Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target

Architecture

August 21, 2006

Redacted March 2007
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................... I

1.0 PART I: LINE OF BUSINESS BACKGROUND INFORMATION ..................................................... 1

1.1 Overview................................................................................................................................ 1

1.2 Guide to the Document ..........................................................................................................3

1.3 Problem Statement ................................................................................................................4

1.4 Vision, Goals, Objectives .......................................................................................................5

2.0 PART II: CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS.......................................................................................... 7

2.1 High Level ConOps Overview ................................................................................................ 7

2.2 ConOps Workflow ..................................................................................................................8

2.3 Requirements and Capabilities............................................................................................... 9

3.0 PART III: COMMON SOLUTIONS................................................................................................ 12

3.1 Approach ............................................................................................................................. 12

3.2 Common Solutions Defined.................................................................................................. 14

3.3 Enhanced Governance ........................................................................................................ 15

FGDC SECRETARIAT:......................................................................................................................... 17

FGDC PROGRAM MANAGEMENT OFFICE: ....................................................................................... 17

3.4 Planning and Investment Strategy........................................................................................ 21

3.5 Optimize and Standardize Data and Services....................................................................... 24

3.6 Solution(s) Applicability Analysis, Benefits Estimate and Value Proposition .......................... 26

4.0 PART IV: CONCEPTUAL TARGET ARCHITECTURE ................................................................. 27

4.1 Purpose ............................................................................................................................... 27

4.2 Target Architecture Approach............................................................................................... 27

4.3 Target Performance Architecture.......................................................................................... 27

4.4 Target Business Architecture ............................................................................................... 28

4.5 Target Service Component Architecture ............................................................................... 30

4.6 Target Technology Architecture............................................................................................ 33

4.7 Target Data Architecture ...................................................................................................... 33

4.8 Integration............................................................................................................................ 43

4.9 Proposed Changes to the FEA Reference Models................................................................ 44

5.0 PART V: BASELINE ARCHITECTURE........................................................................................ 45

5.1 Overview and Purpose......................................................................................................... 45

5.2 Baseline Business Architecture ............................................................................................ 45

5.3 Baseline Service Component Architecture............................................................................ 47

5.4 Baseline Technology Architecture ........................................................................................ 48

5.5 Baseline Data Architecture................................................................................................... 48

6.0 PART VI: TARGET TRANSITION STRATEGY............................................................................. 49

6.1 Redundancy and Gap Analysis ............................................................................................ 49

6.2 Feasibility and Alternatives Analysis..................................................................................... 49

6.3 Transition Strategy and Plan ................................................................................................ 49

APPENDIX A: CONCEPTUAL TARGET ARCHITECTURE MAPPINGS TO FEA REFERENCE

MODELS............................................................................................................................................... 52
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page ii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: Geospatial LoB Common Solutions and Target Architecture Document Guide ...................4

Figure 2: High-Level Concept of Operations Overview......................................................................7

Figure 3: Workflow Concept of Operations .......................................................................................8

Figure 4: Modified A-130 Asset Lifecycle Elements ..........................................................................9

Figure 5: Development Approach ................................................................................................... 12

Figure 6: Common Solutions Framework Diagram.......................................................................... 14

Figure 7: Enhanced Governance Components ............................................................................... 15

Figure 8: Federal Geo LoB Governance Model (To-Be ................................................................... 18

Figure 9: Planning and Investment Strategy Components............................................................... 22

Figure 10: Optimize and Standardize Components......................................................................... 26

Figure 12: Target Service Component Architecture ........................................................................ 34

Figure 13: Geospatial LoB Target Data Architecture Framework..................................................... 37

Figure 14: Geospatial Data Asset Categories ................................................................................. 39

Figure 15: Transition Activities ....................................................................................................... 53

Figure 16: Federal Transition Framework Metamodel ..................................................................... 55

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Cross-governmental activities with geospatial benefits ...................................................... 46

Table 2: Lines of Business that Have Geospatial Elements (per Geo Profile).................................. 49

Table A 1: Performance Analysis for the Geospatial LoB................................................................ 64

Table A 2: Common solution Business Processes .......................................................................... 67

Table A 3: BRM to Common Solutions (External) ........................................................................... 69

Table A 4: BRM to Common Solutions (Internal) ............................................................................ 72

Table A 5: LoB Goal Alignment ...................................................................................................... 74

Table A 6: LoB PRM Alignment ...................................................................................................... 76

Table A 7: Geospatial Service Component ..................................................................................... 78

Table A 8: Service Component to ConOps Process Mapping ......................................................... 83

Table A 9: TRM to Concept of Operations Mapping........................................................................ 85

LIST OF INITIATIVES & TRANSITION STRATEGIES

Enhanced Governance—Transition Strategy......................................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Strategic Planning and Investment—Transition Strategy.....................Error! Bookmark not defined.

Optimized and Standardized Data and Services—Transition Strategy Error! Bookmark not defined.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 1

1.0 PART I: LINE OF BUSINESS BACKGROUND INFORMATION

1.1 Overview

The Geospatial Line of Business (LoB) addresses data and services that are or can be associated

with a location on earth1. Internet services, like Google Earth, MapQuest and many newer

offerings are popularizing location-enabled services that used to be only accessible to high tech

and geography professionals. With these types of services, we can now see that 80 to 90 percent

of all data have a locational or geospatial component that could enable a visual representation or

mapping of information. This is not an arcane interest of a few Federal agencies. Information and

knowledge derived from geospatial data and services are vital to scores of business functions that

span all Federal agencies and other levels of government (international, state, local and tribal). In

addition, geospatial information serves critical needs of private citizens and commercial

businesses in far-ranging ways. For example:

 In Hurricane Katrina, citizens and emergency responders needed to know the nature,

magnitude, and timing of anticipated storm destruction in different areas, the location of

victims and emergency facilities, the best and nearest evacuation routes, and the actual

patterns of damage by location after the storm passed

 Businesses need to know how much the consumer price index is rising in their operating

area in order to fairly establish annual salary increases or the geographic growth patterns

of new consumer markets to properly plan business investments

 Military veterans need to know what medical services are available in their community

and where they can obtain more specialized care

 Farmers can use the measured spatial and temporal trends in climate to help make

prudent decisions on future crop selections and irrigation needs

 Citizens and legislators need to know the changing demographics in their community as a

result of immigration to guide wise decisions about where tax dollars must provide social

services and private investments should fund future development

 Citizens and businesses have a vested interest in whether income tax laws and regulations

are being equitably enforced in different regions of the country, e.g., how does the

likelihood of being audited vary

Today, there are numerous geospatial efforts being conducted independently across Federal

agencies, resulting in disparate data silos and services and investment opportunity losses. It is

estimated that hundreds of millions of dollars are spent annually by Federal Agencies and their

partners on geospatial data, services, technology and expertise to support their internal business

1 Geospatial data is information that identifies the geographic location and characteristics of natural or constructed

features and boundaries on the Earth. This information may be derived from, among other things, remote sensing,

mapping, and surveying technologies.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 2

operations and enhance service to citizens. Advances in technology and the use of geospatial

information have outpaced the ability of Federal agencies and their partners to fully benefit from,

manage, and share these assets. Contributing factors may include a lack of funding for

continuous and targeted training/hiring and university/government partnerships and the

continuing need for innovation in organizations, leadership, and management.

The Geospatial LoB has set forth ambitious and transformational goals to better serve the

Nation’s interests. Building on the policy foundation of the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) Circular A-162(“Coordination of Geographic Information and Related Spatial Data

Activities”) and the President’s Management Agenda, the Geospatial LoB will establish a new

and more citizen-centric collaborative model for geospatial-related activities and investments.

This will create a framework for sustainable participation from non-Federal partners, and create a

more coordinated and leveraged approach to producing, maintaining, and using geospatial data

and services. Future cost savings and greater satisfaction of customer and business needs will be

realized by optimizing, and where appropriate, consolidating geospatial assets and activities

through enhanced performance accountability and compliance mechanisms and coordinated

budget planning and cost avoidance strategies. Provisioning the Nation with easy to use

geospatial capabilities will promote cheaper, smarter and more efficient government business,

services and information.

OMB and the Geospatial LoB are focused on business-driven, common solutions(s) aligned with

the Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA)3and guided by the FEA Geospatial Profile4and the

National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI)5in order to support operations across the Nation and

beyond. This approach leverages the global information platform (and the growing power of its

functional and architectural capabilities) while adhering to privacy, security and other federal

regulations. These web-based services will be managed and delivered through trustworthy

providers (Federal or commercial) where the following characteristics are present:

 High quality and timely geospatial data and services are easy to find and use by all levels

of government, the private sector, and communities of interest (COIs)

 Enterprise business needs and agency core mission requirements can be identified,

planned, budgeted and exploited in a geospatial context

 Long term costs of geo-information delivery and access, are reduced and duplicative

development efforts are minimized

 Business processes are optimized and knowledge management capabilities exist for

locating geospatial data and obtaining services

2

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/circulars/a016/a016_rev.html

3

http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/a-1-fea.html

4

http://www.cio.gov/documents/FEA_Geospatial_Profile_v1-1.pdf

5

http://www.fgdc.gov/nsdi/nsdi.html
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 3

 Effective, yet less costly COTS systems and contractual business support operations can

replace legacy geospatial applications

 Collaborative management of geospatial investments can be made more adaptable,

proactive and inclusive

1.2 Guide to the Document

The results of our Geospatial LoB efforts are described in six major sections. Each section is

summarized as follows:

LoB Background Information – Includes an overview of the LoB, including a problem

statement, and states the vision, goals, and objectives of the LoB.

Concept of Operations (ConOps) – Explains future business processes and activities.

Common Solutions – Identifies the Geospatial LoB common solutions; how the common

solutions interact with each other; the drivers, milestones and desired outcomes; specific support

tasks, roles and responsibilities; and benefits and risks.

Conceptual Target Architecture – Describes how the implementation of common solutions

requires an enabling target architecture that is aligned with the Performance, Business,

Technical, Service and Data Reference models that compose the FEA, augmented by the

managed processes for information exchange among agencies.

Baseline Architecture – Describes the current state that the target transition strategy must

transform to the target architecture and the enabled common solutions.

Target Transition Strategy – Sets forth a time-phased plan for implementing the elements of the

proposed common solutions consistent with an orderly transition to the target architecture.

Figure 1 summarizes the relationships between these sections.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 4

Gap Analysis

Drives

Establishes Target

State Needs

Sets Vision, Scope

Performance Expectation

For

Plan to achieve LOB

Goals and Objectives

Figure 1: Geospatial LoB Common Solutions and Target Architecture Document Guide

1.3 Problem Statement

Current geospatial efforts are largely conducted independently across Federal agencies based on

limited geospatial business requirements definition

6

. There are limited efforts for increasing

internal and enterprise effectiveness and efficiency or creating new geospatial resources and

services. This inability to better coordinate, organize, and manage business needs yields a

situation where:

 Disenfranchised stakeholders perceive that their business requirements are not met and

have little incentive to partner financially or share their geospatial assets with the Federal

government

 Disparate efforts are underway to complete the National Spatial Data Infrastructure

(NSDI) which has delayed its completions and inflated its cost

 Independent geospatial data, services and applications have been developed multiple

times to support the same or similar business processes

 Multiple licenses and contracts for the same product or service are in place across the

government, reducing the opportunities for economies of scale and increasing the overall

cost to the government

6 Geospatial Information: Better Coordination Needed to Identify and Reduce Duplicative Investments, Government

Accountability Office (GAO), GAO-04-703 (June 23, 2004), http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d04703.pdf
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 5

 Operational data and services used to support mission specific business functions have

not been “geo-referenced” or “geospatially enabled”, decreasing their value and use

 Wide disparities in geospatial capabilities exist across Federal agencies resulting in many

programs not taking advantage of innovative technologies that are available

1.4 Vision, Goals, Objectives

Vision

The Nation’s interests are served, and the core missions of Federal agencies and their partners

are met, through the effective and efficient development, provision, and interoperability of

geospatial data and services.

Goals and Objectives

Goal 1 - Productive intergovernmental collaboration for geospatial-related activities and

investments across all sectors and levels of government.

Objectives -

 To improve governance processes and results in alignment with common geospatial

solutions

 To identify, evaluate and implement common geospatial services, processes and best

practices

 To enhance coordination across geospatial community stakeholders

Goal 2 - Optimized and standardized common geospatial functions, services, and processes that

are responsive to customers

Objectives -

 To implement guidance provided through the FEA Geospatial Profile

 To adopt, deploy and promote effective use of geospatial interoperability standards

 To establish an LoB-wide business architecture for common functions associated with

geospatial information

Goal 3 - Cost efficient acquisition, processing, and access to geospatial data and information

Objectives -

 To coordinate geospatial requirements and capabilities

 To identify opportunities and consolidate geospatial acquisition activities when costeffective and when all essential agency requirements are met
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 6

 To enhance LoB-wide portfolio management

 To develop and implement geospatial requirements language for Federal grants and

contracts
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 7

2.0 PART II: CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS

2.1 High Level ConOps Overview

The high level ConOps identifies the future operating environment, in which participating

organizations, stakeholders, partners, and individuals will interact and manage geospatial assets

to support business-driven requirements. It is within this context that the proposed Common

Solutions, described in Part III will be deployed. Figure 2 provides a high-level view of the

geospatial community that is to be engaged in the realization of this Line of Business. Various

stakeholder roles are shown in an inclusive governance process to broaden access to geospatial

assets. Geospatial assets include services, mission or business data and related information, and

human capital that support knowledge management.

Figure 2: High-Level Concept of Operations Overview

Key stakeholders in the realization of the LoB include:

 Users who discover, evaluate, and use geospatial assets in the support of decision-making

 Citizens who gain benefit from geospatially enabled services to citizens through maps

and location-aware applications and technologies (e.g. cell phones, PDAs, and GPS)

 Data Providers who develop, apply quality assurance/quality control, update, and stage

geospatial assets

Governance

Budget Guidance,

Policy, Mandates,

Business Requirements,

Portfolio Management

Data and

Business

Information

Services

Geospatial Assets

Citizens

Data

Stewards

Users

Data

Providers

provide access to,

broker, enable

discovery of, enhance,

link, support

applications on,

develop knowledgebased products from

oversee lifecycle of,

accountable for

Governance

Bodies

select,

coordinate,

provide, integrate

update,

stage

define,

abide by

make decisions with

business-driven

applications using

gain access to

integrated

government

through

controls

disposition of

Human

Capital
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 8

 Data Stewards who oversee the lifecycle of specific geospatial assets, select, coordinate,

and integrate common geospatial assets, and are accountable for their availability in

support of community business requirements

 Governance Bodies where roles and responsibilities are defined based on the role of the

participant. There are several requirements to be addressed in the governance of the

geospatial community for various stakeholder affiliations

The scope of participation in the Geospatial LoB is inclusive of organizations that produce,

coordinate, and consume geospatial data and services. Because one of the primary interests of the

LoB is the sharing and reuse of geospatial resources, the main activities under the governance of

the LoB include access to sustained, mission-critical information resources and access points for

exchange between agencies. The LoB incorporates and respects agency mission responsibilities

and promotes reusability through effective and efficient access to geospatial data and services.

