M

Adva

Meas

S

ncing

uring

State

S

g the F

g Pro

es Init

Final D

Septem

Fifty S

ogres

tiative

Delivera

mber 2, 

States 

ss of 

e Re

able 

2011

Initiat

the F

port 

ive 

ifty 
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 1

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

Contract Information 

This document was produced under contract to the Federal Geographic

Data Committee (FGDC):

Contract Number: 08HQCN0024/0002

PRIME CONTRACTOR

SUBCONTRACTORS
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 2

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

Table Of Contents 

Contract Information .......................................................................................................... 1

Table Of Contents............................................................................................................... 2

1 Executive Summary...................................................................................................... 3

2 Background................................................................................................................... 7

3 Characterization of the Geospatial Maturity Assessment (GMA) ............................. 10

4 GIS Inventory: System Utilization by State and Local Governments......................... 12

5 Overview and Analysis of 2010 State Summaries...................................................... 17

6 State Case Studies...................................................................................................... 23

7 Conclusions & Recommendations ............................................................................. 44

8 Appendix .................................................................................................................... 47

   
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 3

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

1 Executive Summary 

This is the third and final Measuring Progress report under the current Fifty States

Initiative contract (#08HQCN0024/0002) with the Federal Geographic Data Committee

(FGDC).  The purpose is to document progress on statewide geospatial coordination

and capacities made by the states and other eligible jurisdictions who have received

grant assistance under the Fifty States Initiative, and to describe closely related

developments amongst the states.  The Fifty States Initiative was jointly undertaken in a

spirit of collaboration between FGDC and the National States Geographic Information

Council (NSGIC).   

Since 2006, FGDC has awarded approximately $2,746,000 to 59 recipients as part of the

Fifty States Initiative (a.k.a. Cooperative Agreements Program, Category 3 and 4).  When

the 50% match from grant recipients is added, the total investment has been over

$4,119,000, nationally; and this amount does not include the value of the time and

effort contributed by participants in the hundreds of stakeholder workshops, interviews,

and surveys that have been conducted under this initiative around the country.  Indeed,

coordinated efforts to advance the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) have

been far‐reaching and effective with the support of the Fifty States Initiative.

The evident success of the Fifty States Initiative for improving intergovernmental

cooperation and geospatial capacities is built on a sound strategic and business planning

process, to advance the NSDI by improving state government coordination of

stakeholders.  Grant assistance for state projects under the Fifty states Initiative has

been designed to help develop and implement “statewide strategic and business plans

that will facilitate the coordination of programs, policies, technologies, and resources

that enable the coordination, collection, documentation, discovery, distribution,

exchange and maintenance of geospatial information in support of the NSDI and the

objectives of the Fifty States Initiative Action Plan.”
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 4

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

In parallel to the Fifty States Initiative, driven in part by the findings and

recommendations of the various state planning projects, NSGIC has worked with FGDC

on enhancing and augmenting the process used by the states for summarizing progress

on goals related to advancing the NSDI, by developing and implementing the

Geospatial Maturity Assessment (GMA). In fiscal year 2010, FGDC provided funding

assistance to support the development of the GMA, which is an objective baseline

assessment for routinely monitoring and validating a state’s geospatial business

performance capabilities. It was released on August 1, 2011, and is the 4th generation of

NSGIC’s State Summaries, replacing the current reporting process, which has been

weighted toward NSGIC’s “Nine Coordination Criteria” that were central to the Fifty

States Initiative over the past 6 or more years.    

Since the current state summary reporting process was used by NSGIC for 2010, the

results are summarized in this report.  In 2010, forty‐eight states, the District of

Columbia, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin Islands provided state summary reports,

primarily related to the status of progress on the “Nine Coordination Criteria.” The most

notable change in 2010 is the 32% loss of Political Champions (Criteria #4).  Given the

timing of the assessments, this cannot be attributed to the Presidential or mid‐term

election cycle.  It is possible that, due to the worsening economy over this period,

elected and senior agency officials are preoccupied and unwilling to spend their time on

GIS coordination activities.   

Eighteen states specifically mentioned a planning related activity in their list of 2010

accomplishments. Implemented as part of the Fifty States Initiative, the Strategic and

Business Planning process is generally credited by State GIS Coordinators for greater

credibility and clarity of purpose in statewide geospatial efforts.

Another major development in the past year was the new interface (version 4.0) for

“The GIS Inventory” (http://gisinventory.net) formerly known as “Ramona.”  It provides

a fundamentally different interface and much more powerful search and report

capabilities.  On April 26, 2011, the U.S. Census Bureau sent messages to over 44,000
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 5

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

local government contacts in the nation and asked them to adopt use of the GIS

Inventory to help facilitate the 2020 Census, resulting in approximately 350 new users

that are approximately 80% municipal government.   

In use for over 5 years, the GIS Inventory is managed and administered by NSGIC and

the participating states. There are over 4,200 registered users, and 1,300 of them have

documented 20,000 data layers, approximately.  In current practice, its use is voluntary,

and there is a great deal of variability across the states.  Incentives to use it would

further accelerate its already widespread adoption, and could help achieve greater

consistency in how and why it is used.  For example, it could be used to better assess

the nation’s current deployment of Geospatial Platforms for mapping data,

applications, and services.

Due to the continuing state and federal budget problems and the likelihood that

Federal partnership funds and grants will continue to be reduced for the Fifty States

Initiative, progress in the coming year will be difficult to achieve.  Besides lack of

funding, one challenge of note is the cultural struggle to assimilate GIS into IT, where

the implementation of chargebacks and fees for data, applications, and services is

prevalent.  These particular IT business practices can be counter‐productive to

traditional GIS coordination and data sharing efforts that have been so important to

advancing NSDI; and in some states, GIS deployment is falling behind due to this

struggle.

More helpful in the past year or two has been the leverage provided by the American

Reinvestment and Recovery Act (ARRA), mainly through grants administered by the

National Telecommunications and Information Administration (NTIA), which is within

the Department of Commerce.  These grants have been used for Broadband Mapping

and planning across the nation.  States have benefitted from this funding, and it has

become a major focus in many states for applying and growing their geospatial

capacities, and supplying data for use at the national level, as well as locally.  It points to

the importance of having a specific set of business drivers in focus for the justification
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 6

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

of GIS programs, which has also been reinforced by the Strategic and Business Planning

efforts across the states, funded with assistance from the Fifty States Initiative CAP

grant categories 3 and 4.
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 7

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

2 Background 

The background information first presented in the 2010 “Measuring Progress of the Fifty

States Initiative” report remains relevant in 2011 and is largely reiterated below.  The

description of the CAP categories has been updated to reflect the current status.   

2.1 PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to assess how the Fifty States Initiative, Cooperative

Agreement Program (CAP), grants may have enhanced geospatial coordination and

advanced the development of the NSDI through the improvement of state government

geospatial capacities. Coordination has produced benefits, both internally within a state

and externally with a state’s neighbors or federal government partners.  This

“Measuring Progress Report” assesses the Fifty States CAP grant program and its

impacts on furthering state geospatial coordination and, by extension, advancing the

NSDI.   

