from data collections

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Analysis of data sufficiency and necessity will provide the following
value and benefits:

-   Gaps in data collections are identified and recommendations are
    developed for eliminating those gaps

-   Data collection burden is reduced through the elimination of
    unneeded data elements from current collections

[Security and Confidentiality]{.underline}

Security and confidentiality in the context of information management
involves data access controls and the confidentiality rules affecting
the ability to share data and with whom they may be shared. Policies
must be put in place to ensure that authorized users get access to the
data they need while protecting confidential data from inadvertent
disclosure.

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

The program will build on work started by ST to develop policy to
account for revisions to data confidentiality under the Magnuson-Stevens
Reauthorization Act (MSRA). There also needs to be an enterprise data
policy that describes the rules for sharing data both internally and
externally. As NMFS information resources are made more available via
the web, additional rules regarding the sharing of data, and especially
protection of personally identifiable information (PII), need to be
established. The advent of social networking on the web (e.g., chat
rooms and blog sites) may present additional challenges in ensuring that
NMFS data are not inappropriately disseminated or used.

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Effective security and confidentiality policies and standards will
provide the following value and benefits:

-   Data are shared appropriately, with authorized users getting needed
    access and confidential data being protected from improper
    disclosure

-   The public has improved confidence in NMFS' ability to safeguard
    data submitted to the agency

### 4.4.3 Component Three: The Authoritative Data Catalog {#component-three-the-authoritative-data-catalog .Blue-Heading-3}

![](media/image9.wmf){width="3.25in" height="1.7395833333333333in"}The
Authoritative Data Catalog provides the indispensable card catalog for
NMFS' vast library of information assets. It is the single definitive
source for identifying the information that NMFS collects, analyzes,
disseminates, and preserves, and serves as the repository for the data
about the data assets (i.e., metadata). The following sections describe
the inventory and the metadata documented in the inventory.

[The Data Inventory]{.underline}

For NMFS data and information assets to be shared, they must be
discoverable. Too often, access to information is dependent on knowing
where to look or with whom to talk. Developing a regularly updated
inventory of all data assets will provide for more efficient
identification, assessment, and prioritization of our shareable
information assets. Making the inventory available to users, combined
with appropriate metadata (see next section), will greatly improve
access to NMFS' information assets.

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

Conducting a complete inventory of all NMFS information assets is a
large effort involving a review of all HQ and Regional assets. To do
this well requires dedicated resources from across the organization.
This can also be an expensive undertaking depending on how quickly we
want to complete the inventory. There are trade-offs, and we recommend
developing the inventory iteratively in three groups as follows:

-   Large size and/or frequently shared data assets

-   Medium size and/or occasionally shared data assets

-   Small size and/or seldom shared data assets

The inventory and associated metadata needs to be managed and controlled
by a professional data librarian to ensure that the information in the
inventory stays up-to-date. Policies and best practices relating to the
frequency of updating the inventory, versioning, reporting, and
performance measures will be developed and implemented by the librarian.

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Creating and maintaining a data inventory will provide the following
value and benefits:

-   Information assets across NMFS are discoverable regardless of their
    physical location

-   Better understanding and coordination is promoted between Regions by
    giving visibility to information assets important to cross-regional
    initiatives such as ecosystem management

-   Potential of redundant data collections is reduced

Metadata

Metadata is "data about data" and provides the context for data usage.
Well-designed metadata helps facilitate the understanding,
characteristics, use, and limitations of the data. This is especially
important for NMFS, since appropriate understanding of the data is
essential for effective decision-making and stewardship of marine
resources.

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

Policies and standards regarding metadata will be developed, as metadata
spans the information management lifecycle as part of overall data
management and stewardship. It will be important to show the benefits
and ease of use of metadata across the regions to achieve buy-in and
agreement on the standards.

![](media/image10.wmf)Once the policies and standards are in place,
metadata will need to be developed for all information assets contained
in the inventory. There are various levels of metadata to be developed:
from high-level "discovery" metadata describing the asset, to detailed
metadata describing each data element contained within the asset. It is
envisioned that an existing tool, such as InPort, can be utilized as the
metadata repository. We recommend the following phased approach to
developing metadata for NMFS information assets:

-   Phase 1

    -   Define the metadata model and policies and standards governing
        metadata

    -   Capture *discovery-level* metadata for *large/often shared* data
        assets

-   Phase 2

    -   Capture *detailed-level* metadata for *large/often shared* data
        assets

    -   Capture *discovery-level* metadata for *medium/occasionally
        shared* data assets

-   Phase 3

    -   Capture *element-level* metadata for *large/often shared* data
        assets

    -   Capture *detailed-level* metadata for *medium/occasionally
        shared* data assets

    -   Capture *discovery-level* metadata for *small/seldom shared*
        data assets

    -   

-   Phase 4

    -   Capture *element-level* metadata for *medium/occasionally
        shared* data assets (as appropriate)

    -   Capture *detailed-level* and *element-level* metadata for
        *small/seldom shared* data assets (as appropriate)

    -   Continually update and maintain all metadata.

*Discovery-level* metadata is defined as that which is required for
customers to discover the data asset. It includes information such as
data asset title, owner, data steward, description, and information
category. *Detailed-level* metadata is defined as enough information for
customers to determine whether the data asset is what they want. It
includes information such as time, location, data quality, suggestion
for use, and formats. *Element-level* metadata is defined as metadata
required for the customer to use the data elements. It includes, for
each data element, information such as the element name, description,
format, and coding structure.