The precise definition of roles and responsibilities will need to be adjudicated through the

proposed governance bodies for the LoB. Although the focus is on the federal government, key

non-federal stakeholders will have critical roles to play within the broader geospatial community.

2.2 ConOps Workflow

A workflow diagram that addresses the life cycle of geospatial assets from the perspectives of

the provider and the consumer is provided in Figure 3. Both notional data flows (dotted lines)

and governance or workflows (solid lines) are depicted in this figure.

Figure 3: Workflow Concept of Operations

Mediated

Access Consumer

Provider

Stakeholders Policy & Mandates Budget Guidance

Asset Management

Find

Acquire

Publish

Services

Information

Assets,

Knowledge

Utilize Visualize

Guidance

Policy

Charters,

Requirements,

Standards, MOUs

Monitor, Assess,

Business Planning,

Performance Management

Implementation Planning

Data Flow

Control Flow

Requirements (Explicit)

Need (Implicit)

Contract

Need

Reporting

Manage Manage

Geospatial Asset

Improved Mission

and Decision Support

SLAs

Partnerships

Budget

CRADA

● Business Alignment

● Prioritization

● Optimization

● Stewardship

● Portfolio Management

● Outreach / Collaboration

Governance

● Business Alignment

● Prioritization

● Optimization

● Stewardship

● Portfolio Management

● Outreach / Collaboration

Governance
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 9

Providers publish their assets as discoverable resources (assets) that consumers, through their

decision support environments, would use. Consumers use decision support applications that

allow them to discover, visualize, and use geospatial data and their mapped representation.

Mediated access, sometimes known as brokering, helps bridge the heterogeneity problem

between data producers and consumers through applications for processing, translating,

aggregating and integrating data. Asset management is required for both geospatial services and

the information assets (data and knowledge). Direct access to assets is also supported for

applications to perform routine interactions with geospatial data and services.

2.3 Requirements and Capabilities

In the context of this geospatial community,

functional requirements are most readily aligned

with the existing principles of OMB Circular A-130

data lifecycle. In the development of the Geospatial

LoB, it was recognized that the lifecycle should be

applied not only to data, but also to all geospatial

assets – to include data, services, and the human

resources required to provide a sustainable and

accessible set of resources for the community. The

interpretation of the A-130 lifecycle was similarly

extended to include publish and find capabilities

that are especially critical in asset awareness across

multiple organizations (Figure 4).

The following generic scenarios illustrate the

functional requirements and capabilities that are

exercised through the lifecycle by the participants in

the geospatial community. Key aspects of the inset

use scenarios include a citizen user oriented scenario, a scientific publishing scenario that is not

time sensitive but knowledge sensitive, and an emergency scenario for immediate access. There

are many roles depicted in Figure 3 - Workflow ConOps that are key to successful uptake of

geospatial practices. These roles may exist

within all sectors of participation –

commercial, government, citizen, etc. Each

numbered lifecycle element, below, may

not be exercised in every scenario by all

role types.

1. Define – In the context of solving a

problem, a user must first define their

needs in terms of data, services, and

infrastructure based on business-driven

requirements. Key elements of this step

include:

Figure 4: Modified A-130 Asset Lifecycle

Elements

Use

Create/

Acquire

Publish/

Disseminate

Process/

Maintain

Store/

Manage

Acquire/

Create

Data &

Services

Use

Define/

Find

Use

Create/

Acquire

Publish/

Disseminate

Process/

Maintain

Store/

Manage

Acquire/

Create

Data &

Services

Use

Define/

Find

Citizen User Scenario:

1.A citizen accesses a government portal to find what

grant or other assistance opportunities are available to

them.

2.Portal requests information about the type of assistance

required and the location of residence for the citizen.

3.Citizen enters location and other requested information

into the portal.

4.Portal interacts with several government grant and

assistance programs in different agencies that have been

“location-enabled”. Portal compares the characteristics of

the citizen with the programs, including eligibility by

location, and returns eligible program information.

5.Citizen is presented with an integrated listing of eligible

programs customized to his/her location (use).

Citizen User Scenario:

1.A citizen accesses a government portal to find what

grant or other assistance opportunities are available to

them.

2.Portal requests information about the type of assistance

required and the location of residence for the citizen.

3.Citizen enters location and other requested information

into the portal.

4.Portal interacts with several government grant and

assistance programs in different agencies that have been

“location-enabled”. Portal compares the characteristics of

the citizen with the programs, including eligibility by

location, and returns eligible program information.

5.Citizen is presented with an integrated listing of eligible

programs customized to his/her location (use).
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 10

 Categorize requirements - Define data features, properties, quality, reliability, source,

standards, etc.

 Refine Requirements - Consider other similar requirements based on common business

interests

 Discover – Using Implicit Knowledge Model, suitable real-time data and services can be

marshaled in support of a problem (i.e. “I don’t know what data I need” or “I don’t know

how to ask for it). See also “Find”

 Revisit Requirements – Apply governance principles

2. Find – Once the requirements are defined, the user searches the community assets as

described through data and services metadata using requirements defined in prior step. Key

elements include:

 Discover available assets

 Evaluate existing assets (internal and external) against requirements

 Perform gap analysis (if gaps exist,

see also “Acquire”)

 Revisit in accordance with

requirements (“Is the data still useful

today?”)

3. Acquire or Create – If assets exist and

are immediately available, then they are

accessed in real-time through order,

download, or via web services. If assets are

not available, they need to be created. Key

elements include:

 Data may be created on request but

not available in real-time as

developed products

 Data or services are created to meet

requirements using appropriate collaboration and acquisition methods (contract,

agreements, purchase, collection)

4. Publish – Data and service providers or integrators should make their assets known to the

community by documenting them and making them searchable such that they may be applied to

a suitable purpose. Key elements include:

 Describe the geospatial assets of all types using standardized metadata including

documentation of content, quality, and accessibility

Publisher Scenario:

1.A scientists develops a flooding simulation model for a

river basin, based on many geographic parameters. The

model is made accessible through a web application to

support interaction by the public and decision makers.

The scientist stores and manages the model, the data,

and the map.

2.The scientist develops descriptions for the model as an

application, the data used, the output data developed, and

the map service that allows it’s visibility with other maps.

The data and services are disseminated via the web.

3.The scientist registers to publish the geospatial

information . Descriptions of his/her data and applications

are made searchable in the Geospatial One-Stop catalog.

4.Potential users may now find, evaluate and otherwise

use the scientific data and model to support their business

needs.

Publisher Scenario:

1.A scientists develops a flooding simulation model for a

river basin, based on many geographic parameters. The

model is made accessible through a web application to

support interaction by the public and decision makers.

The scientist stores and manages the model, the data,

and the map.

2.The scientist develops descriptions for the model as an

application, the data used, the output data developed, and

the map service that allows it’s visibility with other maps.

The data and services are disseminated via the web.

3.The scientist registers to publish the geospatial

information . Descriptions of his/her data and applications

are made searchable in the Geospatial One-Stop catalog.

4.Potential users may now find, evaluate and otherwise

use the scientific data and model to support their business

needs.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 11

 Post metadata as publicly available for search

5. Disseminate —Geospatial assets that have been published are then made available for access.

Key elements of this task are:

 Establish role-based secure access to resources

 Support bandwidth, concurrency, time-sensitive and device-sensitive requirements on

access

 Make resources available using pull (download, service-based) and push (notification,

status/alert) all, personalization, new, updated, and deprecated or deleted resources

6. Process – When new geospatial features

are collected, or as existing ones change or

no longer exist, the data provider should

process and make public data updates. Key

issues:

 Changes to content are solicited

from the community and accepted

for update

 New, changed, or removed

resources and their properties are

processed for access

 Use personalization capabilities to

keep Community informed

7. Maintain – Data, services, and

personnel are maintained to provide

suitable content, maximum utility, and

accuracy to support the requirements of the

community, Key elements are:

 Provide accessibility to geospatial

resources for broad user base with

many conditions and contingencies

 Promote the development and maintenance of employee geospatial skills and introduce

geospatial analysis into supporting the solution of traditional business problems

 Educational resources are available online to keep skills current and appropriate to

diverse business needs

8. Store and Manage – Data and services are stored and managed with availability appropriate

to the balanced needs of the community. Key elements of this are:

Emergency Scenario:

1.An emergency response decision maker with access to

the internet and desktop GIS software needs to identify

potential routes for evacuation from a coastal area.

Current, detailed road information, elevation, and

population data are requirements.

2.User consults the Geospatial One-Stop catalog to find

geospatial data with the parameters needed for analysis.

Descriptions (metadata) of geospatial data and services

are examined and several data sources are selected that

cover the topical and geographic area of interest.

3.Some data is downloaded in real time, other data

requires e-Authentication services for access to restricted

content. Maps or live data are made available via web

services.

4.Selected information is brought into the desktop GIS

application where query and analysis are performed to

identify potential evacuation routes based on accurate

road conditions (use). A map and table are generated as

products for distribution to emergency evacuation

planners.

Emergency Scenario:

1.An emergency response decision maker with access to

the internet and desktop GIS software needs to identify

potential routes for evacuation from a coastal area.

Current, detailed road information, elevation, and

population data are requirements.

2.User consults the Geospatial One-Stop catalog to find

geospatial data with the parameters needed for analysis.

Descriptions (metadata) of geospatial data and services

are examined and several data sources are selected that

cover the topical and geographic area of interest.

3.Some data is downloaded in real time, other data

requires e-Authentication services for access to restricted

content. Maps or live data are made available via web

services.

4.Selected information is brought into the desktop GIS

application where query and analysis are performed to

identify potential evacuation routes based on accurate

road conditions (use). A map and table are generated as

products for distribution to emergency evacuation

planners.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 12

 Appropriate asset availability is managed and provided for geospatial resources

 Address requirements for critical areas of interest, high-availability areas, real-time,

24x7, historical information

 Plan for extreme access conditions to support full availability (redundancy, replication,

bandwidth, cache)

 Support backup/restore/records and archival/disposition requirements

9. Use – The geospatial assets are applied to solve a problem. Key elements of this are:

 Apply the geospatial resource in mission applications to support business processes

 Align applications using common or shared geospatial services

 Insert geospatial capabilities into implementation of business processes

3.0 PART III: COMMON SOLUTIONS

3.1 Approach

The Geospatial LoB Task Force, comprising government-wide business leaders and subject

matter experts used the approach depicted in Figure 5 to develop a business driven common

solution and supporting architecture

to enable the Geospatial LoB

ConOps.

Geospatial LoB vision, goals and

objectives served as the strategic

guiding principles for the effort.

Using these, the Task Force

incorporated the existing geospatial

community, organizational entities,

and policy arrangements to build a

foundation for developing the

ConOps. Chief among these are:

 OMB Circulars A-16

(identifying Federal

geospatial data theme leads),

and A-130 (Data Lifecycle

and Dissemination)

 The National Spatial Data

Infrastructure (NSDI) and its

enabling Executive Order 12906

as implemented by the Federal

Geographic Data Committee (FGDC)

Figure 5: Development Approach
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 13

 The Geospatial One-Stop initiative and its geodata.gov portal

 The FEA Geospatial Profile that provides guidance on the introduction of geospatial

capabilities into all aspects of agency enterprise architecture

The existing organizational context, institutional knowledge, industry trends, and best practices

were assessed and enhanced to create a 5–10 year operational vision for the LoB. This

operational vision was informed by and validated against operational scenarios in the areas of

science, emergency management, administration, and mission operations.

Three common solution tracks were identified based on high-level requirements articulated by

the Geospatial Task Force and from analysis of the following:

 Responses from the Geospatial LoB Request for Information (RFI)

 Proposals in the June 2004 report “ NSDI Future Directions Initiative-Towards a National

Geospatial Strategy and Implementation Plan”

 Recommendations in the June 2004 GAO document “GEOSPATIAL INFORMATIONBetter Coordination Needed to Identify and Reduce Duplicative Investments”

 Input from subject matters experts associated with multiple Federal agencies and agents

of those agencies

As common solutions and associated tasks were identified, they were mapped back to the goals

and objectives for the LoB (see Appendix B) to ensure a valid line of sight. Tactical

implementation details will be finalized and presented to the FGDC Steering Committee by the

FGDC Secretariat with support from the Geospatial LoB Program Management Office (PMO)

and the FGDC Coordination Group members. Only the most critical common solution

implementation elements are described in this section. The descriptions of the detailed solutions,

tasks, and outcomes focus on those FY 2007 activities necessary to prepare for the fully

operational phase of the Geospatial LoB and key tasks slated for FY 2008 and beyond. The full

array solution elements and activities are described in the Transition Activity Table contained in

Section 6 of this document.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 14

3.2 Common Solutions Defined

As depicted in Figure 6, the common solution consists of three solution tracks. This solution

framework collectively ensures timely, accessible, and quality geospatial data, services, and

products that meet citizen and government business requirements in the most cost effective

manner. Each solution track plays a critical role in supporting the vision, goals, and objectives of

the Geospatial LoB.

Figure 6: Common Solutions Framework Diagram

Enhanced Governance -

Includes the development of a stakeholder centric governance model and robust performance,

evaluation, accountability, and reporting mechanisms required to make the NSDI operational,

and improve Federal Agency geospatial program coordination and performance.

Planning and Investment Strategy -

Incorporates, coordinated requirements analyses, planning and budgeting efforts across LoBs,

standardized budget coding to allow automated evaluation and tracking of Federal geospatial

assets and expenditures; and a common acquisition strategy that includes shared acquisition

vehicles and services to reduce or avoid unnecessary costs.

Optimize and Standardize Geospatial Data and Services -

Utilizes known best practices and open standards to establish widespread, shared and re-useable

geospatial asset discovery, access/delivery, analysis, training, and brokering services. It also

includes mechanisms to standardize agency approaches to geospatial business, technology,

services, and data.

