# Presentation: 530798

## GeoSpatial MultiState Archive and Preservation Partnership State and Local Agency Geospatial Resources

- Content Transfer, Demonstration, and Learning Project

- GeoMAPP

- A Partnership with the National Digital Information Infrastructure Program

- NDIPP Annual Conference
- Arlington, Virginia
- June 8-10, 2008

- Kentucky
- North Carolina
- Utah

## NDIIPP

- U.S. Library of Congress Digital Preservation Initiative
- Identify and preserve “at-risk” digital content
- Develop a national collection and preservation strategy
- Support development of improved tools, models, and methods for digital preservation
- Work with industry, government agencies, libraries, research institutions and not-for-profit entities
- Funds made available for matching grants

**Notes:**
• Library of Congress Digital  Preservation Initiative began in 2000. 

• Identify and preserve at-risk digital content

• Develop a national digital collection and preservation strategy

• Support development of improved tools, models, and methods for digital preservation

• Work with industry, concerned federal agencies, libraries, research institutions and not-for-profit entities

• Funds made available for matching grants
Collect and provide access to important information
Model best practices within a distributed digital preservation network
Catalyze collaboration among/between state CIOs, librarians, archivists, as well as other partners
Demonstrate concrete, repeatable results 
Broad sharing of lessons learned

## Why Archive Geospatial Data?Commonly Understood Processes

**Notes:**

Potential role in COOP: operational restoration and post incident analysis

Increase availability of “superseded” content for temporal analysis: 
Land use land cover/ impervious surface change
Monitoring beach erosion/ shoreline change
Population/ demographic change

Cultural Heritage (Sanborn maps)—The Sanborn maps were produced in from 1867-1970  and the Sanborn Map Company was the primary American publisher of fire insurance maps for nearly 100 years. Many of these maps have been digitized and repurposed. In electronic form, Sanborn Maps take on much improved value over the microfilm versions of the same maps, allowing for greater flexibility of use and improved viewing possibilities. Users have the ability to easily manipulate the maps, magnify and zoom in on specific sections, and layer maps from different years.

GIS data, much like the Sanborn maps reflect the changes to the environment, population shift changes, and growth. Because of the unique nature of the layers, users can see significant changes in areas in a short period of time. Without the data, planners start from day one. When originally published for fire insurance purposes

Significant Investments KE—cost of gis? How much in cost sharing grants does CGIA redistribute every year? Cost of software, storage, personnel, and training. 

Legal and regulatory processes—KE, decisions are made based on information contained in data layers. If disputes arise, it is those layers that may play a part in any court action or audit action that may occur. If the layers are re-written, entities have a more difficult time proving their case. 

Other. . . . . .

## Why Archive Geospatial Data?Shoreline/Climate change

**Notes:**

Potential role in COOP: operational restoration and post incident analysis

Increase availability of “superseded” content for temporal analysis: 
Land use land cover/ impervious surface change
Monitoring beach erosion/ shoreline change
Population/ demographic change

Cultural Heritage (Sanborn maps)—The Sanborn maps were produced in from 1867-1970  and the Sanborn Map Company was the primary American publisher of fire insurance maps for nearly 100 years. Many of these maps have been digitized and repurposed. In electronic form, Sanborn Maps take on much improved value over the microfilm versions of the same maps, allowing for greater flexibility of use and improved viewing possibilities. Users have the ability to easily manipulate the maps, magnify and zoom in on specific sections, and layer maps from different years.

GIS data, much like the Sanborn maps reflect the changes to the environment, population shift changes, and growth. Because of the unique nature of the layers, users can see significant changes in areas in a short period of time. Without the data, planners start from day one. When originally published for fire insurance purposes

Significant Investments KE—cost of gis? How much in cost sharing grants does CGIA redistribute every year? Cost of software, storage, personnel, and training. 