2.2 SCOPE

The scope of this analysis is a multi‐faceted examination of the various data available

from several sources. It provides both quantitative and meaningful qualitative

information that are individually and collectively suggestive of the success of the Fifty

States Initiative in improving geospatial coordination, and making progress on the NSDI.

2.3 CONTEXT

Since the National Research Council coined the phrase National Spatial Data

Infrastructure (NSDI) in 1993, there has been a great deal of thought and considerable

effort made to advance what is still an incompletely defined concept. The Fifty States

Initiative was jointly conceived by the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and

the National States Geographic Information Council (NSGIC).   
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 8

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

The initiative aims to encourage the creation of the NSDI by pursuing the notion that the

NSDI can best be achieved through active intergovernmental cooperation and

coordination built on a sound strategic and business planning process.  These aims

remain valid and of great importance to the successful advancement of NSDI, even as

federal efforts shift toward the concept of establishing Geospatial Platforms.

2.4 FIFTY STATES CAP GRANT CATEGORIES

The Cooperative Agreement Program (CAP) administered by FGDC provides federal funding

opportunities in support of the NSDI, including two grant categories for states in support of

the Fifty States Initiative.  These grants (i.e. Fifty States CAP grants) purposefully seek to

assist states to develop strategic and business plans to improve geospatial coordination in

support of their own statewide spatial data infrastructures (SSDI) and the NSDI.  As the 2011

CAP guidance describes, state projects for this category are designed to help develop and

implement “statewide strategic and business plans that will facilitate the coordination of

programs, policies, technologies, and resources that enable the coordination, collection,

documentation, discovery, distribution, exchange and maintenance of geospatial

information in support of the NSDI and the objectives of the Fifty States Initiative Action

Plan.”  Fundamentally, the Fifty States Initiative recognizes the need to build the NSDI with

the essential involvement of state and local government partners.

Fifty States Initiative CAP grants have been awarded annually since 2006 totaling 59 grant

awards.  Of the grant assistance provided by FGDC for the Fifty States Initiative, 46 were

“Category 3” (Strategic Planning) and 13 were “Category 4” (Business Planning).  Category 3

grants totaled $2,276,000, and Category 4 grants totaled $470,000, with the recipients

matching 50% of the award with funding or in‐kind services. The combined total of FGDC

funding was $2,746,000; when the 50% match from grant recipients is added, the total

investment has been $4,119,000.   
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 9

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

In 2011, there were two Fifty States CAP categories – Category 3 for Strategic Planning (2

grants of $50,000 each), and Category 4 for Business Planning (8 grants of $40,000 each).
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 10

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

3 Characterization of the Geospatial Maturity Assessment (GMA) 

The Geospatial Maturity Assessment (GMA) is an objective baseline assessment for

routinely monitoring and validating a state’s geospatial business performance

capabilities.  FGDC provided funding assistance in FY 2010 to support the development

of the GMA.  Without it, decision‐makers in each state (e.g., state Chief Information

Officers (CIOs), Geographic Information Officers (GIOs), Governors, Legislators, etc.)

have little sense of the extent and value of geospatial assets and capabilities within their

state.  These assets and capabilities include, but are not limited to, the following

components:

 Geospatial Coordination and Collaboration

 Geospatial Data Development (documentation and maintenance)

 Geospatial Asset Discovery and Access (sharing and distribution)

 Statewide Partnership Programs

 Participation in Pertinent National Partnership Programs and Initiatives

 Geospatial Policies, Standards, Guidelines and Best Practices

 Geospatial Training, Education and Professional Networking Activities

 Governance, Policy, Management and Planning

 Enterprise Integration and Design

 Societal Impacts

The GMA was released on August 1, 2011, and it the 4th generation of NSGIC’s State

Summaries.  In 2012, it will be incorporated into the GIS Inventory System (see next

section).  A process has been implemented to allow multiple individuals to complete the
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 11

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

different parts of the assessment.  The GMA is broken down into four fundamental

areas that provide 1) a general look at activities and challenges in each state, 2)

Governance issues, 3) Framework Data assets and 4) Services.  The GMA will serve the

following purposes:

 Inform other national assessments such as the PEW Grading the States Report

Card, ASCE Infrastructure Report Card, the Digital Government Survey and

COGO’s planned Geospatial Report Card, through access to GMA results posted

by individual states and/or the national compilation.

 Enable policy decisions necessary for state‐level strategic and business planning

activities, score cards (or other metrics) and other actionable items.

 Reveal cross‐agency and enterprise geospatial investment opportunities to

Governors, Legislators and other decision‐makers.  These items can be reviewed

independently, placed within the State Strategic Plan or otherwise leveraged.

 Enable GMA components to be assembled into or from more detailed Report

Cards. Alternatively, county GMAs, if and when they begin to surface, may feed

pertinent assessment categories in the state GMAs.

 Offer a framework for enhancing awareness and assessment of local to state to

federal capabilities.

 The GMA results can help guide the FGDC's visioning and the development of

any resulting programs, such as the Geospatial Platform effort.
Applie

USGS

Task 0

4 G

G

The G

inven

and d

is ma

it has

partic

tribal

great

meth

ed Geographics

Contract #: 08

0003AF

GIS Inven

Governme

GIS Inventory

ntory manag

data across t

ade available

s been in use

cipating stat

l, federal and

t deal of vari

hod in which

Figure 1.  U

s, Inc.

HQCN0024/00

ntory: Syst

ents 

y (http://gis

ged by NSGIC

the states, W

e to each sta

e for over 5 y

tes, but inclu

d other user

iability acros

it is used an

Use of the GIS

002

tem Utiliz

inventory.ne

C.  It invento

Washington D

te so they c

years.  The S

udes individu

rs.  In curren

ss the states

nd the incen

S Inventory b

Me

ation by S

et) formerly

ories GIS use

DC, Puerto R

an better un

System is ad

ual inputs fro

nt practice, it

, due to the

tives emplo

y State and L

easuring Progre

State and 

y known as “

ers, organizat

Rico and the

nderstand th

ministered b

om private,

ts use is volu

ir rate of ad

yed (See Fig

Local Governm

ess of the Fifty

Local 

“Ramona”, is

tions, system

Virgin Islan

heir user com

by NSGIC an

municipal, c

untary, and t

option of th

gure 1).  

ments (March

States Initiativ

Page 1

s a data‐rich

ms, policies

ds.  This too

mmunity and

nd the

county, state

there is a

e tool, the

h 2011)

ve

12

ol

d

e,
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 13

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

In contrast, the Clearinghouse system maintained by the FGDC has 61 state nodes at

state government agencies or academic institutions.  Eleven states have from 2 to as

many as 4 separate Clearinghouse nodes that range from inactive to active sites.  The

Clearinghouse is a distributed, electronically connected network of geospatial data

producers, managers and users.  It is neither a central repository where data sets are

stored nor a set of Web sites referencing spatial data.  It is a federated system of

compatible geospatial data catalogs that can be searched through a common interface

which is the Geodata.gov (GOS) portal.1

  

For the 61 state government nodes, the harvesting history is provided as an aggregate in

Table 1 and graphically by state in Figure 2 below.  Twenty‐five (25) of these nodes have

been harvested within the last ~18 months by manually forcing a harvest or selecting

‘settings’ on their systems that causes an automatic harvest by the GOS Portal.