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Creating and maintaining metadata for NMFS information assets will
provide the following value and benefits:

-   Simplifies the discovery of data and helps users better assess
    whether the information in the asset is what they truly need; this
    should lessen the time needed to compile information for scientific
    assessment, data calls, and other uses

-   The meaning and nature of information is better understood and is
    used appropriately

### ![](media/image11.wmf){width="3.375in" height="1.9375in"}4.4.4 Component Four: The NMFS Information Depot {#component-four-the-nmfs-information-depot .Blue-Heading-3}

In order to be useful, NMFS' information resources must be easily
discoverable and appropriately accessible to both internal and external
constituents. Component Three: The Authoritative Data Catalog will
enable us to understand what data we, as an enterprise, hold. But in
order for the data to be useful to NMFS staff and our customers, they
have to be able to find it. NMFS has made great strides in serving data
up on the web. Too often, however, our customers have to wade through a
number of NMFS websites to actually locate the data. For instance, would
a student interested in the migratory habits of Beluga whales go to a
website associated with the Alaska Regional Office, the Science Center,
or NMFS Headquarters Office of Protected Resources to find the
information?

The following sections discuss the portal and the various sub-components
and technologies required to fully implement the concept.

[The Front Door]{.underline}

The Information Depot will serve as a front door to all NMFS enterprise
data, empowering internal and external constituents to effectively
discover access, integrate, and use information to answer key current
and future questions. The NMFS Information Depot is envisioned as an
Amazon.com--type website that provides access to services with
appropriate security and confidentiality filters. The portal would
provide users with the following capabilities:

-   One-stop shopping for NMFS information products and services; this
    may be modeled on the FIS One-Stop

-   Provision of multiple taxonomies that allow customers to use their
    common language to search for and access information

-   Discovery engineering tools and techniques to learn about customer
    search patterns, likes and dislikes, and successes and failures in
    finding what they want

-   A feedback mechanism that accepts customer reviews and assessments
    of NMFS information and incorporates them into the metadata
    repository

-   The ability to subscribe to specific information assets and receive
    a notice or alert when new or modified data are available

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

In developing a NMFS information portal, we recommend that a phased
approach be taken, starting with a small pilot to demonstrate
feasibility and proof of concept. This approach will involve the
following activities:

-   Survey a limited set of regional and HQ information resources and
    document them in the metadata repository

-   Develop an initial taxonomy to support discovery

-   Design and develop the pilot portal to utilize the regional and HQ
    information sources documented in the metadata repository

-   Validate the pilot through user testing and record suggested changes
    and enhancements

-   Develop a plan for further development and implementation of a fully
    featured portal

-   Eventually adopt a service-oriented architecture (SOA) service model
    and expand to NMFS-wide implementation, as appropriate

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Developing the Information Depot will provide the following value and
benefits:

-   A single point of entry for access to all NMFS information products
    and services

-   Improved user experience and simplified access to needed information

-   The ability to receive direct customer feedback and review of NMFS
    information products and services

[Discovery Engineering]{.underline}

Discovery engineering provides a means of analyzing customer activities
and behaviors on websites in order to better understand their needs and
improve service delivery. NMFS data and information are global resources
and should be shared appropriately. Through discovery engineering, we
will take a systematic approach to the practical application of common
terminology and hierarchical taxonomies to develop a logical means of
categorizing and organizing data information in ways that are meaningful
to our customers.

[Implementation]{.underline}

The following techniques will be applied through discovery engineering:

-   Web analysis of visitor activities

    -   Identify paths through the portal and how long each page was
        viewed

    -   Identify the keywords used in searching and navigation

    -   Identify search patterns and trends

    -   Assess the effectiveness in obtaining the desired products and
        services

-   Identify customer groups and link them to their web usage patterns,
    and assess differences in usage among scientists, management,
    academia, legislators, children, etc.

-   Use the analysis to reshape and improve taxonomies and other
    features and capabilities

-   Allow users to put custom tags on data assets

-   Allow users to rate data assets

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Discovery engineering will provide the following value and benefits:

-   Better understanding of who NMFS' customers are and what their needs
    are

-   Improved user experience and service delivery from NMFS websites

[Information Integration]{.underline}

Information integration refers to the ability to combine data sets of
related information that may have been collected via disparate systems.
NMFS information systems have typically been developed in a stand-alone
or stove-piped manner, which makes integration difficult. True
integration will require that systems be constructed using common
architectural models of NMFS business processes and data. Before
undertaking an effort of this magnitude, we need to determine the
business need for integration rather than integrating just for the sake
of integration.

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

The following is a recommended approach to determining integration
requirements and establishing the means to achieve information
integration:

-   Conduct an analysis of integration requirements to support internal
    and external constituent needs

    -   Determine the highest priority integration needs

    -   Analyze integration requirements and develop a strategy

-   Create architectural approach

    -   Define and develop an integrated business model

    -   Define and develop an integrated data model

    -   Assess the relationship between these models and use the
        relationship as a guide for developing integrated information
        systems

-   Develop an approach to address data heterogeneity issues including:

    -   Metadata requirements

    -   Data standards (definitions, formats, etc.)

    -   Mechanisms such as bridge tables to link existing information
        resources

    -   Conversion factors and code translations to allow data to be
        combined

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Appropriate information integration will provide the following value and
benefits:

-   Eliminates the extensive data manipulation required to compile data
    for activities such as stock assessments

-   Establishes a clear architectural framework to guide future system
    development, thereby ensuring that new or redeveloped systems can be
    integrated

-   Enables a single version of the truth across the enterprise

###  {#section-1 .Blue-Heading-3}

[Lexicon and Taxonomies]{.underline}

A standard lexicon and taxonomies are needed to provide the common
language and semantics needed to organize, discover, share, and
integrate NMFS information assets. *Lexicon* refers to the way the
agency uses business terminology. For example, does everyone have the
same understanding of "trips," "landings," and "weigh outs?"

Taxonomies establish a common framework for describing and organizing
information assets. A taxonomy is typically a hierarchical organization.
For example, an automobile may be described with a taxonomy of
Year/Make/Model/Style. Often, multiple taxonomies are used to describe
information assets by using the vocabularies of particular customer or
stakeholder groups. These stakeholder groups include internal users such
as IEA scientists and stock assessment biologists, and external users
such as Congress, fishermen, IOOS customers, and children. Taxonomies
must be developed that support these varying needs and perspectives.