Legal and regulatory processes—KE, decisions are made based on information contained in data layers. If disputes arise, it is those layers that may play a part in any court action or audit action that may occur. If the layers are re-written, entities have a more difficult time proving their case. 

Other. . . . . .

## Why Archive Geospatial Data?Shoreline/Climate change

**Notes:**

Potential role in COOP: operational restoration and post incident analysis

Increase availability of “superseded” content for temporal analysis: 
Land use land cover/ impervious surface change
Monitoring beach erosion/ shoreline change
Population/ demographic change

Cultural Heritage (Sanborn maps)—The Sanborn maps were produced in from 1867-1970  and the Sanborn Map Company was the primary American publisher of fire insurance maps for nearly 100 years. Many of these maps have been digitized and repurposed. In electronic form, Sanborn Maps take on much improved value over the microfilm versions of the same maps, allowing for greater flexibility of use and improved viewing possibilities. Users have the ability to easily manipulate the maps, magnify and zoom in on specific sections, and layer maps from different years.

GIS data, much like the Sanborn maps reflect the changes to the environment, population shift changes, and growth. Because of the unique nature of the layers, users can see significant changes in areas in a short period of time. Without the data, planners start from day one. When originally published for fire insurance purposes

Significant Investments KE—cost of gis? How much in cost sharing grants does CGIA redistribute every year? Cost of software, storage, personnel, and training. 

Legal and regulatory processes—KE, decisions are made based on information contained in data layers. If disputes arise, it is those layers that may play a part in any court action or audit action that may occur. If the layers are re-written, entities have a more difficult time proving their case. 

Other. . . . . .

## Why Archive Geospatial Data?

- Legal and regulatory processes
- Potential role in Continuity of Operations Plans
- Increase opportunity for _temporal analysis_
- Cultural Heritage (Sanborn maps)
- Significant Public Investments
- The Added Value of a an Organized Accessible National Collection is Compelling

**Notes:**

Potential role in COOP: operational restoration and post incident analysis

Increase availability of “superseded” content for temporal analysis: 
Land use land cover/ impervious surface change
Monitoring beach erosion/ shoreline change
Population/ demographic change

Cultural Heritage (Sanborn maps)—The Sanborn maps were produced in from 1867-1970  and the Sanborn Map Company was the primary American publisher of fire insurance maps for nearly 100 years. Many of these maps have been digitized and repurposed. In electronic form, Sanborn Maps take on much improved value over the microfilm versions of the same maps, allowing for greater flexibility of use and improved viewing possibilities. Users have the ability to easily manipulate the maps, magnify and zoom in on specific sections, and layer maps from different years.

GIS data, much like the Sanborn maps reflect the changes to the environment, population shift changes, and growth. Because of the unique nature of the layers, users can see significant changes in areas in a short period of time. Without the data, planners start from day one. When originally published for fire insurance purposes

Significant Investments KE—cost of gis? How much in cost sharing grants does CGIA redistribute every year? Cost of software, storage, personnel, and training. 

Legal and regulatory processes—KE, decisions are made based on information contained in data layers. If disputes arise, it is those layers that may play a part in any court action or audit action that may occur. If the layers are re-written, entities have a more difficult time proving their case. 

The Added Value of a an Organized Accessible National Collection is Compelling. . As opposed to 1,000s of disparate systems...

## Geospatial Content

- Elevation
- Aerial Imagery
- Structures
- Infrastructure
- Place Names
- Hazards
- Landslide Zones
- Flood Insurance
- Derived
- Impervious
- Green
- Real Time Gages

## Geospatial Content

- Geospatial content emerging in many things we do
- Initial problem of preserving digital map layers, now also must consider the new problem of preserving the  location element of many business processes

## Geospatially Enabled and Operational Content

- Offender
- Info

- Photo

## Geospatial Problem AreaNot About Content Only

- Theme Layer
- Analysis Process
- Software
- Business Data
- Output Record
- Cartographic
- Web Services
- Metadata