Enhanced

Governance

Implement Performance Accountability

and Compliance Mechanisms

Planning & Investment

Strategy

Coordinated Budget Planning, Acquisition,

and Labor Cost Avoidance

Optimize & Standardize

Shared and Reusable Geospatial and Geoenabled Business Data and Services

defines responsibilities

and accountability for

frames and implements

asset base for

coordinated use

enforces coordinated lifecycle for

improves effectiveness o

d

f

efine assets for

Enhanced

Governance

Implement Performance Accountability

and Compliance Mechanisms

Planning & Investment

Strategy

Coordinated Budget Planning, Acquisition,

and Labor Cost Avoidance

Optimize & Standardize

Shared and Reusable Geospatial and Geoenabled Business Data and Services

defines responsibilities

and accountability for

frames and implements

asset base for

coordinated use

enforces coordinated lifecycle for

improves effectiveness o

d

f

efine assets for
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 15

3.3 Enhanced Governance

Outcome –

Enhanced performance accountability and

compliance mechanisms

The purpose of this solution is to provide an

effective and representative governance

structure to achieve the goals and objectives

of the Geospatial LoB. The current

governance model addresses data standards

and select enterprise capabilities, but falls

short of addressing cross-agency geospatial

business and information requirements

planning and creating performance

accountability. Without a transformation in

the governance model and supporting

business functions and processes, the

Geospatial LoB will not effectively reduce

the financial and human resources that are

currently necessary to manage nationally

significant geospatial assets and provide

common cross cutting solutions to improving business performance. As illustrated by Figure 7,

the enhanced governance solution provides a forum and mechanisms to provide executive level

advice and recommendations on national geospatial policies and priorities, to provide business

driven common requirements identification, to facilitate the management of geospatial

investments as a national portfolio, and to establish performance based responsibility and

accountability for Federal geospatial activities.

Key to the enhanced government solution is agency representation in the Federal decisionmaking process, and both Federal and non-Federal participation in all other activities. Figure 8

on page 18 depicts the proposed target governance structure.

It is important to note that important components of the Enhanced Governance common solution

track include activities, such as the establishment of the National Geospatial Advisory Council

(NGAC), that extends beyond the scope of the Geospatial LoB. All external to federal activities

identified in Figure 7 will be facilitated by the Department of Interior (DOI) in their role as Chair

of the FGDC. The roles and responsibilities are described below:

FGDC Steering Committee:

The Geospatial LoB will be implemented, managed, and sustained by the FGDC as a national

investment of its members. The FGDC Steering Committee is the policy-level interagency

authority responsible for providing leadership and direction in support of the OMB Circular A16 related activities, the development of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI), and the

Geospatial LoB. The FGDC Steering Committee is comprised of the member agency’s

designated Senior Agency Official for Geospatial Information (SAOGI) who is responsible for

internal and external federal agency coordination for the effective and efficient execution of the

Figure 7: Enhanced Governance Components

Designated

Data

Stewards

FGDC Steering Committee

Sr. Agency Official for Geospatial Information

(SAOGI)

How

The National Geospatial Advisory

Council (FACA)

Ensure

responsibility

& accountability

for key

datasets

What

Provide advice and

recommendations on

national geospatial

policies and priorities Agencies

FGDC

Geospatial LoB

PMO

Conduct LoB

business

requirements

planning,

portfolio and

performance

management

functions

Provide executive

leadership

Ensure accountability

Manage responsibilities

Outcome

Enhanced

Performance

Accountability &

Compliance

Mechanisms
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 16

OMB A-16 and Geospatial LoB activities. The FGDC Steering Committee will serve as a

review and decision-making board for the Geospatial LoB tasks and milestones, with equal

voting representation for the oversight and strategic direction of the Geospatial LoB national

investment.

The FGDC Steering Committee is chaired by the Secretary of the Department of the Interior.

The Deputy Director for Management, OMB, serves as Vice-Chair. Current Steering Committee

member agencies are:

Department of Agriculture

Department of Commerce

Department of Defense

Department of Energy

Department of Health and Human Services

Department of Homeland Security

Department of Housing and Urban Development

Department of the Interior

Department of Justice

Department of State

Department of Transportation

Environmental Protection Agency

Federal Communications Commission*

General Services Administration

Library of Congress

National Archives and Records Administration

National Aeronautics and Space Administration

National Capital Planning Commission*

National Science Foundation

Office of Management and Budget

Tennessee Valley Authority

(*Non-voting members)

Departments or agencies that are not members of the FGDC but have significant activities in

geographic information or spatial data collection or use, identified by and contributing to the

funding strategy for the Geospatial LoB will be requested to become a non-voting Participating

Member, and may request voting membership in writing to the Chair of the FGDC. Upon

acceptance, they assume the same responsibilities and privileges as other members of the FGDC.

FGDC Coordination Group:

The FGDC Coordination Group is accountable to, and reports to the FGDC Steering Committee

and serves as a coordination board for the operational-level interagency management authority

responsible for facilitating OMB Circular A-16 related activities, the implementation of the

NSDI, and the execution of the Geospatial LoB. Coordination Group member representation and

alternate are appointed by each FGDC Steering Committee member. The Coordination Group is

chaired and co-chaired by agency members on a rotating annual basis. The Coordination Group

shall serve as the operational management oversight body for the effective and efficient

prioritization, execution, and administration of the Geospatial LoB, its tasks, milestones, and
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 17

deliverables as directed and approved by the FGDC Steering Committee. The Coordination

Group will provide management direction to the FGDC Secretariat for the execution of the

Geospatial LoB.

FGDC Secretariat:

The FGDC Secretariat Director and staff are accountable and report to the FGDC Steering

Committee and Coordination Group. The FGDC Secretariat administers the daily operation

oversight and execution of the OMB A-16 related activities and the Geospatial LoB as directed

by the FGDC Steering Committee and Coordination Group. The Secretariat is responsible for

the effective and efficient execution of Geospatial LoB tasks, milestones, and deliverables.

Additionally, the FGDC Secretariat provides the Program Management Office (PMO) contractor

support staff direction and contract management oversight. The Department of the Interior

provides administrative support to the FGDC Secretariat.

FGDC Program Management Office:

The FGDC PMO provides contractor staff support to the FGDC Secretariat for task execution of

the Geospatial LoB as directed by the FGDC Coordination Group and the FGDC Steering

Committee. The PMO is responsible for the daily execution of Geospatial LoB tasks,

milestones, and deliverables. The PMO contractor staff requirements will be defined based upon

individual Geospatial LoB task requirements for Subject Matter Expertise to successfully

accomplish the tasks outcomes and deliverables. The scheduled tasks not assigned to the PMO

will be completed by government FTE.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 18

Figure 8: Federal Geo LoB Governance Model (To-Be)

Senior Agency Officials for Geospatial Information (SAOGI), as established by the OMB

Memorandum M-06-07, shall provide executive decision-making capability for the Federal

stakeholders. Executive agencies, agencies that are part of the Executive Branch, must

participate in the governance and execution of the Geospatial LoB to achieve government-wide

benefits. Their duties and membership must be reconciled to ensure that they meet evolving roles

of the FGDC Steering Committee under this new Geospatial Line of Business.

A means to involve maximum participation by non-Federal partners within this community is

also recognized. Governance recommendations from the FGDC Future Directions efforts were

also addressed during the development of this LOB.

Key responsibilities of these Officials include:

 Must have authority to modify critical business processes and allocate requisite budgetary

resources to ensure their organizations geospatial training, information, technology and

service requirements are established in a timely manner
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 19

 Represent their agency in the management and decision-making with respect to mission

specific and the larger community-wide geospatial assets

 Participate in an open and transparent prioritization process to ensure optimal cost benefit

to the government

 Interface with existing agency architecture and investment governance models to ensure

the Federal Geospatial Portfolio is used and integrated into the business planning,

architecture, capital planning and portfolio maturity efforts

 Coordinate the Federal requirements gathering process with those of the state, local and

tribal government geospatial management activities to identify the cost sharing and data

reuse opportunities

Data Stewards roles and responsibilities for data themes and other data assets of national

significance, as defined by NSDI are assigned to Federal agencies in OMB Circular A-16, but

responsibilities regarding geospatial services and related activities, performance expectations

and ways to measure them, and establishment of milestones for NSDI goals have not been

clearly defined and accountability is lacking.

Current Data Steward Agency responsibilities, listed below, relate to leadership, planning, and

development of data and standards and will require updating and modification.

 Assert leadership in the convening of a Community of Interest for a given theme within a

formal national standards process to develop data content standards for data exchange

and access in support of multi-mission business requirements

 Identify and pursue the most effective and efficient means for data acquisition and update

within the community, then marshal those resources to develop data themes from Federal,

state, local, tribal, NGO, academic, and commercial sources

 Assure the online availability of geospatial information for data download (exchange)

and access using web services and interoperability standards for data content, syntax, and

service interfaces

Critical Solution Objectives -

In order to achieve the desired outcome, critical solution objectives are identified as follows:

 A governance model must be established that ensures active stakeholder participation in

the management of nationally significant geospatial assets

 Performance measures and service level agreements (SLAs) must be established and

monitored for Data Stewards to improve service to citizens and government agencies
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 20

 A Federal government-wide geospatial investment tracking process and LoB investment

strategy is implemented to facilitate collaboration of planning, development and

acquisitions of geospatial assets

 Consistent integration of geospatial capabilities into Federal agencies enterprise

architectures wherever appropriate

Critical Solution Tasks -

In order to achieve the critical solution objectives, tasks are identified as follows:

Task 1: Complete the designation of a Senior Agency Official for Geospatial Information

(SAOGI) at every Department and independent agency. Develop a formal functional

description for the SAOGI that reflects the roles and responsibilities necessary to

implement the common solutions of the Geospatial LoB.

Task 2: Update the FGDC Steering Committee and Coordination Group charters to

reflect the roles and responsibilities necessary to implement the common solutions of the

Geospatial LoB.

Task 3: Establish a Geospatial LoB Program Management Office (Geo PMO) to

facilitate agency implementation of the common solutions. Annual work plans will be

coordinated/approved with partner agencies.

Task 4: Review and solidify the roles and responsibilities of the Data Stewards for the A16+ nationally significant geospatial data sets and alter designations as necessary.

Task 5: Establish the National Geospatial Advisory Council (NGAC), based on the

Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), to provide executive level advice and

recommendations on national geospatial policy and priorities.

Task 6: Develop a common set of Federal geospatial investment definitions and budget codes to

enable the consistent tracking of Federal geospatial investments and identify opportunities for

cost savings.

Benefits -

Solution benefits include institutionalizing a governance model that increases buy-in of all

stakeholders in decisions related to the development of the NSDI as well as expedited and more

coordinated completion of nationally significant data sets. The solution will also clarify

performance responsibilities and ensure performance accountability while garnering greater

participation from dependent organizations and other stakeholders.

Risks -

Solution risks include the potential for reduced resource commitment from non-Federal members

of the National Geospatial Advisory Council for inter-governmental common solution elements,

because FACA committee models allow non-Federal members only an advisory role in
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 21

significant governance activities of planning and budgeting. State, local and tribal government

counterparts may not be collaborating due to time and budget constraints. Other risks include

overcoming existing cultural and organizational barriers, legacy thinking, resistance to changing

business processes and current funding model challenges. There is likely to be difficulty in

getting agencies to adopt detailed geospatial definitions and budget coding, because they fear

loosing budget flexibility. This may cause the milestone for adopting this solution to be delayed.

3.4 Planning and Investment Strategy

Outcome –

Coordinated acquisition, budget planning, and labor cost avoidance

As depicted in Figure 9, the purpose of the Planning and Investment Strategy solution is to

develop a series of transformative business processes and supporting mechanisms to improve

government-wide business requirements planning and portfolio management capabilities in order

to better coordinate acquisition and track geospatial investment performance. Today, the civilian

Federal government’s limited capability to define, evaluate and track cross agency geospatial

investments, including contracts, grants and cooperative agreements has hindered coordination of

shared investments for cross-cutting services. This is often because the geospatial community’s

services are embedded in other, large scale IT investments, making the geospatial component

difficult to track and assess for value and performance. A well developed planning and

investment strategy addresses these issues by creating a portfolio of managed assets and

supporting management control, but needs to be coupled with the enhanced governance solution,

as governance provides the decision making and prioritization framework necessary to focus and

execute the strategy. This solution

provides the supporting business

processes to aggregate demand for data

and services requirements. Pre-budget

submission knowledge of these

requirements is critical to providing for

economies of scale purchasing and

licensing agreements, as well as

simplification of administrative support

functions, and are requisite inputs to a

robust governance solution. The

standardization and aggregation of

geospatial business requirements will

place the Geospatial LoB managers in a

position to achieve economies of scale on

technology and to provide improved cost

management and budget planning.

Government FTEs will participate in the

coordinated acquisition, budget planning

for the Geospatial LoB. For further

details of the government FTE skill set

Figure 9: Planning and Investment Strategy Components
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 22

profile, see appendix C.

Other Considerations

This Exhibit 300 funding strategy only covers FY 2007 and FY 2008. Another objective is to

conduct a better investment data call so that possible duplication and real savings will be

identified. In subsequent years, the funding strategy will evolve toward relying more on agency

partnerships for specific data or projects and fee-for-service.

The PMO will conduct a survey of the status and accessibility of A16 layers so that agencies can

save funds on data development and systems. In addition, the overall cost can be reduced by

leveraging shared services such as the eAuthentication service, Business Gateway, IT Security

LOB, IT Infrastructure LOB, and perhaps grants.gov, Recreation One-Stop, USA Services,

Disaster Management, SAFECOM, E-Training, E-Travel, E-Records Management and other

eGov projects as well. New technologies and processes may benefit further the provision of data

in less costly and more efficient ways.

Critical Solution Objectives –

In order to achieve the desired outcome, critical solution objectives are identified as follows:

 Develop a government-wide acquisition strategy for geospatial investments

 Manage nationally significant geospatial assets as a Federal-wide common capital asset

within a Federal portfolio

 Competitively source geospatial data and services delivery wherever possible

Critical Solution Tasks –

In order to achieve the critical solution objectives, tasks are identified as follows:

Task 1: Develop and apply criteria to promote competitive third-party hosting of data

and services both within the government and within the private sector.