Not

Harvested 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

10 11 3 4 3 5 6 19

Table 1. Harvesting History of State Clearinghouse Nodes by GOS2

 

1 http://www.fgdc.gov/library/factsheets/documents/chouse.pdf 2 Information provided by the GOS Portal Team
Applie

USGS

Task 0

In the

the v

with

partic

state

inven

by th

achie

are a

There

users

regist

ed Geographics

Contract #: 08

0003AF

e GIS Invento

arying usage

no single ch

cipants in th

wide data se

ntorying geo

e state. This

eve normaliz

lready subst

e are over 1,

s.  Together,

ter in the sys

s, Inc.

HQCN0024/00

Figure 2. Har

ory, the vari

e patterns h

aracteristic

he GIS Invent

ets.  In other

spatial data

s is to be exp

zation, consis

tantive and m

,300 users d

they have d

stem every d

002

rvesting Activ

ety of partic

ave resulted

approach fro

tory may typ

r cases, the

files within

pected given

stency and r

measurable.

ocumenting

documented

day and the

Me

vity for State

cipants from

d in a non‐un

om state‐to‐

pically be jus

participants

their respec

n the nationw

reliability of

.

g data assets

d 20,000 data

number of d

easuring Progre

Clearinghous

m different st

niform distri

‐state.  For e

st state agen

are principa

ctive jurisdic

wide scope,

results.  No

s out of the 4

a layers.  Typ

data layers g

ess of the Fifty

se Nodes

takeholder g

bution of re

example, in

ncies, focusin

ally counties

ctions withou

where it tak

netheless, th

4,200 total r

pically, new

grows each w

States Initiativ

Page 1

groups and

esponses,

some states

ng on

s that are

ut influence

kes time to

he results

registered

users

week as

ve

14

s,
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 15

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

evidenced by the GOS harvesting reports.  Version 4.0 of the GIS Inventory interface was

released in February 2011.  It provides a fundamentally different interface and much

more powerful search and report capabilities.  The release of Version 4.0 was very well

received by the user community.  On April 26, 2011, the U.S. Census Bureau sent

messages to over 44,000 local government contacts in the nation and asked them to

adopt use of the System to help facilitate the 2020 Census.  That action resulted in

approximately 350 new users that are approximately 80% municipal government.  It will

be followed by additional efforts to market the system to local government.  In 2011,

the Department of Homeland Security is funding NSGIC to work with the National

Alliance for Public Safety GIS (NAPSG) to conduct workshops and provide training

materials focused on the Public Safety community to encourage their use of the system.  

A flyer on this subject was recently published by NSGIC.

In 2010 the State of Georgia used the GISInventory.net platform to roll‐out a 6‐week

geospatial audit across all levels of government.  A Bill passed by the Georgia

Legislature O.C.G.A § 12‐5‐9 (b)(3) prompted this effort.  Their inventory effort captured

information on 88% of Georgia's 159 counties, including the following information that’s

automatically packaged into GIS Inventory: People, Systems, Policies, Data and

Geography.  A 52‐page report documents this first‐ever statewide geospatial audit in

Georgia.  The Georgia Geospatial Advisory Council (GGAC) made five recommendations

in support of the following objectives: 1) to use geospatial capabilities to meet Federal

Emergency Management Agency floodplain notification recommendations; and 2) to

formulate GGAC recommendations for advancing governmental data interoperability to

enhance service delivery to Georgia citizens through geospatial technologies.

The State of Maryland, through the Maryland State Geographic Information Committee

(MSGIC), launched an intense three‐week challenge to inventory Maryland’s GIS data.  

The Center for GIS (CGIS) at Towson University led the initiative, which was funded by

Maryland’s FY 08 Interoperable Emergency Communications Grant Program.  Their

effort began with a Proclamation by Governor Martin O'Malley that declared February

2011 as GIS Inventory Month.  The Inventory Challenge used the GIS Inventory System.  
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 16

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

A report on this effort is available to help better understand how to effectively conduct

similar surveys.

Utilization could be expanded and enhanced with incentives and funding assistance.  

The GIS Inventory provides valuable information for assessing geospatial programs

across levels of government and other stakeholder groups, and insights into the

feasibility of federated scenarios based on the availability of and access to authoritative

sources of geospatial data.
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 17

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

5 Overview and Analysis of 2010 State Summaries 

Beginning in 2003, NSGIC asked each state to self‐assess their status in relation to nine

Coordination Criteria that were adopted by the membership.  The nine Coordination

Criteria are:

1. A full‐time, paid coordinator position is designated and has the authority to

implement the state's business and strategic plans.

2. A clearly defined authority exists for statewide coordination of geospatial

information technologies and data production.  

3. The statewide coordination office has a formal relationship with the state's Chief

Information Officer (or similar office).  

4. A champion (politician or executive decision‐maker) is aware and involved in the

process of coordination.  

5. Responsibilities for developing the National Spatial Data Infrastructure and a

State Clearinghouse are assigned.  

6. The ability exists to work and coordinate with local governments, academia and

the private sector.  

7. Sustainable funding sources exist to meet projected needs.  

8. Coordinators have the authority to enter into contracts and are capable of

receiving and expending funds.  

9. The Federal government works through the statewide coordinating authority.  

The first report on these criteria was titled “State Model for Coordination of Geographic

Information Technology” and published in 2004.  It simply provided a summary total for

all states for each of the criteria and did not provide a detailed rating for each state.  In

2006, NSGIC standardized the responses.  The subsequent annual reports provided

state‐specific rankings for each of the Coordination Criteria.  They were based on the

following range of answers so that progress could be measured.

 Lost this function over the past year              

 No plans to implement criteria              

 Expect to implement criteria in 12 to 18 months          

 Expect to implement criteria in < 12 months            
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 18

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

 Criteria is implemented at this time              

 Did not respond to survey or to this particular question      

          

In 2010, forty‐eight states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the US Virgin

Islands provided the following assessment of their current relationship to the

Coordination Criteria in response to the State Summaries Survey. Key to Colors

   Lost this function over the past year

   No plans to implement this criteria

   Expect to implement this criteria in 12 to 18 months

   Expect to implement this criteria in < 12 months

   Criteria is implemented at this time

x Did not respond to survey or this particular question

Criteria

Has

a Fulltime GIO or Equivalent

Clearly Defined Authorities ExistHave

a Formal Relationship with CIO

A Political Champion is Aware

& Involved

NSDI

& Clearinghouse Duties Assigned

Coordinate Effectively with Local Govt.

&

Stakeholders

Sustainable Funding ExistsAuthority to Contract ExistsFederal Govt. Works through Coordination

Authority

State

Alabama                           

Alaska                           

Arizona                           

Arkansas                           

California                           

Colorado                           

Connecticut x x x x x x x x x
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 19

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF Criteria Has

a Fulltime GIO or Equivalent

Clearly Defined Authorities ExistHave

a Formal Relationship with CIO

A Political Champion is Aware

& Involved

NSDI

& Clearinghouse Duties Assigned

Coordinate Effectively with Local Govt.