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

We will develop taxonomies for all NMFS data, information, and services,
thereby making them more discoverable by both internal and external
constituents. The taxonomies will be dynamically built, and will employ
common terminology. They will be constructed to enable multiple ways of
accessing the same data depending on the inquirer's starting point of
reference. Once the common lexicon and taxonomies are established, they
will be incorporated as part of the standard metadata for all
information assets.

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Building a common lexicon and standard taxonomies will provide the
following value and benefits:

-   NMFS constituents all use a common lexicon of business terms,
    enhancing understanding of the meaning of data

-   Information searches are simplified through use of standardized
    taxonomies that facilitate navigation to desired information
    resources

[Roadblocks Resolution]{.underline}

Roadblocks to data access are an issue across NOAA. Internal and
external customers frequently encounter impediments when trying to
access or use NMFS data. To manage information collaboratively, NMFS EDM
will try to identify and manage roadblocks to data access and recommend
solutions, leveraging current efforts surrounding data access rules and
regulations.

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

Dealing with roadblocks or other impediments to data access will involve
the following activities:

-   Assess the nature and severity of roadblocks (real or imagined)
    originating from the following sources:

    -   Federal, state, and local statutes

    -   Confidentiality issues

    -   Data sensitivity issues

    -   Personally identifiable information (PII)

    -   Other access issues

-   Once the roadblocks are known, devise a process to resolve or
    mitigate the roadblock

    -   Identify access restrictions for data assets in the inventory

    -   Capture any restrictions or limitations on data access or use in
        the metadata

    -   Develop and propose recommendations to leadership on how to
        resolve individual roadblocks or access concerns

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Finding appropriate solutions to data access roadblocks will provide the
following value and benefits:

-   Access restrictions are lifted where possible to allow routine
    access by authorized users

-   Restrictions or limitations on data access or use are known and
    documented through the information asset's metadata

[Service-Oriented Architecture (SOA)]{.underline}

Service-oriented architecture is a system's architectural style for
creating and using business processes, packaged as services, throughout
their lifecycle. The SOA defines and provisions the IT infrastructure to
allow different applications to exchange data and participate in
business processes. It will be necessary to educate participants in NMFS
EDM on SOA and assess the need and applicability within the agency.

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

The following steps will be taken to assess the applicability of SOA for
NMFS information management:

-   Provide education and training on SOA to the FIMC

    -   Use Webinars or other means to provide training

    -   Establish community of practice Wikis to exchange information on
        SOA

-   Keep abreast of other ongoing initiatives, such as IOOS, NOAA DMIT,
    and other federal SOA projects

-   Develop recommendations on SOA applicability for NMFS to the
    Leadership Council

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Assessing SOA applicability will provide the following value and
benefits:

-   Better understanding of the role SOA can play within the agency

-   Leverage SOA directions and progress made by related initiatives

[Interfaces with Other Systems]{.underline}

NMFS has an ongoing need to coordinate and exchange information with
related organizations. Coordination involves interfacing with outside
systems including those at NOAA, other federal, state, and local
governments, and international organizations.

[Implementation Approach]{.underline}

It is recommended that the following approach be taken to manage
interfaces with other systems:

-   Provide central coordination

    -   Establish a single point of contact for outside systems that
        develop links to our information resources

    -   Handle interface requests like information requests by logging
        and managing them

    -   Keep abreast of NOAA, DOC, federal, and other efforts developing
        services, standards, and SOAs (e.g., NOAA GEO-IDE, IOOS, EPA,
        and DHS)

-   Establish best practices related to APIs, services, and registry

-   Eventually develop APIs and services to support external interfaces;
    develop a registry of NMFS services (SOA)

-   Address issues related to information integration including data
    heterogeneity, data standards, and conversion factors

[Value and Benefits]{.underline}

Central management of interfaces with other systems will provide the
following value and benefits:

-   Interface requests are properly coordinated to ensure compliance
    with NMFS security and confidentiality policies

-   Data standards and metadata are put in place to ensure proper
    understanding and use of NMFS information resources

# 5 Program Implementation Alternatives {#program-implementation-alternatives .Blue-Heading-1}

The following sections describe alternatives for implementing the NMFS
EDM program. The alternatives are intended to serve as a menu of
options, describing what could be accomplished given various levels of
investment over the next few years.

Sections 5.1 through 5.3 describe the minimal, intermediate, and full
cost options for EDM, respectively. Section 5.4 presents a recommended
alternative for EDM implementation during FY09.

![](media/image12.wmf){width="1.3131944444444446in"
height="1.0326388888888889in"}Each implementation option is organized by
components and sub-components (see Section 4 for details on these
elements). The right-hand columns depict the activities to be executed
over the next few fiscal years. The box to the right presents the color
code used to indicate when activities are intended to begin and end.
Following each table is an approximation of the annual staff and budget
resources needed to support the depicted level of activity. Note that
funds quoted do not include the costs associated with existing FTE
resources or the increased use of existing staff. Therefore, costs for
increasing the percentages of the RIMCs and the OIMCs efforts dedicated
to EDP are to be borne by the FMCs and HQ Offices.

## 5.1 Minimal Cost Option {#minimal-cost-option .Blue-Heading-2}

The following table presents the schedule of activities under the
minimal cost implementation option:

![](media/image13.wmf){width="6.495833333333334in"
height="4.185416666666667in"}Implementing the minimal cost option will
require the following resources:

-   **FTEs**

    -   S&T: The Information Architect and administrative support
        (current level)

    -   FIMC Representatives: 10% or less of an FTE per FMC (current
        level)

-   **Funds**

    -   S&T: \$300K (current level)

Hidden costs include up to 10% of FIMC members' FTE costs and
miscellaneous overhead expenses.

##  {#section-2 .Blue-Heading-2}

##   {#section-3 .Blue-Heading-2}

## 5.2 Intermediate Cost Option {#intermediate-cost-option .Blue-Heading-2}

The following table presents the schedule of activities under the
intermediate cost implementation option:

![](media/image14.wmf){width="6.493055555555555in"
height="4.622222222222222in"}

Implementing the intermediate cost option will require the following
resources:

-   **FTEs**

    -   S&T: The Information Architect, data librarian (ZP-4), and
        administrative support

    -   FIMC Representatives: 40% or less of an FTE per FMC

-   **Funds**

    -   S&T: \$300K

    -   Other sources: \$700K

Hidden costs include up to 40% of FIMC members' FTE costs and
miscellaneous overhead expenses.