## Collaborative Geospatial Community

- Graphic Courtesy of NASCIO and ESRI

## Statewide Governance

## NDIIPP “Born Digital” Content 

**NDIIPP “Born Digital” Content **

**Geo**

**Geo**

**Geo**

**Geo**

**Geo**

**Geo**

## NCGDAP Engages Community

## GeoMAPP One of Four MultiState Partnerships

- Legislative Records
- Publications, Agency   	and Court Records
- Vital Records, Land 	Ownership, Web-	based Reports
- Geospatial Content
- Twenty-One States

## Multi-State Geo-Archival PartnershipDemonstration and Learning

## Desired Outcomes

- Collect and provide access to important information for Congress, others
- Model best practices within a distributed digital preservation network
- INTERSTATE and INTRASTATE content movement
- Catalyze collaboration among/between state CIOs, librarians, archivists, as well as other partners, stakeholder associations, and  industry (ESRI, OGC)
- Demonstrate and document concrete, repeatable results
- Broad sharing of lessons learned
- Provide a focus for stewardship of state and local government digital information within a larger national context

**Notes:**
States are in varying degrees in terms of their programs. State set up are varied in terms of centralized versus decentralized. 

Partners want to broadcast their results and findings with regards to digital preservation. 

Recognize need to involve industry and IT to address the issue. 

In NC, local governements look to the partners to provide some concrete solutions with regards to their “old” geospatial data. 

## Key Issues / Components

- Content Selection (which content is needed)
- Inventory of geospatial content
- Integrating geospatial content into archival systems (process and frequency)
- Managing/tracking content once archived
- Flow of content between states
- Role of Metadata in the above processes

**Notes:**
Appraisal has been a key point of discussion. What is important for business continuity, may not be “archival” in the traditional sense. 
Partners recognize this as an opportunity to inventory the GIS content that has been created as well as the people creating and maintaining them. 
The groups are still discussing what each other does and coming to an understanding about the roles and responsibilities in each organization. Building the archival components into an existing exchange rather than changing practices presents a much greater chance of success with regards to capturing and archiving data. 
Partners recognize the value exchanging content can/will have. 
Creating multiple copies has challenges but ultimately helps to protect against loss or failure of data.  This is a test point for COOP planning. 
Partnership will promote the use of metadata. Without it, the files are useless. 

## State Level Preservation Challenges

- Capability are resource-limited
- Authority is dispersed
- Efforts hampered by current funding and staffing models
- Digital information not always
- available; often replaced or removed from the Internet
- Digital and print versions not always
- equivalent

**Notes:**
Capability for preserving state government digital information is resource-limited

• Authority for setting standards and responsibility for performing digital preservation is dispersed

• Efforts to develop strategic digital preservation programs are hampered by current funding and staffing models. KE—I would also say that not many understand the Archives role with regards to all records regardless of form or media. I think because it is digital, many think that responsibility  lies with IT. 

• Historical digital information not always available; it is often replaced or removed from the Internet. Question of how to deliver records to the Archives in a fairly easy, painless manner. KE Also, many are unaware of the obligations under their schedule. 

• Digital and print versions not always equivalent

## Status of State GIS at project outset
Governance and Community
Profile State DB
Profile of activity with Retention/Archives
Status of State Archive
Authority
Status of Digital Archive Program
Profile of activity with GIS office(s) 
Focus of Project Activity (Month 0-6)
Near Term Next Steps (Month 6-12)

- Governance and Community
- Profile State DB
- Profile of activity with Retention/Archives
- Status of State Archive
- Authority
- Status of Digital Archive Program
- Profile of activity with GIS office(s)
- Focus of Project Activity (Month 0-6)
- Near Term Next Steps (Month 6-12)