&

Stakeholders

Sustainable Funding ExistsAuthority to Contract ExistsFederal Govt. Works through Coordination

Authority

Delaware

District of Columbia                         x

Florida                           

Georgia                           

Hawaii                           

Idaho                           

Illinois                           

Indiana                           

Iowa                           

Kansas                           

Kentucky          x x            

Louisiana                           

Maine                           

Maryland                           

Massachusetts                           

Michigan                         x

Minnesota                           

Mississippi                           

Missouri                           

Montana                           

Nebraska                           

Nevada x x x x x x x x x

New Hampshire                           

New Jersey                           
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 20

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF Criteria Has

a Fulltime GIO or Equivalent

Clearly Defined Authorities ExistHave

a Formal Relationship with CIO

A Political Champion is Aware

& Involved

NSDI

& Clearinghouse Duties Assigned

Coordinate Effectively with Local Govt.

&

Stakeholders

Sustainable Funding ExistsAuthority to Contract ExistsFederal Govt. Works through Coordination

Authority

New Mexico                           

New York                           

North Carolina                           

North Dakota                           

Ohio                           

Oklahoma                           

Oregon                           

Pennsylvania                           

Puerto Rico                           

Rhode Island                           

South Carolina                           

South Dakota          x               

Tennessee                           

Texas                           

Utah                           

Vermont                           

Virginia                           

Virgin Islands                           

Washington                           

West Virginia                           

Wisconsin                           

Wyoming                           
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 21

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

Considering the current economy and its overall negative impact on the States, they

have surprisingly ‘held their ground’ over the past year in spite of some obvious

functions that were lost (noted in the table above using red).  The following table

indicates the aggregate change from 2009 to 2010 with regard to the Criteria that are

fully implemented.  The one notable change is the 32% loss of Political Champions

(Criteria #4).  Given the timing of the assessments, this cannot be attributed to the

Presidential or mid‐term election cycle, so this significant loss of political champions

can’t be attributed to any tangible event.  It is possible that due to the worsening

economy over this period that elected and senior agency officials are preoccupied and

unwilling to spend their time on GIS Coordination activities.  Also, some relocation

occurred between agencies as coordination offices were moved to implement their

plans or gain other efficiencies.  It’s possible that this movement resulted in the loss of

some political champions.  There was a slight improvement in the number of states that

have assigned NSDI and Clearinghouse responsibilities (Criteria #5), and those

experiencing improved coordination with Federal agencies (Criteria #9).  Again, the

improvement is slight, but it may be an outcome of the Strategic and Business Planning

efforts associated with the Fifty States Initiative.  There is some variation between the

states that responded to the 2009 and 2010 assessment.  Therefore, a more detailed

analysis is not possible.

Criteria Fully Implemented

in 2009

Fully Implemented

in 2010

1 30 29

2 39 37

3 36 38

4 31 21

5 31 36

6 45 42

7 12 14

8 35 36

9 32 36
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 22

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

No questions were asked in the survey to determine why the states have been able to

perform this well, but the following reasons may have played a role.

1. The Strategic and Business Planning process implemented as part of the Fifty

States Initiative may have brought greater credibility and clarity of purpose.  This

was evident in the survey of State GIS Coordinators done as part of last year’s

(2010) Measuring Progress report.  The partnerships that come from these

planning activities are critical in difficult economic times.  Eighteen states

specifically mentioned a planning related activity in their list of 2010

accomplishments.

2. Focusing on the coordination criteria, particularly the relationship with the CIO

and clarifying responsibilities may have helped to sustain their efforts.

3. Increased recognition of the value of Geospatial Technologies and their

widespread use to support business needs may have helped.

4. A considerable number of state GIS Coordination Offices are directly involved in

the FCC/NTIA Broadband Internet Mapping Program.  The level of funding

provided through that program helped these offices sustain their operations.

Due to the continuing state and federal budget problems and the likelihood that Federal

partnership funds and grants will continue to be reduced for the Fifty States Initiative,

states will need to ‘do more with less.’  Focusing coordination activities to meet specific

state‐level business needs will become increasingly important to help them ensure

continuity of operations, let alone make progress on advancing NSDI.
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 23

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

6 State Case Studies 

6.1 Snapshot of State Results

The past CAP awards in the Fifty States Initiative categories (3 and 4) have produced

many successful and ‘measurable’ actions that are direct results of the planning process.

The following examples help to illustrate the successes. 

 AL established a new GIS Coordinator position, GIS Program Office, and a new

GIS Council through a Gubernatorial Executive Order.

 AR is implementing a parcel mapping grant program that provides state

matching funds to county participants.  Round one of the program included 27

applicants.  If all were awarded it would exceed state funding availability.

 AZ is moving toward a statewide Clearinghouse based on recommendations in

their Business Plan.

 CO moved the State GIS Coordinator position under the CIO based on their

Strategic Plan recommendations.

 CT created a new full‐time position dedicated to GIS Coordination. The state also

funded parcel grants for regional planning agencies and statewide collection and

standardization.  In addition, the state was able to fund (along with DPS, DOT &

USGS) a statewide ortho‐imagery collection effort managed by the Geospatial

Council’s Imagery subcommittee.

 DC established a new Executive Board as part of their GIS Steering Committee

through a Mayoral action on a recommendation in the Strategic Plan on

governance.  The City also established a blueprint for applying Portfolio

Management to GIS assets.

 KS has made incremental progress on enhanced statewide elevation data

(LiDAR) based on Business Plan recommendations.
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 24

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

 MA has moved forward on both statewide parcels (i.e. with Executive Office of

Public Safety funding) and also on the reorganization of their group into the

Information Technology Division based on Strategic Plan recommendations.

 ME has made progress Strategic Plan recommendations for a statewide parcel

program.

 MN reorganized their GIS program as recommended by their initial CAP grant for

a Strategic Plan.

 SC commenced 5 pilot studies between local and state government entities as a

direct result of their Strategic Plan recommendations.

 WY established a State GIS Coordinator role under the CIO based on their

Business Plan recommendations.

The following sections provide streamlined cased studies of what several Fifty States

Initiative grant recipients encountered, learned, and achieved as part of the planning

efforts made possible by FGDC funding assistance.  They all follow the same basic

format for case study content and reporting progress.   The profiled states are as

follows:

 Arizona

 Idaho

 Oregon

 US Virgin Islands

6.2 Arizona  

Geographic Information Council (AGIC) GIS Strategic and Business Planning Project

6.2.1 Prior t o Project

The use of Geographic Information Systems (GIS) and the presence of a community of

geospatial data users go back more than 30 years in Arizona.  The current Arizona

Geographic Information Council (AGIC) started as a state‐agency‐centric organization in

1989, but it was not the first GIS organization in the state.  Over the years, AGIC has
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 25

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

achieved broader participation beyond state agencies, as evident from the diversity of

the current AGIC executive and committee rosters, which include all levels of

government and the university community.