Task 2: Prioritize and track investments with geospatial budget codes to foster

collaboration with state, local, and tribal government counterparts to identify

unnecessarily duplicative collection or application development activities. Define and

optimize geo-resource requirements during the budget planning to create opportunities

for shared resource utilization in a planned and predictive manner.

Task 3: Investigate and develop appropriate Federal or government-wide acquisition

vehicles for geospatial data and technologies such as cross-agency licensing, Smart-Buy,

subscription to data or services, working capital funds, and grant mechanisms as well as

arrangement such as MOUs and cooperative agreements.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 23

Task 4: Recognize the 34 data sets listed in OMB A-16 as nationally significant data as a

Federal-wide, common capital asset and manage them as a Federal portfolio as opposed

to individual data sets funded at the discretion of agency managers.

BenefitsSolution benefits include the establishment of reproducible and more effective methods for doing

business and increased optimization of assets for reuse across Federal, state and local

governments by institutionalizing governance and enterprise portfolio management processes

resulting in improved performance of geospatial investments from both a multi-mission delivery

and cost and labor savings perspective. In addition, these tasks will garner greater participation

from dependent organizations and other stakeholders to maximize buy-in to common solution

development activities.

RisksSolution risks include the time it might take to implement this solution due to organizational

culture and administrative barriers that need to be overcome within the contracting and

budgeting arenas of individual agencies. Many agencies are likely to be reluctant to support

third party hosting if they perceive internal resources or positions are threatened even if in the

long term there may be significant cost avoidance. Agreement to common grant and budget

terminology has proven difficult in efforts already underway and consensus may take more time

than anticipated. These barriers can be addressed by using incentive-based funding strategies

within the JBC Exhibit 300, policy directives, and strategic communications from OMB or the

CIO Council.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 24

3.5 Optimize and Standardize Data and Services

Outcome -

Widespread adoption of shared

and reusable geospatial and geoenabled business data and services

As depicted in Figure 10, the

purpose of this solution is to make

geospatial data and services more

available and to institutionalize the

widespread adoption of shared and

reusable geospatial and geoenabled business data and services.

Current practices have not yielded

consistent data collection and

deployment, leading to variable

gaps in the availability of current

and relevant geospatial data for

multiple business purposes. The

establishment of standardized webbased data services, likewise, has

been slow although a few trusted

service arrangements are being

established to assure multi-agency

access to data for mission use. This condition is equally applicable to A-16 data themes and

geospatial mission support data. The means to discover, describe, model, publish, and serve all

geospatial data is required to optimize access to and reuse of geospatial solutions across the

community. As these data are identified and managed, they will be treated as "National" assets

and be subjected to very similar, if not the same, expectations of data management as A-16

information.

This solution includes community tasks that will enhance reliable access to geospatial

information through the design and deployment of common, secure enterprise geospatial services

correlated with established authoritative data sources. The information access and delivery model

is a set of universal services that are required for a wide variety of producers and consumers of

geospatial information (individuals, systems, workflow engines). The services provide a flexible,

reusable and non-intrusive mechanism to integrate with a wide variety of mission areas without

full knowledge of all the local mission requirements. By correlating services to enterprise

authoritative information, supported by robust SLAs, the LoB will be removing significant

cultural and political barriers currently inhibiting successful geo-interoperability. As new assets

mature and are approved by the geo-governance process, these services and supporting

authoritative information will be promoted to an enterprise service. Items that are promoted to

enterprise service will become elements of the enterprise investment portfolio and will be

managed accordingly. The business processes that would support the establishment of enterprise

authoritative data can be coordinated to achieve production and integration economies of scale.

Figure 10: Optimize and Standardize Components
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 25

Workforce proficiency in geospatial technologies is a key factor in successful uptake of the

information and services. Education, outreach, and accommodating technology refresh within the

community are critical in the adoption of geospatial capabilities.

Government FTEs will play a major role in communicating the adoption of shared and reusable

geospatial and geo-enabled business data and services to their respective agencies.

Critical Solution Objectives –

In order to achieve the desired outcome, critical solution objectives are identified as follows:

 Provide discovery, access, delivery, and brokering services for nationally significant

geospatial data

 Near-real-time data and services are available to derive custom products for a variety of

uses

 Enhance awareness of geospatial capabilities and their appropriate usage through training

and outreach

Critical Solution Tasks –

In order to achieve the critical solution objectives, tasks are identified as follows:

Task 1: Establish effective and efficient geospatial information lifecycle services to

enhance decision making using open standards.

Task 2: Initiate implementation of practices and capabilities to extract and link business

data with their geographic location for use with other data.

Task 3: Initiate work to establish enhanced training and outreach for the community

workforce to ensure uptake, sustainability, integration, and applicability of geospatial

capabilities.

Task 4: Implement application and human interfaces that are easy-to-use and are

adaptable towards use and re-use by different types of users, including direct and

mediated services.

Benefits -

Solution benefits include greater and more immediate access to geospatial information, improved

data quality and reliability, reduction in overall IT infrastructure expenditures and labor costs,

improved support of business and workflow processes and efficiencies. This will also lead to

improved productivity, improved mission delivery, and increased service to citizens.

Geospatially enabling traditional business data will improve business process efficiency, allow

for geographically based work planning and investment processes, assist in infrastructure asset

tracking, improve mission delivery, and promote use of business intelligence in decision support

systems.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 26

Risks -

Solution risks include resistance to changing business practices, adoption of new or cutting-edge

technology, costs for service deployment, establishment of trust arrangements in support of

multiple mission activities, delayed design and implementation costs, and potentially unforeseen

architectural transition costs.

3.6 Solution(s) Applicability Analysis, Benefits Estimate and Value Proposition

An initial applicability analysis was done to determine how well the proposed common solutions

supported the Geospatial LoB goals and objectives developed by the Geospatial LoB Task force

Members.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 27

4.0 PART IV: CONCEPTUAL TARGET ARCHITECTURE

4.1 Purpose

This section presents the Conceptual Target Architecture (CTA) for the common solutions

described previously. The purpose of this section is to describe the target “to-be” state towards

which the Federal government’s geospatial asset investment strategy should be driving. Each

agency will be monitored and assessed for progress towards achieving the CTA within the

transition framework outlined in Section 6.

Agencies should use this section to architect their individual solutions within their own

enterprise architecture, aligning with Federal and agency investment strategies for geospatial

assets, and finally implementation utilizing existing standards and guidance provided within this

document.

4.2 Target Architecture Approach

The CTA has been derived from analyzing the material presented earlier. Specifically, the vision,

goals, and objectives provided the high-level business requirements; the ConOps provides the

business process framework for the CTA; the common solutions partitions the CTA into

technology-driven, data-driven, and people-driven aspects; the RFI responses provided

stakeholder perspectives on driving requirements and architecture principles; and the scenarios

described in the RFI provide a validation framework.

The three common solution tracks for the Geospatial LoB present distinctly different aspects of

the ConOps. “Enhanced Governance” and “Planning and Investment Strategy” common

solution tracks focus on the processes needed to manage the organizational and data acquisition

aspects of the ConOps. Whereas the “Optimize and Standardize Geospatial Data and Services”

common solution track is focused on the provisioning of data services through technology. For

this reason, all three common solution tracks will be addressed from a performance and business

layer perspective, but only the “Optimize and Standardize Geospatial Data and Services”

common solution track will be addressed from the service, technology and data layer

perspectives. As information becomes available in the operational phase, additional and

necessary architecture development activities will be addressed.

4.3 Target Performance Architecture

The purpose of the Performance Architecture is to establish a set of measures and indicators to

determine how successful the implementation of the common solution will be. Based upon the

vision, goals and objectives and the ConOps of the Geospatial LoB, performance analysis has

established an initial set of FEA Performance Reference Model (PRM) measures and indicators.

These are depicted in Appendix A, Table 1. These measures and indicators have been developed

to provide guidance to the other layers of the Target Architecture and to inform the Joint

Business Case (JBC) development. This information provides comprehensive coverage of key

benefit areas of the LoB and ensures an appropriate breadth of indicators to support the

requirements of the Capital Planning Investment Control (CPIC) process. In addition, once the

recommendations from the common solution are implemented, this information will provide the

means to monitor the success of the JBC stated benefits to its actual achieved performance.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 28

4.3.1 Performance Layer Approach

The ConOps and LoB goals strongly recommend a common requirements planning model to

identify potential resource savings early in the budget cycle, and a governed approach to reusable

geospatial data and services to provide a foundation to support many LoBs with similar needs.

These strategies and thoughts guided the evaluation of the complete set of FEA PRM

measurement indicators. Special attention was given to the measurement categories related to

services, customer-benefits, data sharing and finance. A future enterprise services paradigm

requires a strong trusted and transparent relationship between the customers (LoB) and the

service providers to facilitate transformation. An emphasis was put on ensuring a high degree of

customer benefits-oriented measures to ensure the visibility to the LoBs. The LoBs will require a

transparent and focused insight into the management and performance of the service providers.

The services themselves will be metered for coverage, availability and quality. The Information

Sharing category analysis led to establishing indicators for data sharing, standardization and

exchange, which are intended to start to account for measured improvements in the reuse of

critical national data assets among the LoBs and stakeholder communities. Financial measures

have been established at the portfolio, service, technology and requirements planning level.

As a result, not only are the LoBs the direct beneficiaries of the service improvements, citizens

become an indirect beneficiary of this approach when we provide common reusable capabilities

to multiple mission areas of the Federal government. These mission areas, in turn, will provide

more efficient and effective products and services for citizens. In addition to these internal

service improvements, there will be opportunities to improve direct citizen interaction where the

Return On Investment (ROI) warrants it. In the past, public data catalogs such as Geospatial One

Stop (GOS) have been such an opportunity. Subsequent JBC performance analysis shall validate

these preliminary concepts, finalize the measures, and establish the baseline values and the

monitoring frequency. The approved performance model will be maintained within a governed

portfolio of geospatial assets.

4.4 Target Business Architecture

4.4.1 Common Target Business Process Layer Mappings to FEA Reference Models

The three common solution tracks, developed of themselves, do not directly implement any

given agency’s business, but the solutions as a whole greatly enhance most agencies’ business.

Analysis of the 2007 OMB Exhibit 300 submissions demonstrated a very broad applicability of

geospatial data services across many business functions and sub functions. Some 50% of the

Business Reference Model (BRM) mappings reported by the Federal government have the

potential for business enhancement through geospatial data services. However, the individual

processes that implement geospatial services belong to the individual agencies, and are

numerous. Therefore, although we have identified the business processes associated with each

common solution, we have adopted the approach of aligning with the FEA BRM at the common

solution level.

The purpose of this section is to help Enterprise Architects map LoB and agency geospatial

investments to business activities (functions, sub-functions and processes). This will enable
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 29

individual investments (whether, within an agency, cross-agency, of LoB-wide) to be assessed or

aligned with business needs.

The business processes associated with each common solution are provided in Appendix A,

Table 2.

Appendix A, Tables 3 and 4 provide two views on the mapping of the BRM to the Target

Business Architecture. Geospatial assets are pervasive across Federal business. However, it is

useful to make a distinction between those activities that service citizens, and therefore require a

single responsible Federal agency, versus those activities that are crosscutting and require interagency coordination. It is worth noting that many “service for citizens” applications are the

culmination of a number of internal business processes. Some of which will require crosscutting

coordination.

When agencies are looking to align their Enterprise Architectures with this document they

should do so by mapping their business lines to the processes defined in Appendix A, Table 2

through the mappings provided in Appendix A, Tables 3 and 4.

The remainder of the Conceptual Target Architecture is applicable for business needs that align

with capabilities from the “Geospatial Data & Services” common solution track only.

4.4.2 LoB Goal Alignment

Appendix A, Table 5 illustrates how each common solution and associated business processes

address the LoB goals and objectives.

4.4.3 PRM Alignment

Appendix A, Table 6 illustrates targeted business processes mapped to the high-level PRM

category, areas, and indicators.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 30

4.5 Target Service Component Architecture

Many of the underlying capabilities for achieving geospatial data and service

interoperability have been developed over recent years. What has been missing is the

organizing principal that describes how these capabilities fit into interoperable service

architecture and can be leveraged within current and legacy environments. It is the

purpose of this section to provide that organizing framework.

4.5.1 Service Layer Approach

The Target Service Component Architecture has been derived from Appendix F of the

FEA Geospatial Profile (Version 1.1) and the Geospatial Interoperability Reference

Model (Version 1.1)7. Both these references are focused on documenting traditional

geospatial service types and capabilities. Additionally, it should be recognized that

geospatial function can be derived from traditionally non-geospatial information

resources – data that happen to include fields that could be geo-referenced (i.e. address,

census or FIPS code, Public Land Survey, or coordinate pair). One of the goals of this

LoB is to ‘geo-enable’ business data that have not been typically used in geospatial

analysis such that they may be more readily used in a geographic context for business

purposes. Wherever, the LoB seeks express geospatial services as “special methods”

under existing FEA SRM components, as opposed to consolidating geospatial functions

into new geospatial SRM components. The benefits of this approach are two-fold:

1) It permits agencies to express their geospatial investments more accurately as

elements of a business focused service implementation rather than as a separate

geospatial service component outside of the business context, and to cluster those

services into a capability appropriate for their application.

2) The de-emphasis of geospatial context means that the Technology Target

Architecture will focus the implementation stack of standards in the right order

i.e. geospatial standards will have to be supported within the framework of the

more general IT standards framework (e.g. SOAP). This will encourage the

integration of geospatial services into business process, and provide ready

adoption as new applications are identified.

To confirm completeness of this approach, the service components were tested against

the scenarios used during the RFI process and the ConOps development.

4.5.2 Service Components

Figure 11 provides the Service Component Target Architecture. Overall, geospatial

capability is provided by special geospatial methods within existing FEA Service

Components. The exceptions are two new components identified as Geographic Analysis

and Imagery Analysis under the Analysis & Statistics Service Type.

7

Insert link to GIRM ver 1.1
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 31

Back Office Business Analytical

Analysis & Statistics

Geographic Analysis*

Imagery Analysis*

Visualization

Mapping / Geospatial /

Elevation / GPS

Knowledge Discovery

Data Mining

Modeling

Simulation

Business Intelligence

Decision Support &

Planning

Reporting

Ad Hoc

Standardized / Canned

OLAP

Digital Assets

Content

Management Tagging & Aggregation

Knowledge Management

Information Retrieval

Information Mapping / Taxonomy

Information Sharing

Categorization

Knowledge Capture

Knowledge Distribution & Delivery

Records Management

Record Linking / Association

Digital Rights Management

Business Mgmt.