- State Partner Profile

## Commonwealth of Kentucky 

**Governance of the KYGEONET:**
- Commonwealth Office of Technology;
-     Office of Enterprise Policy and Project Management;
-        **Division of Geographic Information**
- Supported by over a dozen “responsible” publishers
**KYGEONET** **System: **
- Centralized ESRI system with internet portal viewer
- 487 published items
- 250 + layers in KyVector
- Over 25 layers published                                             to the National Map via GOS

**GIS at the Project Outset**

**Notes:**
 KYGEONET has 487 Published Items!
• KYGEONET and associated IMS sites received 7.5 million hits a month from over 32,000 Unique Visitors!
• This resource is maintained by over a dozen “Responsible” Publishers - Thanks to all Publishers!
•  Over 25 Layers Published to the National Map
•  Full Integration with GOS and Geography Network
•   More than 40 IMS Sites exist!
Kentucky’s Geospatial Database for Raster data
Was collectively built by GIS Staff from several state agencies – Over 250 layers
Resides in mirrored instances at Cold Harbor Computing Center
Contains all the aerial images, topographic maps, digital elevation models, hillshade, SPOT satellite imagery, trucolor imagery, land cover imagery, slope, and other critical raster GIS base layers
Is leveraged by nearly every state agency with a GIS
Drives all of the IMS applications served by state government
Is leveraged on the GIS Desktop by users in state agencies

## Kentucky Department for Libraries and Archives (KDLA) electronic records activities 
Active in electronic records for 20 years
Archives and records management operation includes electronic records
Electronic Records Working Group and Guidelines 
Participation in numerous grant projects
Electronic Records Archives created 2003
GIS activities with KDLA
Records retention schedule established
Transfer of some selected shape files from 2 periods
KDLA representative on GIS Stewards group

- Active in electronic records for 20 years
- Archives and records management operation includes electronic records
- Electronic Records Working Group and Guidelines
- Participation in numerous grant projects
- Electronic Records Archives created 2003
**GIS activities with KDLA**
- Records retention schedule established
- Transfer of some selected shape files from 2 periods
- KDLA representative on GIS Stewards group

**KDLA and Electronic Records**** **

## Focus of Project Activity (Month 0-6)
Project planning in Kentucky 
Learning about GIS system
Presentation at Kentucky Technology and Best Practices Conferences 
Meeting with the other state partners
Constructing a wiki

- Project planning in Kentucky
- Learning about GIS system
- Presentation at Kentucky Technology and Best Practices Conferences
- Meeting with the other state partners
- Constructing a wiki

**Kentucky Project ****Activity**

## Plan to archive KY Vector database quarterly
Purchase of large data store
Additional presentations and outreach to appropriate groups
Examine approaches of other states
Compare identified archival layers   with UT & NC
Match layers with agencies’ retention schedules 

- Purchase of large data store
- Additional presentations and outreach to appropriate groups
- Examine approaches of other states
- Compare identified archival layers   with UT & NC
- Match layers with agencies’ retention schedules

**Kentucky Project ****Activity**

-  Near Term Next Steps (Month 6-12)

## ►Governance of the Utah Geospatial Infrastructure
Department of Technology Services / State CIO
Automated Geographic Reference Center
Utah GIS Advisory Committee
Supported by dozens of “responsible” partners
► State Geographic Information Database (SGID): 
Centralized shared database
		(350 data themes)
Internet portal viewer
		(GIS.UTAH.GOV) 
Web Services and applications
		(MAPSERV.UTAH.GOV)

- Department of Technology Services / **State CIO**
**Automated Geographic Reference Center**
**Utah GIS Advisory Committee**
- Supported by dozens of “responsible” partners
- ► **State Geographic Information Database (SGID)****: **
- Centralized shared database
- 		(350 data themes)
- Internet portal viewer
- 		(GIS.UTAH.GOV)
- Web Services and applications
- 		(MAPSERV.UTAH.GOV)