## 5.3 Full Cost Option {#full-cost-option .Blue-Heading-2}

The following table presents the schedule of activities under the full
cost implementation option:

![](media/image15.wmf){width="6.491666666666666in" height="4.13125in"}

Implementing the full cost option will require the following resources:

-   **FTEs**

    -   S&T: The Information Architect, data librarian (ZP-4), data
        technician (ZP-3), and administrative support

    -   FIMC Representatives: 80% or less of an FTE per FMC

-   **Funds**

    -   S&T: \$300K

    -   Other sources: \$2.7M

Hidden costs include up to 80% of FIMC members' FTE costs and
miscellaneous overhead expenses.

## 5.4 Recommended Alternative {#recommended-alternative .Blue-Heading-2}

Given the urgency of the data management concerns, it is critical to
start executing the full EDM program as soon as possible. However, given
limited funding, especially in the early stages of the program, we
recommend that a combination of the minimal and intermediate cost
options be selected for FY 2009. This option offers a reasonable
compromise, providing for significant progress against key activities at
a relatively modest cost.

In FY 2009, the following activities would be executed under this
option:

-   **Establish the EDM governance structure, including**:

    -   Adoption of the FIMC as an advisory committee to the Leadership
        Council

    -   Establishment of the roles of the Regional Information
        Management Coordinators (RIMCs)

    -   Establishment of the roles and responsibilities of data stewards
        for all enterprise information assets

    -   Establishment of collaboration tools and methodologies to
        effectively communicate EDM activities and technologies

    -   Establishment of EDM policies and best practices

        -   Draft policies for basic data stewardship, including data
            inventory and metadata maintenance

        -   Draft a NMFS glossary of key terminology to define and
            document terms used in NMFS business processes (e.g., IEAs)
            and their associated information (e.g., landings)

-   ![](media/image16.wmf){width="2.25in" height="1.25in"}**Build the
    Data Catalog**

    -   Use the InPort tool as the authoritative data catalog and
        conduct **Phase 2** of the inventory, capturing discovery level
        metadata for all enterprise information assets. The table to the
        right depicts the phases of metadata development.

-   **Create the NMFS Information Depot**

    -   Initiate development of a NMFS information taxonomy and our
        corporate understanding of SOA and other emerging technologies.

-   **Develop Performance Metrics**

    -   Establish performance measures for the above tasks and keep the
        Leadership Council apprised of progress with quarterly status
        reports.

Implementing the recommended alternative will require the following
resources:

-   **FTEs**

    -   S&T: The Information Architect and administrative support
        (current level)

    -   FIMC Representatives: 25% or less of an FTE per FMC

-   **Funds**

    -   S&T: \$300K (current level)

    -   Other sources: \$500K

Implementing this alternative will present NMFS with the following
benefits and risks:

-   **Benefits**

    -   The basic governance structure and procedures for managing the
        program are in place

    -   The authoritative data catalog of NMFS information assets is
        started

    -   All NMFS information is categorized in a draft taxonomy

    -   The cultural shift regarding stewardship of NMFS corporate
        information resources is started

-   **Risks**

    -   The data catalog is not fully populated, so identification of
        data stewards can only be done for the portion of enterprise
        data that has been inventoried

    -   Key activities will need to be deferred, including:

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Information request management

-   Data call management

-   Information Depot development

-   Development of alternative constituent-based taxonomies

-   Completion of a confidentiality policy

-   Communications and technology sharing mechanisms

## 5.5 Continuing with Status Quo {#continuing-with-status-quo .Blue-Heading-2}

Having studied the current NMFS EDM environment and analyzed concerns
and priorities of NMFS management, the FIMC believes that NMFS IM
challenges may put NMFS' reputation as a leader in science and
environmental information at increasing risk. In the Internet culture,
data and information are thought of as commodities that should be easily
discovered and accessed with ever-increasing speed. We should start now
to lay the groundwork to understand our data assets from an
enterprise-wide perspective. We need to develop transparent data
stewardship policies and establish tools to facilitate the public use of
our data with an information portal that leverages inventories, data
dictionaries, data standards, glossaries, thesauri, and taxonomies. The
longer we wait to move beyond the status quo, the more difficult and
expensive it will be to catch up.

Unless we start investing in EDM now, NMFS will be increasingly at risk
of:

-   Being absent or misrepresented in portals for GEOSS, IOOS, Census of
    Marine Life, and NCDDC and others;

-   Continuing to have inconsistent web portals across the Regional
    Offices and Science Centers with different user interfaces and
    varying degrees of data sharing;

-   Inadvertently sharing inconsistent data, which may reflect poorly on
    NMFS science and diminish trust in the agency;

-   Continuing to make inconsistent and poorly structured data calls to
    the regions---a continuing source of frustration to Science Center
    and Regional Office personnel;

-   Sharing data and information erratically, with little or no
    monitoring and without consistent business rules;

-   Having no data policies and few data standards and data quality
    metrics;

-   Having no consistent way of tracking and learning from users'
    satisfaction with NMFS information resources;

-   Frustrating constituents with the inability to quickly access the
    information they need;

-   Being accused of hoarding data and being perceived as obstructing
    NOAA efforts to archive our data;

-   Not being much farther ahead than when Dr. Knauss said, 25 years
    ago, that NOAA information is like a library with no card catalog or
    bookshelves.

# 6 Other Recommendations {#other-recommendations .Blue-Heading-1}

During the development of the discussed recommendations, a number of
other opportunities for consolidation or reprogramming in the context of
enterprise data management came to light. This section discusses them
and makes recommendations to be considered by NMFS management

### 6.1 Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA) Business Process {#paperwork-reduction-act-pra-business-process .Blue-Heading-3}

**[Recommendation]{.underline}**: Consider PRA processing an integral
part of the EDM business process, but leave it in the OCIO for the time
being.