Supply Chain Mgmt.

Catalog Management

Ordering / Purchasing

Support

Security

Access Control

Role / Privilege

Management

Search

Query

Precision / Recall Ranking

Classification

Pattern Matching

*These services are not

accounted for in the FEA SRM

Data Management

Data Exchange

Extraction & Transformation

Data Mart

Data Warehouse

Metadata Management

Data Cleansing

Data Classification

Figure 11: Target Service Component Architecture

Geographic Analysis - A general-purpose set of capabilities for analyzing and

processing geospatial data. This service includes general Geographic Information

Systems (GIS) services as well as general analytical capabilities such as geocoding,

geolocation, navigation & routing, monitoring and tracking, and specific decision

applications.

Image Analysis - A general purpose set of capabilities for analyzing and processing

geospatial imagery and related metadata. Capabilities in this service area include, image

manipulation and processing, feature identification and extraction, image merging

(compositing).
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 This document contains predecisional information. Page 32

Appendix A, Table A7 maps service requirements to capabilities. The table provides

a complete description of the service components and the geospatial methods that

apply within each of the service components. Architects will be able to identify how

to map unique geospatial functions to the FEA Service Components Reference Model

thus enabling service component level alignment of geospatial capability within the

agency’s enterprise architecture.

Appendix A, Table A8 provides a mapping of the service components to the common

processes defined in the ConOps. This completes the mapping process by providing

the linkage between geospatial capability expressed in the Geospatial Functions

column of Appendix A, Table A7 and geospatial services need as expressed by the

activities identified in the ConOps.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

4.6 Target Technology Architecture

Appendix A, Table A9 maps the functions of the ConOps to the FEA Technical

Reference Model (TRM). In addition to this general mapping, this table indicates in the

“Technology Comments” column, those specific standards (where relevant) that support

the implementation of geospatial methods within the mapped service standard.

4.7 Target Data Architecture

This section outlines a Conceptual Target Architecture that will enable the widespread

adoption of shared and reusable geospatial and geo-enabled business data and services.

This data architecture will be further elaborated during the operational phase of the

Geospatial LoB initiative. This section does not recommend a specific data taxonomy or

data schema. Rather, it sets forth principles by which various data sets are stewarded and

utilized by the Nation. Data should be defined, structured, and documented to facilitate

efficient discovery, sharing, and reuse of geospatial and geo-enabled business data.

Specific data schemas shall be documented by lead Federal agencies responsible for

nationally significant framework themes and by COIs responsible for thematically or

regionally specific data.

Several challenges have been identified that limit the Nation’s ability to discover, share,

and reuse geospatial data. Nationally significant geospatial data – as defined in OMB

Circular A-16 – are not complete and are not shared effectively. A significant amount of

Federal data assets are not associated with location (i.e., not “geo-referenced”), thereby

limiting the utility of those data as they cannot be visualized or analyzed in a spatial

context. Additionally, existing geospatial data assets are not formally aligned with

business functions and the taxonomies and data schemas are not adequately documented

in a fashion enabling efficient discovery, sharing, and re-use. The Geospatial LoB RFI

findings show that citizens and organizations would benefit from interoperability, and

that common or interoperable data standards would enable that interoperability. The

Target Data Architecture sets forth principles and guidelines for rectifying these issues.

This section is organized by the FEA Data Reference Model (DRM) version 2.0. Figure

12 provides an illustrative overview of the Geospatial LoB Target Data Architecture.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

Figure 12: Geospatial LoB Target Data Architecture Framework

4.7.1 Defining Geospatial Data Assets

For the purposes of defining a Target Data Architecture (Figure 14), data assets are

categorized as follows:

 Nationally Significant Geospatial Data –

Geospatial data themes of national significance and coverage providing the core, most

commonly used set of base data, referred to as “National Spatial Data Infrastructure

(NSDI) framework themes” in OMB Circular A-16. These nationally significant

geospatial data serve as the foundation of national and regional use and into which

other geospatial data (locally oriented, thematically specialized, more detailed) may

be “nested”. Nationally significant data are stewarded by lead Federal agencies

identified in OMB Circular A-16. Lead Federal agencies must establish and maintain

data taxonomies and data schemas for nationally significant geospatial data as

described in DRM version 2.0.

 Other Geospatial Data –

Other geospatial data include those geospatial data with national or regional coverage

that do not fit into the context of the NSDI framework themes set forth in OMB

Circular A-16 and state, local, or tribal data that can be “nested” into the nationally

significant geospatial data framework themes. Some other geospatial data might be

stewarded by COIs with participation by key stakeholders. These COIs may be

internal to Federal departments and agencies or can be intra-agency where particular

business functions or requirement warrant. COIs should include state, local, and tribal

participation as appropriate. Other geospatial data must have their context,

taxonomies, and data schemas formally defined, DRM version 2.0 defines the role of
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

COIs in defining geospatial data context and establishing and documenting data

schemas for these data, respectively.

 Administrative and Operational Data –

Administrative and operational data are those business data maintained and used by

Federal departments and agencies that are specialized or more dynamic in nature used

for specific events or analytic purposes. These data are typically non-spatial in nature

but include one or more locational attributes (address, etc.) that enables georeferencing to facilitate fusion with nationally significant and other geospatial data to

support specific visualization or analysis needs. Communities of interest may identify

the business need (context) warranting the geo-referencing of administrative and

operational data.

Figure 13: Geospatial Data Asset Categories

4.7.2 Data Context

The FEA DRM Data Context area provides a standard approach to representing

taxonomies that data stewards use to categorize data. Taxonomies are important for all

data – including geospatial data – to ensure a consistent understanding of how data are

organized and how data ‘model’ the real world. The FEA DRM Data Context also

enables the business context of data to be well understood, which enables the ability to

track and align geospatial investments by LoB and the ability to establish business- and

mission-oriented taxonomies for geospatial data.

4.7.2.1 Defining Taxonomies and Business Context for Geospatial Data

 Identifying Business Context for Geospatial Data -

Section 4.1.1 recommends that the common solutions rather than the target

architecture be aligned with the FEA BRM. However, Section 4.1.1 also states that
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

specific LoB and agency geospatial investments should be formally aligned with

BRM functions and sub-functions. In accordance with this approach, geospatial data

assets should be associated with BRM functions and associated functions and subfunctions to formally associate LoB and agency geospatial portfolios to Federal

business functions defined in the BRM. This association should be performed by

appropriate lead Federal agencies or COIs responsible for stewarding specific data

resources.

Nationally significant and other Federally stewarded geospatial data shall be

explicitly associated with one or more FEA BRM business functions or subfunctions8

. The BRM functions and sub-functions with which geospatial data are

associated should be recorded in the metadata (see Section 4.7.3.2) describing each

data object and in Exhibit 300 submittals as described in Section 3, Common

Solutions.

 Defining Taxonomies for Geospatial Data -

Taxonomies contain a hierarchy topics and relationships between topics, which in

turn define specific data assets. Data assets provide the management context for

structured data resources. Once data assets are identified for a given taxonomy,

logical data models can be developed to guide physical instantiation and

implementation of specific data objects. This framework, described in the FEA DRM

version 2.0, should apply to all nationally significant and other Federally stewarded

geospatial data.

Taxonomies describing nationally significant and other Federally stewarded

geospatial data should be documented using Web Ontology Language (OWL) and the

Resource Description Framework (RDF). Taxonomies describing geospatial data can

then be made accessible via services defined in the Service Component Target

architecture to facilitate efficient search, discovery, and data translation capabilities

and to facilitate development of more detailed data schemas and logical data models

as described in Section 4.7.3.

Geospatial data schemas should be associated with existing business-oriented

taxonomies (i.e., those taxonomies defined by and aligned with the FEA BRM) where

possible. This will enable synchronization of geospatial data schemas with business

language and processes and better facilitate the integration of geospatial data with

departmental and agency-specific enterprise architectures (EAs).

In some cases, taxonomies have been developed describing specific FEA BRM LoBs,

functions, and sub-functions, but no explicit reference is made to geospatial

representation of data assets. These taxonomies typically describe non-spatial

operational and administrative data as described in Section 4.7.1. To facilitate geo8

It is recognized that many geospatial data are cross-cutting and may support several BRM functions or

sub-functions. Therefore, it is appropriate to associate geospatial data with multiple BRM functions.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

referencing of operational and administrative data, COI’s may choose to identify

those data assets resulting from the taxonomy that should or could have a geospatial

representation and then develop geospatially oriented data schemas to organize

geospatial representations of those data.

4.7.2.2 Locational Representation Frameworks

Nationally significant and other geospatial data are inherently geospatial in nature;

i.e., they are represented using spatial geometries. Other operational and

administrative data are typically non-spatial in nature but can be geo-referenced by

rendering spatial objects (points, lines, areas) using locational attributes associated

with operational and administrative data objects.

Several frameworks exist for representing location, and are summarized here. The

FEA Geospatial Profile provides more information on the international (ISO) and

national (ANSI/NISO) standards that govern the representation of location using

these frameworks:

 Spatial Referencing by Coordinates (“Absolute Location”) -

Geographic objects (points, lines, areas) can be represented by one-, two-, or threedimensional coordinates and coordinate reference systems. nationally significant

geospatial data and other Federally stewarded geospatial data should be referenced

using absolute location.

Any number of coordinate systems, horizontal and vertical datums, and projections

may be applied by different geospatial data. The Geospatial LoB Target Data

Architecture does not dictate use of a single, common coordinate reference system,

horizontal or vertical datum, or projection. Rather, the metadata describing geospatial

data objects shall comprehensively and accurately describe these parameters to enable

real-time fusion with other disparate geospatial data and to enable extract, transform,

and load (ETL) operations.

 Spatial Referencing by Geographic Identifiers (“Relative Location”) -

Geospatial data can also be referenced using relative location. Relative location is

established by use of geographic identifiers that do not provide precise, explicit

coordinate locations for a given data asset. Relative location is typically appropriate

when geo-referencing non-spatial administrative and operational data, but can also be

associated with geographic objects (points, lines, areas) as attributes. Methods for

representing relative location include:

o Addressing –

Addresses specify location by reference to a thoroughfare, landmark or a

point of postal delivery. The FGDC is currently coordinating a national

addressing standard, to be stewarded by the U.S. Census Bureau upon

publication.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

o Linear Referencing –

Linear referencing specifies location along a linear feature using a

measurement from a known point, such as highway mile-markers.

o Place Name and Identifier –

The U.S. Board of Geographic Names approves the official names of over

twenty different types of named locations in the United States, its Territories,

and Possessions. The U.S. Geological Survey manages the authoritative place

names, identifiers, and their geographic location in the Geographic Names

Information System (GNIS). The use of GNIS Identifiers (GNIS-ID) is

recommended as a key to unique, officially recognized locations in the U.S.

o Federal Information Processing (FIPS) Codes9–

ANSI/NISO standard codes ensuring uniform identification of geographic

entities in the United States and territories. Relevant FIPS codes include:

 FIPS Pub 5-2, Codes for the identification of U.S. states

 FIPS Pub 6-4, Counties and equivalent entities

 FIPS Pub 8-6, Metropolitan areas (MSAs, CMSAs, PMSAs, and

NECMAs)

 FIPS Pub 9-1, Congressional districts

 FIPS Pub 55-3, Named populated places, primary county divisions,

etc.

o U.S. Public Land Survey System –

Location reference system for western states that reference Meridian,

Township, Range, Section and Partitioning for land and resource management

o U.S. National Grid (USNG) –

A hierarchical spatial reference system presenting Universal Transverse

Mercator (UTM) coordinates via a scalable grid reference system at various

levels of precision10.

The FEA Geospatial Profile provides a more thorough discussion of the standards and

code lists enabling geo-referencing using relative location.

9 These FIPS Standards are being deprecated and all FIPS codes will be moved to and managed within the

GNIS system, described above, and will be nominated as an American National Standard (ANS).

10 USNG is primarily used to define a ‘grid’ position for a point or small rectangular area; it is not intended

to be used as a coordinate reference system.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

4.7.3 Data Description

The FEA DRM Data Description area guides the uniform description of data to enable

data discovery, reuse, harmonization, sharing, and exchange. Data Description is based

on taxonomies developed under the FEA DRM Context area and result in the

development of data schemas that define entities, attributes, associated data types, and the

formal relationships between entities. Properly documented, data schemas can then be

exposed to the broad user community to enable discovery and understanding of the

structure of data assets and to implement physical (operational) data models. The

Geospatial LoB Target Data Architecture establishes guidelines for developing and

documenting geospatial data schemas and documenting geospatial data resources using

metadata.

4.7.3.1 Geospatial Data Schemas

Data schemas define how geospatial data are organized, how geospatial objects relate to

each other, and the attributes associated with each object. For maximum interoperability,

these schemas must be based standards identified by lead Federal agencies or COIs for

logical (abstract/database design) and physical (encoding/exchange) applications. For

data that have not been standardized, data schemas should be documented using logical

data models with sufficient detail to enable physical data models and development of

geospatial data objects. Logical data models are vendor-neutral and are independent of

physical data storage devices, but may be used to define data transfer encodings.

Logical data models should be documented using international (ISO) and national

(ANSI/NISO) standards including:

 Unified Modeling Language (UML)

 Entity-Relational (E-R) diagrams

 XML schemas

 Modeling Nationally Significant and Other Geospatial Data

All nationally significant geospatial data (NSDI framework themes) and Federally

stewarded other geospatial data shall have established logical data models. These logical

data models shall govern physical implementation (operationalization) of geospatial data.

Logical data models shall be developed by lead Federal agencies responsible for NSDI

framework themes – as per OMB Circular A-16 – and by COIs for other Federally

stewarded geospatial data.

 Modeling Administrative and Operational Data

Taxonomies and logical data models for non-spatial administrative and operational data

are expected to be developed by appropriate COIs. Once a decision is made to georeference a specific non-spatial data resource, the Geospatial LoB would collaborate with
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

the authoritative data steward (or COI) to extend those data models to facilitate consistent

geospatial representation of those data resources.

4.7.3.2 Geospatial Metadata

All nationally significant and other Federally stewarded geospatial data shall be

documented with descriptive metadata to enable discovery, assessment of fitness-of-use,

and sharing of geospatial data resources. Geospatial metadata should be organized by a

common schema to be applied across the Federal sector that would:

 Be organized in accordance with ISO metadata specifications (ISO 19115 and ISO

19139), thereby documenting key properties of geospatial data resources including

but not limited to:

o Identification information including context/topic, search keywords, data set

title, etc.

o Data quality information including positional accuracy and precision,

adherence to data accuracy standards, completeness, etc.

o Spatial representation and reference system information including

geometry properties, coordinate systems, projections, datums, etc.

o Maintenance frequency, data steward (POC) information, content description,

distribution protocol and constraints, etc.