An active and knowledgeable stakeholder community of GIS professionals exists across

the state, involved in many different aspects of government and the economy.  

Expertise in the technology is a prerequisite for many jobs that depend on the

availability of geospatial data.  The productivity‐related benefits of GIS are generally

recognized in the professional community, and geospatial data is used in many jobs and

business processes related to the generation of revenue and the delivery of services,

such as taxation, utilities, permitting, public safety and many other daily operations.

Key GIS milestones in Arizona that preceded this project include the following selected

items:

 1980’s

o Arizona Mapping Advisory Council (AZMAC) established by

Executive Order 1982‐10, by Governor Babbitt

o Arizona Land Resource Information System (ALRIS) in 1982, and

the State Cartographer’s Office established under state statute, in

1989

o AGIC formed to replace AZMAC by Executive Order 1989‐24, by

Governor Mofford

 1990’s

o Regional GIS consortia added to AGIC by Executive Order 1992‐17,

by Governor Symington

o AGIC Strategic Plan developed in 1992

 Administrative and Legal Recommendations

 Data Resources Recommendations

 Technology Recommendations

 Education Recommendations

 Information Exchange Recommendations

 2000’s

o State Homeland Security Strategy (SHSS) developed, 2003
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 26

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

o AZ Map populates The National Map, c. 2005

o AZ Geodata Portal developed, c.2005

o FEMA grant received; Mapping Arizona document produced, 2005

o Height Modernization undertaken, 2006

o AZ3D initiative, 2008

o FGDC grant received to assist Strategic and Business Planning

o Senate Bill 1318 signed into law by Governor Brewer, 2009

6.2.2 Project Overview

The Arizona Geographic Information Council (AGIC) initiated this planning project to

more effectively meet the geospatial needs and requirements of Arizona.  AGIC applied

for funding assistance through the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC), as part

of the Fifty States Initiative to advance the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI).  

In February 2009, Arizona was selected as a grant recipient, specifically to support

Strategic and Business Planning for Geographic Information Systems (GIS).  When

Senate Bill 1318 (SB1318) was signed into law by Governor Brewer in July of 2009, it

became a key focal point for the AGIC Steering Committee leading the planning process.

Outreach was conducted and input was collected from the diverse community of

geospatial stakeholders throughout the state during 2009, including a series of Regional

Workshops held in Flagstaff, Kingman, Phoenix (Peoria), and Tucson.  In addition, an

online survey was conducted to gather input from GIS users and managers.  Based on

the input from the workshops and survey, preliminary findings and recommendations

were compiled and presented at the Annual AGIC Conference, which was held in

Tucson, in November 2009.  

6.2.3 Project Activities

AGIC followed the methodology outlined in the Strategic Planning Guidelines produced

for the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Fifty States Initiative.  A Steering
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 27

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

Committee was formed to provide oversight and direction, and the members are

acknowledged in the Foreword to this document.  The following list includes the major

milestones for the project:

• June 2009:  Project Initiation Meeting

• July 2009:  Project Initiation Report  

• July‐Oct. 2009: Online Survey

• Sept‐Oct. 2009:  Regional Workshops (Flagstaff, Kingman, Phoenix/Peoria,

Tucson)

• October 2009:  Preliminary Findings Summary Report  

• November 2009:  AGIC Annual Conference (Prelim. Findings and Additional

Input)

• December 2009:  Submit Draft Plans

• January 2010:  Make Plan Revisions

• February 2010:  Present Plans to AGIC Board

• February 2010:  Plans Approved by AGIC Board

6.2.4 Project Outcomes

The project resulted in the development of strategic goals as part of the strategic

planning effort, and a specific business plan to implement a statewide Clearinghouse.

The goals were formulated to support the key requirements of Arizona Senate Bill 1318

(SB1318).  They focus strategic efforts onto the creation, sharing, and governance of

geospatial data and services that support the business drivers in Arizona, and enhance

well‐being and prosperity for all Arizonans.  They also support the provisioning of

reliable and accessible geospatial basemap data to support key statewide initiatives,
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 28

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

including the Arizona Renewable Energy Project, AZ3D, and the Arizona Broadband

Mapping Project.  

The project also resulted in the alignment between the activities of the current AGIC

committees and the goals of the plan.  The leadership and membership of the current

committees are key resources for enabling concerted action. AGIC committees were

aligned with the overarching strategic goals, whereas the more granular programmatic

goals varied by committee.

Things That Worked Well.

 The entire Arizona Geographic Information Council got involved in supporting

the grant request and in creating a review committee to become involved in

the project.

 SB1318, which facilitated data sharing in Arizona and established AGIC in

legislation, was advanced and promoted. As SB1318 proceeded through the

legislative process, changes were made to it based on findings from the

Strategic Plan.  SB1318 became law in September 2010 (ARS 37.171 ‐ 178).  

 Internal resources and expertise were lacking to conduct a strategic and

business plan project, so AGIC obtained the services of highly knowledgeable

and experienced consultants to provide guidance and expertise.   

Problems That Were Encountered.

 Geography made it difficult to hold enough workshops throughout the state

to obtain input from all GIS stakeholders in Arizona and outreach efforts did

not draw a crowd proportionate to the GIS activities in the Phoenix area.

 The burst of the housing bubble and large State budget deficits posed

obstacles.
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 29

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

 The unexpected transition of Governor and replacement of most senior State

executives was disruptive.

Successful Results.  

 The planning process and the resulting strategic plan and goals helped to focus

and prioritize the efforts of AGIC as a statewide body.

 The resulting business plan provided a “how to” guide for implementing a

statewide Clearinghouse, to fulfill one of the key requirements of the legislation

that became law (ARS 37‐178) during the planning process.

6.3 Idaho

Eastern Idaho Regional Resource Center Business Plan

6.3.1 Prior t o Project

For decades, Geographic Information Systems in east Idaho has been developing at a

steady rate due, in large part to the efforts of numerous individuals within the GIS

community. As a result, pockets of GIS infrastructure exist throughout the region. More

recently, Idaho’s GIS business plan identified an organizational component known as a

Regional Resource Center (RRC), which was intended to anchor state spatial data

infrastructure objectives regionally. However, the exact mix of services and capabilities

of each RRC was left for interested groups to define.

In September 2009, several regional groups were identified in response to a call for

proposals by the Geospatial Information Office. These proposals identified geographic

regions, overviews of GIS resources, and GIS practitioners within their respective regions

that were associated with each proposed RRC. In February 2010, the east Idaho GIS

community was awarded a CAP grant to support the development of a regional resource

center business plan.   
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 30

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

6.3.2 Project Overview

The project scope included the development of a Business Plan specifically for the East

Idaho Regional Resource Center, as well as the creation of a Business Plan guideline for

use by other Regional Resource Centers, both in Idaho and in other parts of the country.  

GIS Regional Resource Centers (RRCs) are organizational components of Idaho’s

statewide GIS program ‐‐The Idaho Map (TIM) ‐‐ and have the primary mission of

supporting and coordinating GIS activities and users in specific geographic regions of the

state, in coordination with the Idaho Geospatial Council (IGC) and Idaho Geospatial

Office (IGO).  