**[Rationale]{.underline}**: A significant portion of NMFS information
is collected from the public under the provisions of the PRA. Since NMFS
EDM includes the full lifecycle of information from collection to
long-term preservation, the PRA approval process, which is currently
managed by the OCIO, should be considered part of the EDM.

**[Background]{.underline}**: The primary purpose of the PRA is to:

-   Minimize the paperwork burden for individuals, small businesses,
    educational and nonprofit institutions, federal contractors, state,
    local, and tribal governments, and other persons resulting from the
    collection of information by or for the Federal Government

-   Ensure the greatest possible public benefit from and maximize the
    utility of information created, collected, maintained, used, shared,
    and disseminated by or for the Federal Government

-   Improve the quality and use of federal information to strengthen
    decision-making, accountability, and openness in government and
    society

NMFS currently has hundreds of data collection forms, including
commercial and recreational landings data and dealer reports,
socio-economic surveys, and reports on marine mammal interactions. Aside
from resource surveys, information collected under PRA represents the
largest set of NMFS data.

Approval must be obtained from OMB for each data collection system. The
NMFS process for obtaining this approval is highly structured and is
carried out currently by the NMFS CIO---a business practice that was
developed in 2001 when it was excised from F/MB.

### 6.2 Administrative Systems {#administrative-systems .Blue-Heading-3}

**[Recommendation]{.underline}:** Have the NMFS CIO develop an
enterprise-wide portal to all of the administrative systems NMFS
managers are required to use, that is organized by administrative
function and contains password reminders.

[**Rationale**:]{.underline} During interviews conducted by the FIMC,
one of the highest priorities cited by NMFS management was to address
the plethora of administrative systems that are not connected and don't
work well together.

**[Background]{.underline}**: During the initial 15-minute discussion
with NMFS top management, one senior official noted that we are
confronted with a unwieldy variety of administrative applications from
NMFS, NOAA, DOC, and OMB that overlap, seldom work together, have bugs,
and often don't meet NMFS' needs. It\'s often difficult to determine
what applications should be used when, and it\'s difficult to keep track
of passwords. Also, there may be potential conflicts and redundancy of
information in multiple systems. He suggested developing an
enterprise-wide portal.

# 7 Risks and Constraints {#risks-and-constraints .Blue-Heading-1}

In this section we explore the risks and constraints associated with
establishing and administering the EDM Program.  Implementing a new
program, like any business or organizational change, presents
challenges.  However, proper planning, including effective monitoring of
progress and a corrective action process, can minimize the impact of
potential problems and keep the implementation process moving
efficiently toward its intended results.

The following describes possible areas of risk or constraint and
presents a mitigation strategy for addressing them:

-   **Buy-in from management** -- To be successful, the NMFS EDM needs
    the support and buy-in from management, both at HQ and in the
    Regions.

> *Mitigation*: To achieve management buy-in and ongoing support, plans
> will be vetted and progress will be reviewed with management
> stakeholders on a continuing basis. In addition, a communications plan
> will be established for the Program describing the mechanisms for
> keeping managers and other stakeholders informed.

-   **Regional support** -- Similar to above, the Program needs to have
    the support of regional leadership and data stewards to be
    successful.

> *Mitigation*: The RIMCs, supported by a communications plan, will play
> a key role in ensuring buy-in by the regions through regular
> communications and vetting with regional stakeholders.

-   **Regional concerns regarding centralization** -- There is a risk
    that the regions may not fully cooperate if they view the Program as
    a HQ initiative that doesn't provide value to the Regions.

> *Mitigation*: The RIMCs will play a key role by acting as liaison
> between the Regions and HQ. Part of their responsibility will be to
> ensure that the needs of individual Regions are being addressed
> throughout Program implementation.

-   **Funding / staffing** -- Lack of adequate funding and staffing
    levels could severely hinder the ability of the Program to achieve
    its objectives. At the very least, timelines to complete certain
    activities may become unacceptably extended.

> *Mitigation*: The Program will ensure that management is kept informed
> of the trade-offs at various levels of funding and staffing, so they
> can make informed decisions regarding program implementation. In
> addition, regular progress reporting will convey the accomplishments
> and benefits being derived from investments in the Program.

-   **PII issues** -- As NMFS data become more exposed and accessible,
    there is a risk that PII or other confidential data may be used or
    disseminated through unauthorized channels.

> *Mitigation*: As part of Program implementation, policies and
> procedures for the management and dissemination of data need to be
> developed. This includes establishing policies and procedures for the
> security and handling of PII and confidential data.

-   **Cultural Shift** -- The EDM Program will present new ways of doing
    things and present new tools for users that represent a significant
    cultural shift from current practices. There is a risk that people
    will resist this change if the benefit to them is not immediately
    obvious.

> *Mitigation*: Culture change challenges can be successfully minimized
> by effective planning and orientation.  The implementation plan and
> the EDM tools and services must be designed to ensure successful
> application---one cannot make a good first impression the second
> time.  Therefore, it is important to choose a scale and setting for
> initial pilots that will lead to visible accomplishment. In order to
> be adopted, tools and services must provide benefits such as saving
> time, making people's jobs easier, and making their tasks more
> rewarding.  It is crucial to take the time to design in advance the
> robust management systems that, when coupled with the proper level of
> automation, deliver positive and lasting results.