 Contain, to the maximum extent possible, normalized and well-defined metadata

descriptive attributes (“pick-lists”) to enable efficient discovery; “free-text” metadata

tags should be kept to a minimum

 Utilize ISO 19115 Topic Categories to categorize data to facilitate keyword searches

and structured query. ISO 19115 topic categories should be mapped to FEA BRM

functions and sub-functions to enable the linkage between geospatial data resources

and the FEA BRM

 Explicitly define distribution rights and restrictions, to enable role-based access

implemented through Federal e-Authentication initiatives and strategy

The common metadata schema should be documented using international (ISO) and

national (ANSI/NISO) standards including:

 Unified Modeling Language (UML)

 Entity-Relational (E-R) diagrams

 XML schemas

Lead Federal agencies and COIs stewarding specific data resources may establish

targeted profiles that extent the common metadata schema to accommodate descriptive

requirements for a particular mission or problem set.

The FGDC is currently developing North American Profile of ISO 19115/19139

metadata standards. This profile will act as the next generation of a government-wide
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

geospatial metadata schema and, when finalized, will provide the discovery capabilities

and meet the objectives of the FEA DRM and DRM XML schema. ISO Metadata

supports the collection and management of feature-level, dataset-level (like the current

FGDC metadata standard), and collection-level metadata.

Until this profile has been completed and properly vetted, Federal departments and

agencies should continue to document all existing geospatial data resources using the

Content Standards for Digital Geospatial Metadata (CSDGM) v2.0, 1998 as maintained

by the FGDC.

4.7.4 Data Sharing

The FEA DRM Data Sharing area provides an architectural pattern for the sharing and

exchange of data through a services-oriented strategy, such as that recommended by the

Geospatial LoB. Geospatial data should be encoded using appropriate interface standards

and specifications to enable data exchange (fixed recurring transactions between data

suppliers and consumers) and less structured requests for data access. This section

identifies the key interface standards and specifications to enable geospatial data sharing.

4.7.4.1 Supplier-to-Consumer Matrix

The FEA DRM recommends development of a supplier-to-consumer matrix (or “user”-

to-“data provider” matrix as per Figure 3 in Section 2.0, Concept of Operations) to

identify organizational (or COI-oriented) information exchange requirements to guide

development of service components and information exchange packages. The number of

potential consumers of Federal geospatial data assets is too large to warrant an explicit

data supplier-to-consumer matrix as recommended by the DRM. The Geospatial LoB

Target Architecture will enable any number of consumers to discover availability and

fitness-of-use of relevant geospatial data and provide an effective means to connect

consumers with authoritative geospatial data through service-oriented discovery,

brokering, and access. The service components defined in Section 4.5 will provide broad,

cross-cutting capabilities that can be exploited by the full range of potential consumers of

Federal geospatial data resources.

4.7.4.2 Geospatial Data Interoperability Standards

Once consumers request access to geospatial data resources (upon performing necessary

discovery as described above), these data must be encoded in a fashion by which

interoperable service components can access and deliver the data. Geospatial data

encoding standards should:

 Be open and vendor-neutral to enable exploitation by a broad range of technology

solutions

 Be based on ISO and ANSI/NISO standards

The Geospatial LoB recommends use of the Open Geospatial Consortium (OGC) family

of specifications as they are based on and adhere to the two fundamental requirements
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

listed above. Geospatial data should be encoded and exposed to services using OGC

encoding standards including but not limited to:

 Web Map Service (WMS)

 Web Feature Service (WFS)

 Web Coverage Service (WCS)

 Geography Markup Language (GML)

 Style Layer Descriptor (SLD)

The FEA Geospatial Profile provides a more exhaustive list of ISO, ANSI, and OGC

geospatial standards and specifications.

4.7.5 Target Data Architecture Summary

In summary, geospatial data should:

 Be stewarded by formally chartered communities of interest (COI)

 Be aligned with business functions and sub-functions defined in the FEA BRM and as

defined in departmental and agency EAs

 Have taxonomies defined and documented

 Have data structures defined and documented

 Comply with and utilize relevant Federal and international standards

 Be described using metadata

 Shared/exchanged using open, vendor-neutral interoperability standards

 Exposed through services documented in the Service Component Target Architecture

outlined in Section 4.5.

In turn, this will:

 Facilitate the translation and exchange between national and local data resources

organized by disparate standards and schemas

 Improve the ability to fuse disparate data and provide a more comprehensive and

holistic view of a particular problem set

 Improve the ability to make connections and relationships based on location and

spatial relationships

 Increase interoperability, communication and collaboration

 Reduce redundancy by making existing data discoverable and accessible – and

improving access to government information resources – via query and catalog

services as described in Section 4.5.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

4.8 Integration

The pervasive, cross-cutting nature of embedded and explicit geospatial capabilities in

government leads to potential benefits and coordination with many of the existing

recognized Federal e-Government initiatives and LoBs. Table 1 shows the results of an

initial review of initiatives for which there is a suggested potential integration point with

the common solution initiatives of the Geospatial LoB. Initiatives with a higher potential

for integration benefit are shown with a double diamond relative to that common

solution.

Table 1 - Cross-governmental activities with geospatial benefits

Common Solutions

E-Government Initiatives

E

n

h

a

nced

G

o

vern

a

nce

Pla

n

nin

g

&

In

vestment Strateg

y

O

ptimize &

Sta

n

d

ardize D

ata

&

Services

Government to Citizen

Recreation One-Stop 

GovBenefits.gov 

E-Loans  

Government to Business

Federal Asset Sales  

International Trade Process Streamlining 

Consolidated Health Informatics 

Government to Government

Grants.gov   

Geospatial One-Stop   

Disaster Management  

E-Vital 

Internal Efficiency & Effectiveness

Recruitment One-Stop 

Enterprise Human Resources Integration  

Integrated Acquisition Environment 

E-Records Management 
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

Common Solutions

E-Government Initiatives

E

n

h

a

nced

G

o

vern

a

nce

Pla

n

nin

g

&

In

vestment Strateg

y

O

ptimize &

Sta

n

d

ardize D

ata

&

Services

E-Authentication

E-Authentication 

HSPD-12 

OMB-recognized Lines of Business

Financial Management  

Grants Management  

Human Resources Management  

Federal Health Architecture 

IT Security 

Infrastructure  

The prominent initiatives that have the highest potential or need to integrate/coordinate

with the Geospatial LoB are in the government-to-government category, where direct

sharing of government mission data is supportive of decision-making. The wider

availability of all geospatial assets for multiple use, the definition of participant roles and

responsibilities backed by performance and accountability measures, the ability to place

business data into a geographic context, and coordinated investments – all these stand to

provide significant benefit to other initiatives. The strongest category of support is the

Optimize and Standardize Data and Services common solution track, which is the

provision of access to geospatial and services for use by many applications in many

domains.

The Geospatial One-Stop (GOS) initiative was specifically intended to provide improved

access, governance, and geospatial data availability. It has resulted in an operational

catalog of community data and services descriptions accessible through a portal. The

GOS portal may provide a future implementation vehicle for the solution architectures to

be defined by the Geospatial LoB.

4.9 Proposed Changes to the FEA Reference Models

The development of the Conceptual Target Architecture has highlighted the need for

some additions to the Service Component Reference Model. While we were able to map
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

the majority of the services on geospatial data to existing Service Components, new

services were identified in the Analysis & Statistics Service Type. Analysis and statistics

is a central service area for geospatial data. Many geospatial applications are focused on

the detailed analysis of geographic or imagery data. For this reason, the CTA proposes

the following service components be added to this Service Type.

Geographic Analysis - A general-purpose set of capabilities for analyzing and processing

geospatial data. This service includes general Geographic Information Systems (GIS)

services as well as general analytical capabilities such as geocoding, geolocation,

navigation & routing, monitoring and tracking, and specific decision applications.

Image Analysis - A general-purpose set of capabilities for analyzing and processing

geospatial imagery and related metadata. Capabilities in this service area include, image

manipulation and processing, feature identification and extraction, image merging

(compositing).

5.0 PART V: BASELINE ARCHITECTURE

5.1 Overview and Purpose

This section is a preliminary, high-level narrative describing the current business

practices data, services, and technology environments encompassed within the scope of

the Geospatial LoB.

5.2 Baseline Business Architecture

The common solutions outlined in Section 3 reflect the consensus of Agency participants

that the largest barriers to optimizing the use of geospatial data and technologies in

government business functions are related to insufficient business modeling, governance,

policy, and targeted resources. This section summarizes key issues identified with these

areas.

5.2.1 Business Process

The business processes of most Federal agencies are oriented around places, therefore

geospatial data and capabilities can serve as a strong integrating force in many LoBs and

their associated business functions. An analysis by the Geospatial LoB Task Force of the

2007 OMB Exhibit 300 submissions identified a very broad applicability of geospatial

data services across many business functions and sub functions. An assessment by the

authors of the Geospatial Profile (January 2006) determined that all 39 LoBs delineated

within the FEA BRM can benefit from location based approaches to some extent. They

identified twenty lines of business (63%) as having primary geospatial elements. In the

“Services for Citizens” lines of business, 74% had geospatial components as a primary

element. (see Table 2).

Table 2 - Lines of Business that Have Geospatial Elements (per Geo Profile)
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

Business Area Lines of Business

Primary or Secondary

Element

Homeland Security, Intelligence

Operations, Defense & National

Security, International Affairs and

Commerce, Disaster Management,

Law Enforcement, Education,

Energy, Environmental Management,

Health, Natural Resources,

Community and Social Services,

Economic Development,

Transportation

Primary

Services for Citizens

General Science and Innovation,

Correctional Activities, Litigation and

Judicial Activities, Income Security,

Workforce Management

Secondary

Revenue Collection, Internal Risk

Management and Mitigation,

Controls & Oversight, General

Government

Primary

Support Delivery of Services

Legislative Relations, Regulatory

Development, Public Affairs,

Planning and Resource Allocation

Secondary

Admin Management, Supply Chain

Management Primary

Manage Government

Resources Financial Management ,Human

Resource/ Resource Management ,

Information and Technology

Management

Secondary

Although “geospatially enabling” agency business activities can significantly improve the

services provided to citizens and management of government resources, most agencies

have not built geospatial requirements management into their business process modeling.

When modeling occurs, it is often on an ad hoc basis at a project level versus at the

enterprise level, hindering the expansion of geospatial capabilities across all business

processes of an agency. Therefore, geospatial data and technology, while currently

embedded in numerous different business functions is still not maximized to the extent

that it could be to improve decision making. There is a trend for agencies to incorporate

geospatial components into their enterprise architecture and agencies including DOI,

USDA and EPA are using EA efforts to identify the geospatial aspects of their business

functions. The Geospatial Profile released in January 2006 provides a framework for

identifying which business processes to “geo-enable.”

There is an increasing interest across Federal agencies to share data and collaborate to

solve common issues with Federal, State and local government, yet cross agency

deployment of application solutions for the same or similar business processes is still not

common. This increases the likelihood that independent geospatial applications are being
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

developed multiple times across the Federal government to support the same or similar

business processes. For example, there are the geospatially enabled targeting tools

developed used by numerous agencies for environmental impact assessments under the

National Environmental Protection Act. This situation is compounded because few

policies are in place to encourage cross business function planning and geospatial data

and applications are often managed and maintained on a project-by-project basis.

5.2.2 Cost Savings

Federal agencies collectively acquire millions of dollars of geospatial assets. OMB,

individual Federal agencies, and cross-government committees and initiatives have each

taken actions to coordinate the government’s geospatial investments. Many examples of

data acquisition partnerships exist. For example, the Department of Agriculture and

Department of Interior have collaborated on a land management system. Over 1700

counties have been updated using state, county, tribal, or local geospatial files for the

Census Bureau’s TIGER Modernization program. The National Digital

Orthophotography Program (NDOP) was chartered in 1993 as a consortium of Federal

agencies with the purpose of developing and maintaining national orthoimagery coverage

in the public domain by establishing partnerships with Federal, State, local, tribal, and

private organizations. NDOP has allowed many agencies to acquire much needed

imagery by leveraging their collective dollars.

Although the GOS Marketplace is a good starting point for helping ensure that the same

data is not acquired more than once, one can not easily ascertain if the same data provider

is being used to provide the same data to other Federal agencies or to leverage across

agencies to get a price reduction due to the data volume being captured. In addition,

many Federal agencies still do not register intended geospatial data collection and

acquisition on the Geospatial One-Stop (GOS) Marketplace, stating the intent to spend

dollars for geospatial data that could be leveraged to meet all stakeholder needs over the

same piece of ground. Where cost data is collected it is not collected consistently which

is compounded by the lack of a consistent budget coding structure for geospatial assets.

5.3 Baseline Service Component Architecture

There is a growing number of web mapping and locator services that are helping more

business entities understand the benefits of geospatial data and services. However, the

current framework for providing consistent reusable geospatial services is fairly

fragmented so these services are not always coordinated or optimized. There is a wide

range of geospatial capability across government agencies. Some agencies are leaders in

geospatial technical innovation, while others still rely primarily on manual processes.

Some have implemented service-oriented architectures (SOA), while others are just

beginning to explore the potential for its use.

The evolving web service standards and the SOA approach help organizations attain

interoperability among services. To date there are few geospatial applications built using

multi-source services and a broader use of applications using multiple services will not

advance rapidly unless organizations comply with interoperability standards. The
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

development of shared services through data centers is also limited in the Federal

government.

The Geospatial One-Stop portal provides a mechanism to organize, discover, and interact

with geospatial resources from all sectors. It is currently configured as a catalog service

that enables human negotiation among geospatial resources, but does not currently

provide functionality for transparent brokering of service requests to back-end

contributors. Enhancing GOS to provide this type of functionality would help to improve

its utility as a service provider for end-users. The move from human negotiation among

services to automated peer-to-peer, service-to-service negotiated requests with different

back-end providers would be an important step toward interagency interoperability.

5.4 Baseline Technology Architecture

This section will be completed after the information from the OMB geospatial investment

reporting data call is analyzed (estimated 1Q07).