The business plan and guideline project was managed by the Idaho State University GIS

Training and Research Center (ISU GIS TReC) and was funded by a Category 4 NSDI CAP

Grant.  The preparation of the plan was carried out with a project team that included

personnel from the ISU GIS TReC, Eastern Idaho Regional GIS (EIRGIS) and Southeast

Idaho GIS Users' Group (SEIGUG). In addition to this core project team RRC business

planning has included input from GIS stakeholders throughout Idaho. The intention of

the guidelines is to provide a foundation and support for RRC development throughout

the state. While the primary focus is on Idaho, it has applicability for any statewide GIS

program for which improved regional participation and coordination is needed.

The project successfully garnered tremendous participation from stakeholders across

the state using e‐mail, the list serve, in‐person and teleconference meetings, and a

dedicated web forum.  As geography presented significant challenges to travel,

technology was key in gathering input from this broad spectrum of stakeholders.   

  
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 31

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

6.3.3 Project Activities

The following research, information gathering and deliverable review activities were

conducted as part of this project beginning in May 2010:

 June 2010: RRC Business Planning kick‐off meeting

 June 2010: RRC discussion at the North Idaho GIS User Group meeting

 Summer 2010: Comments posted to the “RRC Forum”, a publicly accessible web

forum

 Summer 2010: Results of a Web‐based survey deployed and managed by the RRC

project team

 Summer 2010: Preparation followed by a review and comment on a companion

document, “Notes on Investigations about Potential Host Organizations and

Outside Support”

 August 2010: RRC planning meeting

 August 2010: RRC discussion (EIRGIS meeting)

6.3.4 Project Outcomes

As a result of the business plan, the East Idaho Regional Resource Center developed the

following Mission Statement:

The East Idaho Regional Resource Center will be a vital component of The Idaho

Map and enhance geospatial capabilities in the region by:

 Sharing scarce resources

 Avoiding duplication of effort

 Bridging local and state activities

The East Idaho RRC empowers local people to participate in The Idaho Map

without leaving the office. Even better, governments in the region benefit from
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 32

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

ready‐to‐go trans‐boundary information assembled by people they know and

trust. Anchored to Idaho State University's GIS Training and Research Center for

stability and maximum leverage, the EIRRC can rapidly facilitate regional

mapping and geospatial data needs.

Organizationally connected to Idaho’s GIS coordinating body, linked with other

RRCs, and the Idaho Geospatial Office and guided by a steering committee, the

EIRRC will accelerate The Idaho Map and unleash latent potential in the region.

Harnessing personal relationships and economic engines, like INL, provide an

additional catalyst and opportunity to create enduring benefits for all sectors and

citizens.

The plan also identified key partners and resources and made specific recommendations

for the development and operation of regional resource centers including:

 A balance of services and capabilities

 An organizational structure

 A physical location and operation strategy

 A communication and coordination approach with the Idaho Geospatial

Council and The Idaho Map

 Staffing strategies

 Technical architecture

 Interaction with other RRCs

 Potential funding sources

These recommendations and the comprehensive guidelines document now available to

other regions serve as a valuable template and set of tools for establishing the next

regional resource center.  

The East Idaho Regional Resource Center (EIRCC) was officially formed through

recognition by the Idaho Geospatial Council.  EIRCC management is located at Idaho
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 33

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

State University’s GIS Training and Research Center.  The EIRCC, as well as other RCCs,

will help connect local activities and coordination with statewide coordination and

facilitate interaction among regional efforts that are currently operating independently.  

Things That Worked Well.

 Communication was effective and key to the success of the project.  Tremendous

stakeholder participation was sought and received.  

 Project momentum was maintained through active project management and

communication.  As a result the project team adhered to the original project

timeline.   

 The project sought to achieve more than the “minimum” required components

of a business plan.  

Problems That Were Encountered.

 Originally two Regional Resource Centers were involved (East Idaho and

Southeast Idaho) but these merged nearly half‐way through the process which

required significant adjustment.  Fortunately, no serious project set‐back was

experienced.

 Geography presented a significant challenge to stakeholder participation.  This

was overcome by leveraging telecommunications and web‐based collaboration

tools.

 In the search for a consultant to support the project, many requests were sent

out but only two proposals were received.  Fortunately, both proposals were

strong and a selection was made.  

 Legislative and decision maker input was sought but very little interest was

expressed.   
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 34

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

 The length of the final business plan was deemed to be too long according to

some (43 pages).  The executive summary was written to communicate the key

components in an accessible format.

Successful Results.  

 An important step in the overall Idaho SDI strategic plan has been achieved.

 A useful guideline is now available to other Regional Resource Centers.

6.4 Oregon

Oregon Geographic Information Council ‐ Strategic and Plan for Geographic

Information Management

6.4.1 Prior t o Project

Oregon has a long history of investments in digital mapping starting in 1969 with the

effort by the Department of Forestry to capture map information on keypunch cards to

be processed on a mainframe computer and sent to a plotter.  In the 1970s, Oregon

counties began to move toward digital parcel mapping, often through contracts with the

Department of Revenue.  In the 1980s, a few local and state agencies began testing a

new type of mapping system that directly linked with a database, which allowed them

to begin comparing and analyzing spatial data.  Since these early endeavors, GIS has

evolved technologically and has integrated with key government agencies and programs

putting the tools into the hands of the problem solvers and decision makers.  In

September 1994, Executive Order EO‐94‐16, the Oregon State Map Advisory Council

(SMAC) was reorganized and renamed the Oregon Geographic Information Council

(OGIC).  Today, the Council’s scope includes local, state and Federal agencies and

establishes a relationship between the policies and guidelines of OGIC and the State’s

Enterprise Information Technology Strategy.   

Oregon’s first geospatial strategic plan was created in 2001, prior to the Fifty States

Initiative. While that plan was for development of Oregon’s spatial data infrastructure, a

refreshed plan was needed to align with the NSDI.  In 2008, a detailed business plan was
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 35

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

developed for the Oregon NavigatOR program, which was based on strategic discussions

with the Council and their understanding of the Fifty States Initiative but no

documentation of the strategy behind that business plan was produced.

The 2009 project was aimed at producing a refreshed strategic plan for geographic

information management and coordination for Oregon.  In addition to involving as many

local, regional, tribal, academic, business, state, and federal partners as possible, the

plans proposal called for a group of approximately ten GIS and accounting professionals

from around the country to develop an accounting mechanism to track the accrual of

benefits from coordinated development of GIS.  This tool was intended to serve

government agencies, at any level, in justifying the continued investment in coordinated

GIS development.