#   {#section-4 .Blue-Heading-1}

# Appendix A -- Fisheries Information Management Committee Roster {#appendix-a-fisheries-information-management-committee-roster .Blue-Heading-1}

F/NER-Martin Colby, Anthony Conigliari

F/NEC-Joan Palmer

F/SER-John Reed

F/SEC-Brion Cook

F/SWR-Jerry Hornof

F/SWC-

F/NWR-April Wolstencroft

F/NWC-Richard Kang

F/AKR-Corinne Brown

F/AKC-Mike Brown

F/PIR-Eric Forney

F/PIC-Brent Miyamoto

F/CIO-Susan Molina

F/PR-Angela Collins-Payne, Laura Gutierrez

F/HC-Joan Moumbleaux

F/SF-Regina Spallone

F/ST-Jihong Dai, Tina Chang, Jim Sargent, Chair

[Subject Matter Experts]{.underline}

Karen Sender-F/PIC (Metadata)

Larry Talley-F/AKR (Information Management)

John Witzig-F/ST (FIS)

Ajith Abraham-F/CIO (Applications Development)

#   {#section-5 .Blue-Heading-1}

#  Appendix B -- Data Management Issues Questionnaire {#appendix-b-data-management-issues-questionnaire .Blue-Heading-1}

#  {#section-6 .Blue-Heading-1}

> NMFS Information Management Issues Interview Form

**[Overview]{.underline}**

Data and information are the critical ingredients for all NMFS outputs.
Some internal and external constituents, over the years, have observed
that NMFS faces challenges with its data and data management programs
that potentially impact our ability to meet our current and future
mission requirements. The Office of Science and Technology wants to
determine if we do, indeed, have problems, and if so, what they are so
we can takes steps to address them.

The purpose of these interviews is to help the Fisheries Data Management
Committee (FDMC) gain an understanding of the information management
challenges facing NMFS today. In response to challenges identified, we
plan to brief the Leadership Council on proposed solutions. If there are
no critically perceived problems, then we have completed our mission and
can invest our resources elsewhere. If, however, as has often been
observed by internal and external constituents and studies, there are
significant problems, then we need to do something about them.\
\
As follow-up to the interview, you will have the opportunity to review
the notes on your responses before proceeding further. Presentations to
the Leadership Council will be summarized and will not disclose
individual responses without approval.

> The FDMC has identified the following issues regarding data and
> information management. Please rate each of them, on your perception
> on the priority for NMFS to address, on a scale of 0 - 3, where:
>
> 0 = No priority, This is not an issue;
>
> 1 = Low Priority;
>
> 2 = Moderate Priority; or
>
> 3 = High Priority.
>
> **[Guidance]{.underline}**

**Scope:** Consider all data and information collected, developed or
obtained by NMFS including environmental, administrative, legal,
socio-economic, enforcement, etc.

**Data vs. information**: In the following, consider \"data\" to mean
\"data and/or information\"

**Context:** All issues are to be considered in the NMFS-wide context.
Please provide scoring from this perspective. If the priority of address
an issue would be different within your Office or Center, please note it
in the comments.

> **[Please Note]{.underline}:** The purpose of this interview form is
> to aid FDMC members in discussing the following issues with their
> management and to record the results of those discussions. It is not
> intended to be a form filled in by interviews or to be a statistically
> reliable survey. Also feel free to add any additional issue you see
> fit.
>
> ***[The Issues]{.underline}***
>
> **1. We don't know all the data we have. Rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**
>
> [Discussion:]{.underline} Over the past 30+ years, NMFS has collected
> a vast array of data that may be useful in answering questions of
> today and the future. Are you confident that we are aware of all these
> data across the enterprise and/or know where to go to determine what
> data we have?
>
> Comments:
>
> **2. We don't know enough about the data we have to use it effectively
> and**
>
> **creatively. Rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**
>
> [Discussion:]{.underline} In order to effectively use data and relate
> them to other data sets, we need to have adequate information about
> the data (metadata), such as field names; coding structures and
> formats; and how, when, and why the data were collected. Do we have
> this information or do we need to collect and document metadata to use
> our data effectively?
>
> Comments:
>
> **3. We can't integrate our data to determine effects of climate
> change on living marine resources. Rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**
>
> [Discussion:]{.underline} In some cases, data sets that we would like
> to relate, such as research vessel trawl survey data with fisheries
> catch data and habitat data with marine mammal sightings, can not be
> integrated to meet the needs of integrated ecosystems assessments. Are
> we able to integrate our data well enough to meet our needs?
>
> Comments:
>
> **4. Data delivery is not timely enough to implement new management
> strategies. Rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**
>
> [Discussion:]{.underline} New management strategies such as ITQs and
> DAPs require timely data. With the advent of web technologies, the
> demand for timely data has increased. For example, information about
> marine mammal events are now expected near real time. Are critical
> data being audited, analyzed and delivered to managers and scientists
> timely enough to meet our current and future mission requirements?
>
> Comments:
>
> **5. Our data has critical gaps that need filling. Rating:
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**
>
> [Discussion:]{.underline} Often NMFS scientists have said that we need
> more and better data to confidently predict outcomes. As we move
> toward IEA, do we need to expand our data collection programs?
>
> Comments:
>
> **6. Data are being lost without our knowing about it. Rating:
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**
>
> [Discussion:]{.underline} Observations have been made that specific
> data sets and models on which some NMFS scientific publications were
> based on were not reserved and were eventually lost. Do you perceive
> potential loss of data as problem that needs to be addressed?
>
> Comments:
>
> **7. Data quality and versioning problems. Rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**
>
> [Discussion:]{.underline} Several studies and reports have indicated
> that NMFS could improve the quality of its data. Also, constituents
> receiving inconsistent data from two different sources is a challenge
> that can be traced to not keeping track of different versions of data
> sets.
>
> Comments:
>
> **8. Data not being archived for perpetuity (as per NARA
> requirements). Rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**
>
> [Discussion:]{.underline} We obviously need to preserve our data for
> use in the future. NARA regulations require than all federal records
> be preserved in archives conforming to their standards. The only
> archives in NOAA that adhere to these standards are NODC, NCDC, and
> NGDC. Is it a concern that, because we have no archive policies and
> standards, that our data is at risk?
>
> Comments:
>
> **9. Historical data needs to be rescued to provide a context for the
> future. Rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**
>
> [Discussion:]{.underline} Are there data that may be on perishable
> media that need to be rescued and put in digital formats for our use?
>
> Comments:
>
> **10. Plethora of administrative systems are not connected and don't
> work well. Rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**
>
> [Discussion:]{.underline} One NMFS senior official noted that we are
> confronted with a plethora of administrative applications from NMFS,
> NOAA, DOC and OMB that overlap, seldom work together, have bugs, and
> often don't meet NMFS needs. It\'s often difficult to determine what
> applications should be used when and it\'s difficult to keep track of
> passwords. Also, there may be potential conflicts and redundancy of
> information in multiple systems.
>
> Comments:

**11. NMFS needs to improve communications regarding the development and
use of its applications and technologies. Rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**

> [Discussion:]{.underline} NMFS develops and deploys new applications
> and technologies, such as electronic reporting of fisheries
> statistics, but often in a stove-piped manner. Do we need to share IT
> development efforts, successes, and challenges among ourselves more?
>
> Comments:
>
> **12. We don\'t have buy in for addressing information management
> across FMCs. Rating: \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_**
>
> [Discussion:]{.underline} Initiatives that attempt to address
> information management across FMCs (such as FIS) encounter resistance.
> Sharing data beyond the jurisdiction where it was collected, and for
> different purposes, involves risk, with little perceived benefit to
> the originating FMC. Is the lack of support for establishing NMFS-wide
> policies and initiatives to address some of these issues a challenge?
>
> Comments:
>
> **13. Are there additional issues? Please list your top three
> information management related issues not found on this list.**
>
> [Discussion]{.underline}: Are there other information management
> related issues that NMFS should be addressing?
>
> Comments:
>
> **ACRONYMS**
>
> DAP - Dedicated Access Privilege
>
> FMC - Financial Management Center; HQ and each Regional Office and
> Science Center is a unique FMC
>
> IEA - Integrated Ecosystem Assessment
>
> ITQ - Individual Transferable Quota.
>
> NARA- National Archives and Records Administration
>
> NCDC -National Climatic Data Center
>
> NGDC - National Geophysical Data Center
>
> NODC - National Oceanographic Data Center
>
> OMB - Office of Management and Budget

#   {#section-7 .Blue-Heading-1}

# Appendix C -- Objectives and Priorities {#appendix-c-objectives-and-priorities .Blue-Heading-1}

During the information management workshop conducted July 8 -- 10, 2008,
the FIMC identified objectives for each EDM goal area (see Section 3)
and established relative priorities as to the importance of each
objective. The following table presents the objectives by goal area,
indicating the desired time frame for completion (short, mid, or
long-term) as well as the priority level (low, medium, or high). These
timeframes and priorities were used to help inform the analysis that
went into development of the program implementation alternatives
presented in Section 5.

  --------------------------------------------- -------------- --------------
  ***Goal 1. Manage information with                           
  appropriate governance, focus and                            
  accountability***                                            

  **Objectives**                                **Time Frame** **Priority**

  Establish role of information coordinator in  Short-Term     Medium
  each FMC to work with local data managers and                
  act as point of focus for IM in the FMC                      

  Establish a governance structure for IM       Short-Term     Medium
  (project/portfolio mgmt)                                     

  Develop elements of performance plans for     Mid-Term       Low
  information managers and data stewards within                
  the agency                                                   

  Establish an information architect position   Short-Term     N/A

  Achieve buy-in and secure commitment from     Short-Term     Medium
  management                                                   

  Develop mechanisms for communicating          Short-Term     Low
  progress, success, value, and benefits                       

  Develop recommendations for funding and       Short-Term     Medium
  budget initiatives needed to support IM                      
  efforts                                                      

  ***Goal 2. Manage information collaboratively                
  to promote sharing of information, solutions                 
  and IM investments***                                        

  **Objectives**                                **Time Frame** **Priority**

  Establish mechanisms for ongoing              Short-Term     Low
  communication and coordination with FMCs and                 
  related programs (e.g., FIS)                                 

  Create mechanism for collaboration to allow   Mid-Term       Low
  exchange of information on common needs and                  
  services                                                     

  Develop a service oriented architecture,      Long-Term      Low
  enterprise service bus                                       

  Identify and manage roadblocks to data access Short-Term     High
  and recommend solutions to management and                    
  data stewards                                                

  Define information terms                      Short-Term     Low

  ***Goal 3. Establish and maintain policies,                  
  best practices, procedures and metrics to                    
  ensure good stewardship and preservation of                  
  NMFS information resources***                                

  **Objectives**                                **Time Frame** **Priority**

  Develop metadata policy and standards for     Short-Term     High
  data access and use                                          

  Identify, assess, and prioritize shareable    Short-Term     High
  information assets                                           

  Publish and maintain metadata on all          Mid-Term       Low
  shareable information assets                                 

  Establish quality plans for all data          Mid-Term       Low
  collections including minimum elements,                      
  formats, and values                                          

  Define policy and standards related to        Short-Term     High
  stewardship of data through the life-cycle                   
  including metadata, security, access,                        
  preservation                                                 

  Define concept of operations for NMFS IM      Short-Term     Low
  including high-level view of functions, data                 
  subjects, tools, and technology                              

  ***Goal 4. Empower internal and external                     
  constituents to effectively discover, access,                
  integrate and use the information to answer                  
  key current and future questions***                          

  **Objectives**                                **Time Frame** **Priority**

  Develop taxonomy for all NMFS data,           Mid-Term       Low
  information, and services                                    

  Educate ourselves on SOA and assess the need  Short-Term     Low
  and applicability of SOA within the agency                   

  Develop policies, guidelines, MOUs, etc.      Mid-Term       Low
  needed to facilitate access to data                          

  Define business glossary for NMFS information Short-Term     Low
  assets                                                       

  Define and implement a \"front door\" to      Mid-Term       Low
  enable access to NMFS information access by                  
  both internal and external constituents                      

  ***Goal 5. Continually assess and improve the                
  availability, timeliness and quality of data                 
  resources to support NMFS mission***                         

  **Objectives**                                **Time Frame** **Priority**

  Provide training, education, and outreach to  Mid-Term       Low
  data stewards, managers, and users of NMFS                   
  data                                                         

  Establish mechanisms to receive feedback from Mid-Term       Low
  users on satisfaction with NMFS information                  
  and services                                                 