5.5 Baseline Data Architecture

While the FGDC efforts have resulted in increased use of standards across the Federal

government, it is still uncommon to observe consistent implementation of standards

across an organization’s business processes. At many civil agencies, much of the

geospatial data in use across the agency is obtained from different state or local sources.

An attempt to observe geospatial data use and patterns across an agency often requires a

large amount of up-front work to simply determine which data layers are similar across

the various offices. Standards within data sets (attributes, naming conventions, etc) are

even more wide-ranging. In many cases, even when standards are applied, it is difficult to

ensure rigorous adherence. Discrepancies across data sets from different sources make

utilization of disparate data sets challenging, especially during times of heightened

pressure, such as an emergency response. The current governance structure does not

support the development of policies to enforce the adoption of standards. Thus, there is

no guarantee that resources are being spent effectively and that the data or products

generated can be reused to realize the full return on investment. There is a greater need

for changes in policies to enable geospatial data and services coordination between the

defense and intelligence communities and civilian agencies. The use of different

standards, protocols and access restrictions has made it difficult to share and then use

data, particularly in emergency responses.

Because the current governance structure does not approach the development of priority

data sets as a common capital asset, the development of policies to enforce the adoption

of standards is lacking. Thus, there is no guarantee that resources are being spent

effectively and the data or products generated can be reused to realize the full return on

investment.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006

6.0 PART VI: TARGET TRANSITION STRATEGY

6.1 Redundancy and Gap Analysis

When the data call information from the Federal agencies is received, all reported items

will be matched to the target state to identify gaps and redundancies. Taxonomy and

ontology will be considered to determine if data truly are redundant or missing.

Prioritization will be applied as gaps are further researched against the RFI universe to

determine whether existing solutions are available. Redundancies will be closely

regarded to determine if any of the current state data collection, processing, services or

technologies can be consolidated.

6.2 Feasibility and Alternatives Analysis

As discussed in Section 3.3 Solution Applicability Analysis, the common solution

initiatives will be evaluated for cost/benefit analysis, risk analysis, and valuation, as a

part of the feasibility and alternatives analysis pending results of the June 2006 data call.

Upon completion of the feasibility and alternatives selection, the appropriate transition

strategy and plan can be crafted and will be addressed the Geospatial LoB JBC.

6.3 Transition Strategy and Plan

The Federal Transition Framework (FTF) is a single information source for cross-agency

IT initiatives. It is developed and maintained by the Office of Management and Budget

(OMB) and is an important part of efforts to fulfill government-wide policy objectives.

Content related to the initiatives will be placed into the FTF Catalog. The content

describes information using a standard series of layers mapped to the Federal Enterprise

Architecture (FEA) Reference Models. These layers are illustrated in Figure 16 below.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 50

Figure 14: Federal Transition Framework Metamodel

Content related to the Geospatial LoB will be placed into the FTF Catalog. The FTF

Catalog will be published in September.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 51

By publishing information about the Geospatial LoB into the FTF Catalog, agencies will:

 Receive more consistent, complete and detailed information about the LoB initiative to

inform agency enterprise architecture, capital planning, and implementation activities

 Use information about the LoB to make better informed decisions about agency

investments

 Improve the effectiveness and efficiency of IT investments to realize service

improvements and cost savings.

In turn, government overall will benefit from:

 More consistent, complete and detailed information about the LoB and be able to more

efficiently communicate to a broad audience

 Increased level and speed of adoption of the LoB initiatives

 Improved overall effectiveness and efficiency of IT investments related to the LoB.

In summary, the information published in the FTF Catalog will support the following goals:

 Increase the alignment of agency enterprise architectures with federal IT policy

decisions or other forms of official guidance

 Increase sharing and reuse of common, cross-agency processes, services components

and technology standards

 Increase collaboration through agency participation in cross-agency communities of

practice.

.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 52

APPENDIX A: CONCEPTUAL TARGET ARCHITECTURE MAPPINGS TO FEA REFERENCE

MODELS

Table A1 represents the performance analysis of Geospatial LoB goals and objectives mapped to the

PRM.

Table A 1: Performance Analysis for the Geospatial LoB

Geo LoB Sub-Objectives

FEA

Measurement

Area

Measuremen

t Category

FEA Generic Measurement

Indicator

Goal 1 - Productive intergovernmental collaboration for geospatial-related activities and investments across all

sectors and levels of government.

Customer

Results

Customer

Benefit

Customer Satisfaction

(% of subscribed customers who are

satisfied with service level

agreements)

To enhance coordination across

geospatial community stakeholders

Customer

Results

Service

Coverage

New Customers & Market

Penetration

(% change in the number of new

subscribers –end users and

applications)

To identify, evaluate and implement

common geospatial services,

processes and best practices

Technology Efficiency

Accessibility

(change in the number of accesses

moving from manual to automated)

To improve governance processes

and results in alignment with

common geospatial solutions

Process and

Activities

Management

and Innovation

Innovation and Improvement

(measure of the number of LoB,

program actively participating in

GEO LoB)

Goal 2 - Optimized and standardized common geospatial functions, services, and processes that are responsive to

customers

To establish an LoB-wide business

architecture for common functions

associated with geospatial

information

Customer

Results

Service

Accessibility

Availability

(% of day service is available –

work day to be defined)

Mission and

Business Results

Planning and

Resource

Allocation

Budget Formulation

(shared costs)

Customer

Results Service Quality

Accuracy of Service or Product

Delivered

(% of products delivered according

to specification)

Mission and

Business Results

All LoBs (To

Be Assessed) (labor savings)
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 53

Geo LoB Sub-Objectives

FEA

Measurement

Area

Measuremen

t Category

FEA Generic Measurement

Indicator

Process and

Activities

Productivity

and Efficiency

Efficiency

(for service: measured improvement

in time to perform specified task)

Process and

Activities

Management

and Innovation

Participation

(% of LoB using standard services

and authoritative data sources)

Technology Information

and Data

External Data Sharing

(number of formal external data

sharing partners)

Technology Information

and Data

Data Standardization

(number of data standards approved

and implemented into authoritative

data assets using governance model)

Process and

Activities Quality Complaints

(% change in number of complaints)

Technology Efficiency

Interoperability

(For each service: time to wait for

service from system/app interaction)

Customer

Results

Timeliness &

Responsiveness

Delivery Time

Response Time

(time from request to product

delivery)

Technology Reliability and

Availability

Availability

(number of failed bus. Operations

due to lack of availability)

Goal 3 - Cost efficient acquisition, processing, and access to geospatial data and information

To coordinate geospatial

requirements and capabilities Process and

Activities

Management

and Innovation

Knowledge Management

(number of shared requirements

consolidated for cost savings)

To enhance LoB-wide portfolio

management Technology Financial

Costs

(% reduction in cost of providing

service/customer)

To identify opportunities and

consolidate geospatial acquisition

activities

Technology Financial Licensing Costs

(cost / seat)
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 54

Geo LoB Sub-Objectives

FEA

Measurement

Area

Measuremen

t Category

FEA Generic Measurement

Indicator

To identify opportunities and

consolidate geospatial acquisition

activities - To develop and

implement geospatial requirements

language for Federal grants and

contracts - To implement guidance

provided through the FEA Geospatial

Profile

Process and

Activities Financial

Savings & Cost Avoidance

(portfolio aggregated costs /

customer)

(total cost avoidance/customer)
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 55

Table A2 provides the business processes associated with each common solution. This helps identify

which processes are important in the management of geospatial asset lifecycle. Note that for

“Optimize and Standardize Geospatial Data & Services” the business processes identified map back

to the capability areas discussed in the ConOps.

Table A 2: Common Solution Business Processes

Common

Solution Process/Capability Description

Stakeholder

Management

The activities a business enterprise initiates to manage the

relationships with its stakeholders. These activities include

partnering, consulting, information and controlling

depending on the importance of the stakeholder to the

enterprise.

Portfolio

Management

The processes, practices and specific activities to perform

continuous and consistent evaluation, prioritization,

budgeting, and finally selection of investments that provides

the greatest value and contribution to the strategic interest

of the organization.

Capital Planning

A decision-making process for ensuring that investments

integrate strategic planning, budgeting, procurement, and

management of the asset (IT, construction, etc.) in support

of agency missions and business needs.

Enterprise

Architecture

The explicit description and documentation of the current

and desired relationships among business and management

processes and information technology.

Strategic Planning Planning which focuses on longer range objectives and

goals.

Governance

The people, policies and processes that provide the

framework within which managers make decisions and take

actions to optimize outcomes related to their spheres of

responsibility.

Budget Planning Tactical/ operational financial planning

Enhanced

Governance -

Enhance

performance

accountability and

compliance

mechanisms

Asset Life-cycle

Management

The management of an asset (both Data & Services assets)

covering all phases of acquisition, operation, and logistics

support of an item, beginning with concept definition and

continuing through disposal of the asset.

Relationship

Management

The management of relationships formed by two or more

organizations that share, participate in joint investments,

and develop linked and common processes to increase the

performance of both organizations.

Planning &

Investment

Strategy -

Coordinated

acquisition, budget

planning, labor

cost avoidance Acquisition

Planning

The process by which all acquisition-related disciplines of

an acquisition program are developed, coordinated, and

integrated into a comprehensive plan for executing the

program and meeting the stated requirements within the cost

and schedule boundaries.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 56

Common

Solution Process/Capability Description

Requirements

Management &

Planning

Concerned with understanding the goals of the organization

and its customers and the transformation of these goals into

potential functions and constraints

Requirements

Prioritization

The strategic organization of requirements to address

business priorities

Requirements

Optimization

The tactical organization of requirements to maximize ROI

Define businessdriven requirementsIdentification of data and services need

Find data and

services

Discovery, Evaluation, and assessment of suitability of

geospatial assets

Acquire Delivery, purchase, or generation of a geospatial data asset

Publish Make known to the public, announce availability

Disseminate Distribute or provision geospatial assets

Update resource

content

Change content of a published asset

Resource

maintenance

Provide Level of Service against assets

Store and manage

resources

Host geospatial Assets

Optimized and

Standardized

Geospatial Data &

Services -

Widespread

adoption of shared

and reusable

geospatial and

geo-enabled

business data and

services

Use Employ geospatial assets
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 57

Table A3 shows how the external or citizen facing services map to the LoB common solutions. These

services are consumers of services provided under the common solution for the benefit of the citizen. The

contents of the table were deduced using the GEA Profile in the evaluating of each business sub-function and

determining if geospatial could help the business effectiveness. The result illustrates the pervasive nature of a

geospatial capability. Columns marked “TBD” (To Be Determined) are inadequately described in the OMB

FEA BRM to determine the relevance of geospatial capabilities to the sub-function. Future efforts in

describing the business value of geospatial capabilities should strive to prioritize the business lines and subfunctions based on potential value/impact and/or cost savings.

Table A 3: BRM to Common Solutions (External)

Line of Business

(FEA) Sub Function (FEA) G

o

v

ern

a

n

c

e

Pla

n

nin

g

&

In

v

e

stm

e

nt

G

e

o

s

p

atial

D

ata

&

S

ervic

e

s

Services for Citizens

Agricultural Innovation and Services X X X

Water Resource Management X X X

Conservation, Marine and Land Management X X X

Natural Resources

Recreational Resource Management and Tourism X X X

Energy Resource Management X X X

Energy Conservation and Preparedness X X X

Energy Supply X X X

Energy

Energy Production X X X

Pollution Prevention and Control X X X

Environmental Remediation X X X

Environmental

Management

Environmental Monitoring and Forecasting X X X

Criminal Apprehension X X X

Citizen Protection X X X

Crime Prevention X X X

Property Protection X X X

Substance Control X X X

Leadership Protection X X X

Law Enforcement

Criminal Investigation and Surveillance X X X

Business and Industry Development X X X

Financial Sector Oversight X X X

Industry Sector Income Stabilization TBD TBD TBD

Economic

Development

Intellectual Property Protection TBD TBD TBD

Community and Community and Regional Development X X X
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 58

Line of Business

(FEA) Sub Function (FEA) G

o

v

ern

a

n

c

e

Pla

n

nin

g

&

In

v

e

stm

e

nt

G

e

o

s

p

atial

D

ata

&

S

ervic

e

s

Services for Citizens

Home Ownership Promotion X X X

Postal Service X X X

Social Services

Social Services X X X

Emergency Response X X X

Disaster Preparedness and Planning X X X

Disaster Repair and Restore X X X

Disaster

Management

Disaster Monitoring and Prediction X X X

Consumer Health and Safety X X X

Health Care Services X X X

Access to Care X X X

Population Health Management X X X

Health

Health Advancement X X X

Border and Transportation Security X X X

Homeland Security Key Asset and Critical Infrastructure Protection X X X

Catastrophic Defense X X X

Higher Education X X X

Cultural and Historic Exhibition X X X

Cultural and Historic Preservation X X X

Education

Elementary, Secondary, and Vocational Education X X X

Ground Transportation X X X

Air Transportation X X X

Space Operations X X X

Transportation

Water Transportation X X X

Worker Safety X X X

Training and Employment X X X

Workforce

Management

Labor Rights Management TBD TBD TBD

Judicial Hearings TBD TBD TBD

Resolution Facilitation TBD TBD TBD

Legal Defense TBD TBD TBD

Litigation and

Judicial Activities

Legal Investigation X X X
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 59

Line of Business

(FEA) Sub Function (FEA) G

o

v

ern

a

n

c

e

Pla

n

nin

g

&

In

v

e

stm

e

nt

G

e

o

s

p

atial

D

ata

&

S

ervic

e

s

Services for Citizens

Legal Prosecution and Litigation X X X

Space Exploration and Innovation X X X

General Science

and Innovation Scientific and Technological Research and

Innovation X X X

Correctional Criminal Incarceration X X X

Activities Criminal Rehabilitation X X X

Operational Defense X X X

Strategic National and Theater Defense X X X

Defense and

National Security

Tactical Defense X X X

Food and Nutrition Assistance X X X

Housing Assistance X X X

Survivor Compensation TBD TBD TBD

Unemployment Compensation TBD TBD TBD

Income Security

General Retirement and Disability TBD TBD TBD

Intelligence Planning and Direction/Needs X X X

Intelligence Collection X X X

Intelligence Analysis and Production X X X

Intelligence

Operations

Dissemination X X X

Foreign Affairs X X X

Global Trade X X X

International

Affairs and

Commerce International Development and Humanitarian Aid X X X
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 60

Table A4 shows how the internal or cross agency services map. These services can also be consumers for

internal agency business processes, but are more likely to be providers of services for the coordination of the

common solution processes, which are then consumed by other agencies in the provisioning of their own

citizen services.