6.4.2 Project Overview

The scope of the project was to refine the state’s existing strategic plan and update the

goals based on progress and events that took place since the completion of the original

strategic plan in 2001.  The Oregon Geographic Information Council (OGIC) was focused

on several key goals with this project:

 More inclusive government model

 Expanded data sharing

 Improved Communication

 Formalized data stewardship

OGIC applied for funding assistance through the Federal Geographic Data Committee

(FGDC), as part of the Fifty States Initiative to advance the National Spatial Data

Infrastructure (NSDI).  In 2009, Oregon was selected as a grant recipient, specifically to

support Strategic and Business Planning for Geographic Information Systems (GIS).  The

Oregon plan was completed in September 2010.  
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 36

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

The Council’s steering committee included representative members from state, regional

and local government.  Outreach was conducted and input was collected from the

diverse community of geospatial stakeholders including private, tribal, academic, and

federal (in addition to local, regional, and state). The steering committee was integral in

providing guidance and feedback on the strategies drafted by the council.

The ultimate project vision was to “Support the business of Oregon government by

enabling efficient and effective use and sharing of geospatial information.”

6.4.3 Project Activities

The following activities were conducted in support of the project:  

 A series of facilitated group discussions was conducted focusing on open

communication and frank dialog to elicit information about navigatOR, how

it’s working, what needs to change and where it needs to go. Meeting

locations were dispersed around the State and included GIS in Action

(ORURISA, WA URISA), Portland Metro area, Pendleton, Ontario, Lakeview,

Bend, Portland, Salem and Roseburg.

 Meeting results were summarized and distributed back to those individuals

that attended each meeting to allow for edits or additional comments to be

captured. These comments were added to the results and used as direct

input to the Plan.

 Oregon project staff met with Gail Ewart, GIO, State of Idaho and Danielle

Ayan, Georgia GIS Clearinghouse Manager, State of Georgia to discuss their

respective 50 States GIS Strategic Planning efforts.

 A Strategic Plan Steering Committee composed of representatives from

State, Regional and Local Government and the University System was

convened. This group discussed information gathered to date and provided
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 37

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

strategic guidance. Metro’s Data Resource Center (the GIS business group in

Oregon’s largest regional government) was simultaneously refreshing their

strategic plan. Coordination with Metro was initiated to align planning

activities.

 A nationally attended WebEx/teleconference focused on benefit accrual

tracking was held and volunteers were solicited for additional working

teleconferences. One additional WebEx/teleconference with a smaller

workgroup was conducted.

 The Strategic Plan draft was widely reviewed by the GIS community and

revisions were made prior to OGIC endorsement.

6.4.4 Project Outcomes

The project resulted in the development of a strategic plan that provides a long‐term

strategic direction and foundation for geographic information management in Oregon.  

Other key outcomes of the plan included:

 The definition of an organizational environment for accomplishing geographic

information management goals.  

 Promotion of geographic information management programs and initiatives,

within the context of the overall government information resources enterprise.  

 Provision of programmatic objectives for more detailed tactical plans and

programs.  

 Vision and overarching strategy within which all geographic information

stakeholders can develop strategies and tactics for improved collaboration,

coordination, and geographic information management

 The next steps are to achieve support for the proposed data sharing legislation,

formalize the data stewardship model and process, and revise the Council

governance model to be more inclusive and equitable.  
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 38

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

Things That Worked Well.

 The Council achieved excellent stakeholder participation through the outreach

sessions and Steering Committee participation.

 The planning initiative was aligned with the goals of the Metro regional

government.

 An ROI study was initiated that will ultimately inform the goal to modify the

Council’s funding model.  

Problems That Were Encountered.

 It was difficult to stay focused on the strategic planning initiative thus it was not

completed as quickly as desired.

 The ROI study was not completed during the planning period thus could not

inform the strategic plan to the degree desired.

 Local governments were reluctant to take ownership for the plan’s success

 The plan was not completely aligned with the new Governor and Legislature.

 The results should have been more widely broadcast.   

Successful Results.  

 There was nearly unanimous support for continuing in the current direction

 Support for additional business planning efforts was garnered.  The Council was

enthusiastic about refreshing business plans even before the strategic plan was

completed.

 GIS strategy is now leading enterprise IT planning and providing direction
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 39

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

6.5 US Virgin Islands

United States Virgin Islands Geospatial Strategic Plan

6.5.1 Prior t o Project

In many ways the Territory, with its approximately 108,000 people spread across 133

square miles functions as both a state and a medium sized city or county.  Since both

states and counties have traditionally been major consumers and users of GIS

technology the Territorial Government has a tremendous variety of potential uses. At

the same time, the USVI is only in the beginning stages of GIS development and the

extent of GIS penetration is currently modest.  

Currently, the Lieutenant Governor’s Office of the Tax Assessor and the Department of

Planning and Natural Resources (DPNR) are the longest standing and most functional

users. In addition to governmental departments other significant geospatial technology

users include the University of the Virgin Islands and private non‐ profits that operate in

the USVI (e.g. The Nature Conservancy). Finally, a variety of federal agencies are

involved in mapping the territory whether or not they have permanent operations

on‐island.

The Virgin Islands Geographic Information Council (VIGIC) was formally recognized as

the geospatial coordinating entity in 2006 via Executive Order.  VIGIC provides a forum

and authority for geospatial coordination and has helped coordinate key investments

such as the territory‐wide orthophotography, LiDAR‐based elevation, and parcels.   

6.5.2 Project Overview

In 2008, the territory was awarded a Fifty States Initiative category 3 CAP grant to

support geospatial strategic planning and strengthen both the USVI SDI and the National

Spatial Data Infrastructure.  The project commenced in May 2009 and was completed in
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 40

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

June 2010.   

The plan’s overall strategic goal was documented as the following:

To develop a territory‐wide spatial data infrastructure that can be shared by all

units of the government and makes the territory’s geospatial data assets readily

available to the territory’s partners and the general public.  The U.S. Virgin

Islands spatial data infrastructure (USVI‐SDI) will be a key asset that serves the

residents and visitors daily and makes the Territory resilient in times of natural or

manmade disasters.  The USVI‐SDI will assist in the efficient and effective delivery

of government services and functions that include, but are not limited to:

 Economic development

 Protection of the environment and natural resources

 Providing public safety

 Supporting tourism

 Delivering government services

An enterprise GIS approach, spanning the entire territory will be pursued for

establishing the USVI spatial data infrastructure.

The plan also identified seven programmatic goals that represent the activities that are

necessary to create an enterprise GIS approach for the territory.  These goals included:

1. A full‐time paid territorial geospatial information office/coordinator

2. Finding sustainable funding that can span administrations

3. Territory‐wide street naming/addressing initiative

4. Finalization of parcels

5. Develop digital polling district layer

6. Develop a geospatial data clearinghouse

7. Develop an enterprise GIS technological infrastructure
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 41

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

6.5.3 Project Activities

Strategic planning project activities included the following:

 November 2009: Kick‐off and project planning meeting

 November 2009: Stakeholder Workshop (in association with the 5th Annual GIS

Conference held on St. Croix)

o Participation from over 120 conference attendees including participation

by the following sectors:

 Territorial government

 Neighboring territories and nations

 Federal government

 Non‐governmental organizations

 Private sector

 Academia

 January 2010: Development of a prototype web viewer to expose existing USVI

data.   

o Existing data sets included including parcels, orthophotos and elevation

were published via a prototype GIS web viewer deployed by AppGeo.  