- State of Utah

**Notes:**
 KYGEONET has 487 Published Items!
• KYGEONET and associated IMS sites received 7.5 million hits a month from over 32,000 Unique Visitors!
• This resource is maintained by over a dozen “Responsible” Publishers - Thanks to all Publishers!
•  Over 25 Layers Published to the National Map
•  Full Integration with GOS and Geography Network
•   More than 40 IMS Sites exist!
Kentucky’s Geospatial Database for Raster data
Was collectively built by GIS Staff from several state agencies – Over 250 layers
Resides in mirrored instances at Cold Harbor Computing Center
Contains all the aerial images, topographic maps, digital elevation models, hillshade, SPOT satellite imagery, trucolor imagery, land cover imagery, slope, and other critical raster GIS base layers
Is leveraged by nearly every state agency with a GIS
Drives all of the IMS applications served by state government
Is leveraged on the GIS Desktop by users in state agencies

## ► Utah State Archives electronic records activities 
Active in electronic records for 10 years
Archives and records management operation includes electronic records
Electronic records business case developed through legislative funding
Ongoing strategic discussions with Utah’s Dept. of Technology Services
► GIS activities with Utah State Archives
Records retention schedules established
Application development done to correlate GIS datasets with finding aids

- Active in electronic records for 10 years
- Archives and records management operation includes electronic records
- Electronic records business case developed through legislative funding
- Ongoing strategic discussions with Utah’s Dept. of Technology Services
- ►** ****GIS activities with Utah State Archives**
- Records retention schedules established
- Application development done to correlate GIS datasets with finding aids

**KDLA and Electronic Records **

- State of Utah

## ► Focus of Project Activity (Month 0-6)
Project planning in Utah
Meeting with the other state partners
Learning about GIS system and Archive process
Identifying and
	inventorying specific
	datasets for inclusion
	in Archives’ holdings
Developing process
and architecture for
preservation

- Project planning in Utah
- Meeting with the other state partners
- Learning about GIS system and Archive process
- Identifying and
- 	inventorying specific
- 	datasets for inclusion
- 	in Archives’ holdings
- Developing process
- and architecture for
- preservation

- State of Utah

- Web-Based Inventory Tool

## Plan to archive Utah Vector datasets as determined by retention schedule
Acquire funding for ongoing storage needs
Presentations and outreach
	to appropriate groups
Examine approaches of
	other states
Compare identified archival
	layers with KY & NC
Match layers with agencies’
	retention schedules, link to
	general schedules 

- Acquire funding for ongoing storage needs
- Presentations and outreach
- 	to appropriate groups
- Examine approaches of
- 	other states
- Compare identified archival
- 	layers with KY & NC
- Match layers with agencies’
- 	retention schedules, link to
- 	general schedules

**Kentucky Project ****Activity**

- ► Near Term Next Steps (Month 6-12)

- State of Utah

- Archive’s Database Geo-spatial Data Entry Tool

## State of NC

**Governance of GIS:**

- Department of Environment and Natural Resources
- Geographical Information Coordinating Council
- Supported by over 17 State agencies and 90 counties
**NC ONEMAP** **System: **
- 	ESRI viewer system linked via WMS to decentralized 	unique data providers
- 	342 items available via OneMap viewer
- 	208 layers available via centralized FTP (107 vector, 	98 raster)
- 	478 data layer records inventoried statewide by NC 	GIS Inventory (Ramona)

## NCAR electronic records activities 
Active in electronic records for 20 years
Archives and records management operation includes electronic records
Work with Secretary of State and ERC, GICC Preservation and Access Working Group 
Publish guidelines 
Participate in grant projects
Began accepting electronic records in 2001
GIS activities with NCAR
Began discussions with NC State and CGIA 2 years ago
NCAR representatives on GICC Preservation and Access Working Group