  Establish service level and metrics related   Mid-Term       Low
  to delivery of NMFS products and services.                   
  Enable periodic review of service level                      

  Establish independent review of compliance    Mid-Term       Low
  with policy and standards related to data                    
  stewardship and evolve as needed                             
  --------------------------------------------- -------------- --------------

# Appendix D -- NMFS EDM Components Cross-Reference Tables {#appendix-d-nmfs-edm-components-cross-reference-tables .Blue-Heading-1}

**Table D.1. EDM Components x IM Issues**

![](media/image17.wmf)

**Table D.2. EDM Components x IM Issues**

# ![](media/image18.wmf) {#section-8 .Blue-Heading-1}

#   {#section-9 .Blue-Heading-1}

# Appendix E -- Glossary of Terms {#appendix-e-glossary-of-terms .Blue-Heading-1}

This appendix provides definitions for terminology used in this document

**Data** - A value, or set of values, representing a specific concept or
concepts. Data becomes \"information\" when analyzed and possibly
combined with other data in order to extract meaning, and to provide
context. The meaning of data can vary according to its context. (DRM
usage). Note: In the NMFS EDM program, the terms "data" and
"information" are treated and used synonymously, principally because
whether a data has meaning is in the mind of the beholder.

**Data asset** -- A managed container for data; examples include a
relational database, Web site, document repository, directory or data
service (FEA DRM)

**Data steward** - The individual who is responsible for establishing
and maintaining the quality, integrity, documentation, and preservation
of the data asset

**Enterprise Data (Information)** - Data and information that is:

-   Already shared with some entity outside of the FMC of origin (for
    example, observer data that is already shared between a science
    center and a region);

-   About entities or issues that cross FMC boundaries (for example,
    data about vessels that fish in multiple regions); or

-   Routinely aggregated to support decisions at a higher organizational
    level (i.e., data that is rolled-up to support national decisions,
    such as catch and value data that rolls-up to Fisheries of the
    United States).

**Information Management (IM) -** IM is the management of the
information that resides on the IT Infrastructure, and addresses issues
such as collection, data stewardship, IM tools and applications
development, preservation, and confidentiality.

**Information Technology (IT) -** IT is the infrastructure and the
applications running on the infrastructure, and addresses related issues
such as operations, security, capital planning and investment control,
and IT tools and applications development (i.e., what are primarily the
responsibility of the NMFS CIO).

**Metadata** -- An external description of a distinct data resource.
Common usages for metadata include providing the context of the data
resource, managing its lifecycle, and extending it to new uses. An
example of metadata is the external description of an audio file
specifying the artist that created it, when it was created, the length
of playtime, and its genre of music. The purpose of metadata is to
manage and improve the use of data and thereby turn it into a strategic
asset. (Daconta) TBD

**Metadata levels**

-   *Discovery-level* metadata is defined as that which is required for
    customers to discover the data asset. It includes metadata such as
    data asset title, owner, data steward, description, and information
    category.

-   *Detail-level* metadata is defined as enough information for
    customers to determine whether the data assets are what they want.
    It includes information such as time, location, data quality,
    suggestion for use, and formats.

-   *Element-level* metadata is defined as information required for the
    customer to use the data elements. It includes, for each data
    element, information such as element name, description, format, and
    coding structure.

> (NMFS EDP)

# Appendix F -- Acronyms {#appendix-f-acronyms .Blue-Heading-1}

  ------------------ ----------------------------------------------------
  AOOS               Alaska Ocean Observing System

  API                Application Program Interface

  CaRA               Caribbean Regional Association

  CeNOOS             Central and Northern California Ocean Observing
                     System

  CLASS              Comprehensive Large Array Data Stewardship System

  CXE                Customer Experience Evaluation

  DMAC               Data Management and Communications

  DMIT               Data Management Integration Team

  DAP                Dedicated Access Privileges

  DOC                Department of Commerce

  EOS                Earth Observing Systems

  EDMS               Electronic Document Management System

  EDM                Enterprise Data Management

  FMC                Financial Management Center

  FIMAC              Fisheries Information Management Advisory Committee

  FIMC               Fisheries Information Management Committee

  GEO-IDE            Global Earth Observation Integrated Data Environment

  GEOSS              Global Earth Observation System of Systems

  GCOOS              Gulf of Mexico Coastal Ocean Observing System

  ITQ                Individual Transferable Quota

  IA                 Information Architect

  IT                 Information Technology

  IEA                Integrated Ecosystems Assessment

  IOOS               Integrated Ocean Observation System

  MSRA               Magnuson-Stevens Reauthorization Act

  MACOORA            Mid Atlantic Coastal Ocean Observing Regional
                     Association

  NARA               National Archives Administration

  NCDC               National Climate Data Center

  NGDC               National Geophysical Data Center

  NMFS               National Marine Fisheries Service

  NOAA               National Oceanic Atmospheric Administration

  NODC               National Oceanographic Data Center

  FIS                NFMS Fisheries Information System

  DMC                NOAA Data Management Committee

  IPT                NOAA Integrated Products Team

  NOSA               NOAA Observing Systems Architecture

  GoMOOS             Northeast

  ANOOS              Northwest Association of Networked Ocean Observing
                     Systems

  OBIS               Ocean Biological Information System

  OIMC               Office Information Management Coordinators

  OMB                Office of Management and Budget

  ST                 Office of Science and Technology

  PacIOOS            Pacific Islands Ocean Observing System

  PRA                Paperwork Reduction Act

  PII                Personally Identifiable Information

  RIMC               Regional Information Management Coordinators

  RO                 Regional Office

  SC                 Science Center

  SOA                Service Oriented Architecture

  SECOORA            Southeast Coastal Ocean Observing Regional
                     Association

  SCCOOS             Southern California Coastal Observing System

  SMEs               Subject Matter Experts

  DAARWG             The Data Archiving and Accessing Requirements
                     Working Group

  VMS                Vessel Management System
  ------------------ ----------------------------------------------------