This web‐site serves as a proof‐of‐concept for making USVI geospatial

data more readily available.

 January 2010: Department head briefing sponsored by the Lieutenant Governor

o Attended by 33 individuals representing 28 territorial

departments/agencies

 February – May 2010: Report Authoring
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 42

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

o Drafted by project consultant (AppGeo)

o Editing by the VIGIC Executive Committee

 June 2010: Formal release of plan

o Educational meetings to describe the plan including one‐on‐one briefings

with key territorial government officials

o Initial advocacy for carrying out the recommendations

6.5.4 Project Outcomes

The strategic planning project resulted in a plan that outlines the comprehensive uses

and applications of Geospatial Information Systems (GIS) data and makes several

recommendations for advancing the territory's GIS program. The primary goal identified

in the plan is to develop a territory‐wide spatial data infrastructure that can be shared

by all units of the government and makes the territory's geospatial data assets readily

available to the territory's partners.  The next steps for VIGIC include:  

 Pursue funding to create a GIO position

 Implement Territory‐wide street addressing project

 Pursue Enterprise GIS implementation for the U.S. Virgin Islands

Things That Worked Well.

 The integration of the workshops with the Territorial GIS conference contributed

to substantive stakeholder participation

 One‐on‐one interviews with present and past leadership contributed significantly

to the output

 The project team established a good working relationship with Governor’s

cabinet
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 43

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

 The project obtained legislative support and initial funding for the street

addressing project

Problems That Were Encountered.

 Procurement process was painstakingly slow;

 Individuals were more interested in their political agendas than actually

contributing to the plan;

 It was difficult to obtain comments and feedback on‐line early in the process;

 More budgetary detail should have been prepared for inclusion in the FY 2011

project.

Successful Results.  

 Completion of the Territory’s first plan for launching GIS throughout the

Territory

 The prototype on‐line GIS viewer provided an exemplar of how GIS data can be

consumed and made accessible to Territory GIS users
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 44

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

7 Conclusions & Recommendations 

The following are the important overarching conclusions and recommendations from

this year’s Measuring Progress study:

7.1 Conclusions

 Despite difficult economic times, states have generally “held their ground” on

the nine coordination criteria.  The strategic and business plans implemented as

part of the Fifty States initiative have brought great clarity and purpose to these

states allowing them to better withstand economic down times.  

 The strategic and business planning processes have helped states forge key

partnerships that have contributed to their stability and progress.  In particular, a

relationship with the state CIO appears to a key component to the success of a

state GIS coordination program.

 The FCC/NTIA Broadband Mapping Program has had a positive impact on state

GIS Coordination Offices that are directly involved in this effort.  The program

has further demonstrated the value of geospatial data for analysis and planning,

and focused attention on state GIS coordination programs.   

 The Fifty States Initiative CAP grants have helped to formalize efforts toward and

improve statewide coordination, communication and collaboration among

stakeholders.  State case studies show that successful stakeholder outreach is an

essential part of the planning process and greatly improves the chances of a

successful implementation of strategic goals.  
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 45

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

 As the political and technological landscape changes over time, geospatial

coordination plans need to be refreshed to identify new requirements and

opportunities.  Many strategic and business plans are over five years old and

should be refreshed to reflect the current situation.  

7.2 Recommendations

Build on the success and leverage the gains made over the past several Fifty States

Initiative CAP grant cycles with ongoing investment in the planning and coordination

process, and related efforts, as follows (echoing and expanding previous years

recommendations):

 Document demonstrable progress toward advancing NSDI, and identify gaps

between plan goals and actual results.  For example, for goals related to

developing or enhancing framework layers and themes such as elevation, what

has been funded and achieved?  

 Catalog and foster exchange of information, lessons‐learned, best practices and

success stories among states and federal partners.

 Continue with state case studies as a vehicle for information exchange and

documenting progress and obstacles to advancing NSDI.

 Revise and modernize the Strategic and Business Plan Guidelines, which were

last updated in 2009; specifically, the concept of Geospatial Platforms and

associated Data, Applications, and Services need to be explicitly addressed in the

current Guidelines.
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 46

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

 Provide funding to stimulate the refreshment and advancement of prior plans or

to establish new ones, in recognition of the cyclical nature of planning, and

evolving national objectives and expectations.

 Expand support and incentives for the GIS Inventory and GMA efforts and link

these to Strategic and Business Planning efforts, and to Geospatial Platform

objectives.

 Increase awareness across federal agencies of the successful outcomes of the

planning process, and the value of products from the Fifty States Program for

coordinated place‐based strategies across different levels of government.
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 47

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

8 Appendix 

State Award

Year Category 3 Category 4

Total

Awards by

Year

CT 2006 $50,000

LA 2006 $50,000

MD 2006 $50,000

MN 2006 $50,000

NH 2006 $50,000

NC 2006 $50,000

OK 2006 $50,000

TX 2006 $50,000

WV 2006 $50,000

WI 2006 $50,000

WY 2006 $50,000

ANNUAL SUBTOTAL 2006 $550,000 11

CA 2007 $50,000

DC 2007 $50,000

FL 2007 $50,000

IA 2007 $50,000

IL 2007 $50,000

IN 2007 $50,000

ME 2007 $50,000

MO 2007 $50,000

NY 2007 $50,000

SD 2007 $50,000

UT 2007 $50,000

VT 2007 $50,000

ANNUAL SUBTOTAL 2007 $600,000 12

CO 2008 $50,000

ID 2008 $50,000

SC 2008 $50,000

GA 2008 $50,000

NE 2008 $50,000

VI 2008 $50,000

HI 2008 $50,000

PA 2008 $50,000

ANNUAL SUBTOTAL 2008 $400,000 8
Measuring Progress of the Fifty States Initiative

Applied Geographics, Inc.    Page 48

USGS Contract #: 08HQCN0024/0002

Task 0003AF 

State Award

Year Category 3 Category 4

Total

Awards by

Year

AR 2009 $47,000

AZ 2009 $47,000

DE 2009 $47,000

KY 2009 $47,000

MI 2009 $47,000

OR 2009 $47,000

VA 2009 $47,000

WA 2009 $47,000

ANNUAL SUBTOTAL 2009 $376,000 8

AL 2010 $50,000

AK 2010 $50,000

MA 2010 $50,000

MI 2010 $50,000

OH 2010 $50,000

DC 2010 $30,000

HI 2010 $30,000

ID 2010 $30,000

ME 2010 $30,000

NY 2010 $30,000

ANNUAL SUBTOTAL 2010 $250,000 $150,000 10

NJ 2011 $50,000

TN 2011 $50,000

CA 2011 $40,000

FL 2011 $40,000

ID/MT 2011 $40,000

LA 2011 $40,000

MN 2011 $40,000

WV 2011 $40,000

WI 2011 $40,000

UT 2011 $40,000

ANNUAL SUBTOTAL 2011 $100,000 $320,000 10

ALL YEARS SUBTOTAL $2,276,000 $470,000

TOTAL $2,746,000   59