- Active in electronic records for 20 years
- Archives and records management operation includes electronic records
- Work with Secretary of State and ERC, GICC Preservation and Access Working Group
- Publish guidelines
- Participate in grant projects
- Began accepting electronic records in 2001
**GIS activities with NCAR**
- Began discussions with NC State and CGIA 2 years ago
- NCAR representatives on GICC Preservation and Access Working Group

**NCAR and Electronic Records**** **

## Project Steps

- Focus of Project Activity (Month 0-6)
- Project planning
- Meeting with the other state partners
- Learning about GIS system and Archive process
- Identifying and inventorying specific datasets for inclusion in Archives’ holdings
- Developing process and architecture for preservation
- Compare identified archival layers   with UT & NC
- Match layers with agencies’ retention schedules
- Purchase larger data store
- Transfer of content within and between states

## Engage Community

- National GIS Inventory
- NSDI, NGAC, FGDC
- Governance Community
- Survey Instruments
- Archives and Long Term Access Committee

**Notes:**
Recite NSDI definition from 2002 which includes ...preservation of data...

## Plan to ingest content packages and sets of CGIA information
Purchase of large data store
Additional presentations and outreach to appropriate groups
Examine approaches of other states
Compare identified archival layers with  UT & KY
Survey and outreach to match layers
   with agencies’ retention schedules 

- Plan to ingest content packages and sets of CGIA information
- Purchase of large data store
- Additional presentations and outreach to appropriate groups
- Examine approaches of other states
- Compare identified archival layers with  UT & KY
- Survey and outreach to match layers
-    with agencies’ retention schedules

**North Carolina Project Activity**

-  Near Term Next Steps (Month 6-12)

## Geo Archives Surveys

- 4 Targeted Communities:
- NC County and Municipal GIS contacts
- NC State Agency geospatial data creators
- NSGIC
- CoSA/ NAGARA
- Common themes across surveys
- Focus on “at risk” geospatial data layers

**Notes:**
Local Govt Target: 100 Counties/ 50 largest munis & other munis participating in the NC GIS inventory 
State Agency Target: 73 agency GIS creators from 13 different state departments
NSGIC  National States Geographic Information Council: State GIS coordinators
CoSA Council of State Archivists NAGARA National Association of Government Archives and Records Administrators

Common themes: info about what data is being archived, management of geo archives, business drivers for/ unique uses of archived data, awareness of Archives (or geospatial) staff and policy
Data about land parcels & roads constantly changing.  At risk of being overwritten or lost.  Aerial imagery/ land use & land cover data useful for change analysis

## Early Survey Results

- State Agency
- 58 responses from 6 departments
- 50% are archiving geospatial data
- Awareness of archives/ business drivers

- Local Government
- 61% of counties and 64% of towns responded
- 69% are archiving geospatial data
- Business drivers

**Notes:**
Primary Local Business drivers: The primary business drives appear to be: Historic Mapping (37%), Records Retention/ Archival Policy (29%), Change Analysis (27%), IT Policy (25%), Tax administration Rules (21%)

State Agency: Majority of GIS creators/ respondents are part of the Dept. of Environment and Natural Resources.  DOT, Commerce and Agriculture are also large GIS producers
- Knowledge of records retention policy: 47% said that they were familiar with the concept of a records retention but did not know what was in their agency’s schedule , 26% had  reviewed their agency’s schedule and had a general understanding, 14% said they were “responsible” for their schedule while another 14% were not familiar with retention schedules 
- State business drivers appear to be: Historic Mapping (44%) ,Records Retention/ Archival Policy (42%), Change Analysis (31%), Legal or Statutory purposes (28%) 

## Additional Engagement

- NSGIC
- NAGARA
- COSA
- NASCIO
- Intra State Communities (like Anne’s Committee
- Industry (OGC, ESRI, Reference WG)

## What’s next!

- Zsolt Nagy, North Carolina
- Kelly Eubank, North Carolina
- Glen McAninch, Kentucky
- Dennis Goreham, Utah
- Steve Morris, North Carolina