Table A 4: BRM to Common Solutions (Internal)

Line of Business (FEA) Sub Function (FEA) G

o

v

ern

a

n

c

e

Pla

n

nin

g

&

In

v

e

stm

e

nt

G

e

o

s

p

atial

D

ata

&

S

ervic

e

s

Management of Government Resources (Cross-Agency)

Financial Management

(Cross-Agency)

Reporting and Information (CrossAgency) X X X

Administrative Management

(Cross-Agency) Help Desk Services (Cross-Agency) X

Human Resource

Management (Cross-Agency) Training Management (Cross-Agency) X

Information Management (Cross-Agency) X X X

IT Infrastructure Maintenance (CrossAgency) X X X

IT Security (Cross-Agency) X X X

Lifecycle-Change Management (CrossAgency) X X

Record Retention (Cross-Agency) X

System Development (Cross-Agency) X

Information and Technology

Management (Cross-Agency)

Systems Maintenance (Cross-Agency) X

Supply Chain Management Goods Acquisition (Cross-Agency) X

(Cross-Agency) Services Acquisition (Cross-Agency) X X X

Mode of Delivery - Financial Vehicles

Federal Financial Assistance Federal Grants (Non-State) X X

Transfers to State & Local

Governments Earmarked Grants X X

Knowledge Creation and

Management Knowledge Dissemination X

Knowledge Creation and

Management Research & Development X

Public Goods Creation &

Management Information Infrastructure Management X

Regulatory Compliance and

Enforcement

Standard Setting/Reporting Guideline

Development X

Support Delivery of Services (Cross-Agency)
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 61

Line of Business (FEA) Sub Function (FEA) G

o

v

ern

a

n

c

e

Pla

n

nin

g

&

In

v

e

stm

e

nt

G

e

o

s

p

atial

D

ata

&

S

ervic

e

s

Contingency Planning (Cross-Agency) X

Continuity of Operations (Cross-Agency) X

Internal Risk Management

and Mitigation (CrossAgency)

Service Recovery (Cross-Agency) X

Budget Execution (Cross-Agency) X

Capital Planning (Cross-Agency) X X

Enterprise Architecture (Cross-Agency) X

Management Improvement (CrossAgency) X

Planning and Resource

Allocation (Cross-Agency)

Strategic Planning (Cross-Agency) X

Official Information Dissemination

(Cross-Agency) X X

Public Affairs (CrossAgency)

Product Outreach (Cross-Agency) X

Policy and Guidance Development

(Cross-Agency) Regulatory Development X

(Cross-Agency)

Public Comment Tracking (CrossAgency) X

Revenue Collection (CrossAgency) User Fee Collection (Cross-Agency) X
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 62

Table A5 illustrates how each common solution and associated business processes address the LoB

goals and objectives.

Table A 5: LoB Goal Alignment

Enhanced Governance

Planning & Investment

Strategy

O

ptimize

a

n

d

Sta

n

d

ardize

Sta

k

e

h

old

er

M

a

n

a

g

e

m

e

nt

P

ortfolio

M

a

n

a

g

e

m

e

nt

C

a

pital Pla

n

nin

g

E

nterpris

e

Arc

hite

cture

Strate

gic

Pla

n

nin

g

G

o

v

ern

a

n

c

e

Pro

gra

m

M

a

n

a

g

e

m

e

nt

B

u

d

g

et Pla

n

nin

g

A

s

s

et Life

c

y

cle

M

a

n

a

g

e

m

e

nt

R

elatio

n

s

hip

M

a

n

a

g

e

m

e

nt

A

c

q

uisitio

n

Pla

n

nin

g

R

e

q

uire

m

e

nts

M

a

n

a

g

e

m

e

nt a

n

d

Pla

n

nin

g

R

e

q

uire

m

e

nts

Prioritizatio

n

R

e

q

uire

m

e

nts

O

ptimizatio

n

All C

a

p

a

bilitie

s

Goal 1 - Productive intergovernmental collaboration for geospatial-related activities and

investments across all sectors and levels of government.

To enhance coordination across geospatial community stakeholders

X X X X X

To identify, evaluate and implement common geospatial services, processes and best practices

X X

To improve governance processes and results in alignment with common geospatial solutions

X X

Goal 2 - Optimized and standardized common geospatial functions, services, and processes that

are responsive to customers

To establish an LoB-wide business architecture for common functions associated with geospatial

information

X X X X X X X X X X

To adopt, deploy and promote effective use of geospatial interoperability standards

X X X X X

To implement guidance provided through the FEA Geospatial Profile

X X X X X X X X X

Goal 3 - Cost efficient acquisition, processing, and access to geospatial data and information

To coordinate geospatial requirements and capabilities

X X X X
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 63

Enhanced Governance

Planning & Investment

Strategy

O

ptimize

a

n

d

Sta

n

d

ardize

Sta

k

e

h

old

er

M

a

n

a

g

e

m

e

nt

P

ortfolio

M

a

n

a

g

e

m

e

nt

C

a

pital Pla

n

nin

g

E

nterpris

e

Arc

hite

cture

Strate

gic

Pla

n

nin

g

G

o

v

ern

a

n

c

e

Pro

gra

m

M

a

n

a

g

e

m

e

nt

B

u

d

g

et Pla

n

nin

g

A

s

s

et Life

c

y

cle

M

a

n

a

g

e

m

e

nt

R

elatio

n

s

hip

M

a

n

a

g

e

m

e

nt

A

c

q

uisitio

n

Pla

n

nin

g

R

e

q

uire

m

e

nts

M

a

n

a

g

e

m

e

nt a

n

d

Pla

n

nin

g

R

e

q

uire

m

e

nts

Prioritizatio

n

R

e

q

uire

m

e

nts

O

ptimizatio

n

All C

a

p

a

bilitie

s

To enhance LoB-wide portfolio management

X X X X

To identify opportunities and consolidate geospatial acquisition activities

X X X X X X X

To develop and implement geospatial requirements language for Federal grants and contracts

X X X X X X X
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 64

Table A6 illustrates targeted business processes mapped to the high-level PRM category, areas, and indicators.

Table A 6: LoB PRM Alignment

Enhanced Governance Planning & Investment Strategy

O

ptimize and

Standardize

FEA

Measurem

ent Area

Measure

ment

Category

FEA Generic

Measurement

Indicator Stakeholder

ManagementP

ortfolio

ManagementCapital PlanningEnterpriseArchitectureStrategic PlanningG

o

vernance

ProgramManagementBudget PlanningAsset LifecycleManagementRelationshipManagementAcquisitionPlanningRequirementsManagementand

Planning

RequirementsPrioritizationRequirementsO

ptimization

All Capabilities

Customer

Results

Customer

Results

Service

Coverage X X X

Customer

Results

Service

Coverage

New Customers

& Market

Penetration

X X X X

Technology Efficiency Accessibility X

Process and

Activities

Manageme

nt and

Innovation

Policies

X X

Customer

Results

Customer

Benefit

Customer

Satisfaction X X X

Customer

Results

Service

Quality

Accuracy of

Service or

Product

Delivered

X X X

Mission and

Business

Results

All LoBs

(To Be

Assessed)

X

Process and Processes Productivity and
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 65

Enhanced Governance Planning & Investment Strategy

O

ptimize and

Standardize

FEA

Measurem

ent Area

Measure

ment

Category

FEA Generic

Measurement

Indicator Stakeholder

ManagementP

ortfolio

ManagementCapital PlanningEnterpriseArchitectureStrategic PlanningG

o

vernance

ProgramManagementBudget PlanningAsset LifecycleManagementRelationshipManagementAcquisitionPlanningRequirementsManagementand

Planning

RequirementsPrioritizationRequirementsO

ptimization

All Capabilities

Activities and

Activities

Efficiency

Process and

Activities

Processes

and

Activities

Management

and Innovation

X

X X X X X X

Technology Information

and Data

External Data

Sharing

X

X X

Technology Information

and Data

Data Reliability

& Quality X X

Process and

Activities

Quality Complaints X X X

Technology Efficiency Interoperability X

Technology Reliability

and

Availability

Availability

X

Process and

Activities

Manageme

nt and

Innovation

Knowledge

Management X X

Technology Financial Costs X X X

Technology Financial Licensing Costs X X X X X X X X

Process and

Activities

Financial Savings & Cost

Avoidance

X

X X X X X X
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 66

Table A7 maps service requirements to capabilities.

Table A 7: Geospatial Service Component

Domain Description

Service Type Description

Domain Service Type Service Component Component Description Geospatial Function(s)

Defines the set of capabilities that support the management of enterprise planning and transactional-based functions

Provide for the usage, processing and general administration of unstructured information.

Data Exchange Support the interchange of

information between multiple systems

or applications; includes verification

that transmitted data was received

unaltered

Imagery Product (multi-file)

exchange services

Brokering Services

Extraction & Transformation Support the manipulation and change

of data

coordinate transformation,

resampling, subsetting,

reprojection

Data Mart Support a subset of a data warehouse

for a single department or function

within an organization

Location specific subset

Data Warehouse Support the archiving and storage of

large volumes of data

Geospatial context data storage

Metadata Management Support the maintenance and

administration of data that describes

data

FGDC compliance tests, spatial

processing on ingest

Data Cleansing Support the removal of incorrect or

unnecessary characters and data from

a data source

Geospatial data cleansing (e.g.

Gazetteers, address

reconciliation)

Back office

Data

Management

Data Classification Allow the classification of data Spatial Classification

Defines the set of capabilities supporting the extraction, aggregation, and presentation of information to facilitate

decision analysis and business evaluation.

Business

Analytical

Services Analysis & Examine business issues, problems and their solutions.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 67

Domain Description

Service Type Description

Domain Service Type Service Component Component Description Geospatial Function(s)

Geographic Analysis* A general purpose set of capabilities

for analyzing and processing

geospatial data.

GIS, Navigation, Tracking

Weather, etc.

Statistics

Imagery Analysis* A general purpose set of capabilities

for analyzing and processing

geospatial imagery and related

metadata.

Feature extraction, edge

detection, neural networks etc.

Visualization Convert data into graphical or picture form.

Mapping / Geospatial /

Elevation / GPS

Provide for the representation of

position information through the use

of attributes such as elevation,

latitude, and longitude coordinates

Mapping Client, Coverage Client

Etc.

Facilitate the identification of useful information from data.

Data Mining Provide for the efficient discovery of

non-obvious, valuable patterns and

relationships within a large collection

of data

Geospatial Mining Algorithms

Modeling Develop descriptions to adequately

explain relevant data for the purpose

of prediction, pattern detection,

exploration or general organization of

data

Geospatial Modeling

Knowledge

Discovery

Simulation Utilize models to mimic real world

processes

Geospatial Simulations

Business Provide information that pertains to the history, current status or future projections of an organization.

Intelligence Decision Support &

Planning

Support the analyze information and

predict the impact of decisions before

they are made

Geospatial Decision Support

Reporting Organize data into useful information.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 68

Domain Description

Service Type Description

Domain Service Type Service Component Component Description Geospatial Function(s)

Ad Hoc Support the use of dynamic reports on

an as needed basis

Geospatial based reporting

Standardized / Canned Support the use of pre-conceived or

pre-written reports

Geospatial based reporting

OLAP Support the analysis of information

that has been summarized into

multidimensional views and

hierarchies

Geospatial analysis

Defines the set of capabilities that support the generation, management, and distribution of intellectual capital and

electronic media across the business and extended enterprise.

Content Manage the storage, maintenance and retrieval of documents and information of a system or website.

Management Tagging & Aggregation Support the identification of specific

content within a larger set of content

for collection and summarization

Geospatial Tagging &

Aggregation

Identify, gather and transform documents, reports and other sources into meaningful information.

Information Retrieval Allow access to data and information

for use by an organization and its

stakeholders

Location based information

retrieval

Information Mapping /

Taxonomy

Support the creation and maintenance

of relationships between data entities,

naming standards and categorization

Geospatial Ontology mediation

Information Sharing Support the use of documents and

data in a multi-user environment for

use by an organization and its

stakeholders

Location based information

sharing

Categorization Allow classification of data and

information into specific layers or

types to support an organization

Geospatial data categorization

Digital Asset

Services

Knowledge

Management

Knowledge Capture Facilitate collection of data and

information

Geospatial Knowledge Capture
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 69

Domain Description

Service Type Description

Domain Service Type Service Component Component Description Geospatial Function(s)

Knowledge Distribution and

Delivery

Support the transfer of knowledge to

the end customer.

Geospatial Knowledge

Distribution

Schedule, appraise, store, protect, classify, retire and preserve geospatial data and information.

Record Linking /

Association

Support the correlation between

logical data and information sets

Geospatial association

Records

Management

Digital Rights Management Support the claim and ownership of

intellectual capital and artifacts

belonging to an organization

Geospatially constrained digital

rights.

Defines the set of capabilities that support the management of business functions and organizational activities that

maintain continuity across the business and value-chain participants. The Business Management Services Domain

represents those capabilities and services that are necessary for projects, programs and planning within a business

operation to successfully be managed.

Plan, schedule and control a supply chain and the sequence of organizations and functions that mine,

make or assemble materials and products from manufacturer to wholesaler to retailer to consumer.

Catalog Management Support the listing of available

products or services that an

organization offers

Feature update,

Coverage Update,

Gazetteer Update

Resource Catalog Update

Business

Management

Services

Supply Chain

Management

Ordering / Purchasing Allow the placement of request for a

product

Geospatial data order

Defines the set of cross-functional capabilities that can be leveraged independent of Service Domain objective and/or

mission.

Protect an organization's hardware/software and related assets.

Access Control Support the management of

permissions for logging onto a

computer or network

Location based access control

Security Services

Role / Privilege Management Support the granting of abilities to

users or groups of users of a

computer, application or network

Location based Role / Privilege

management

Support

Services

Search Provide for the probing and lookup of specific data from a data source.
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 70

Domain Description

Service Type Description

Domain Service Type Service Component Component Description Geospatial Function(s)

Query Support retrieval of records that

satisfy specific query selection criteria

Geospatial Query

Precision / Recall Ranking Support selection and retrieval of

records ranked to optimize precision

against recall

Geospatial optimization

Classification Support selection and retrieval of

records organized by shared

characteristics in content or context

Geospatial Context Classifiers

Pattern Matching Support retrieval of records generated

from a data source by imputing

characteristics based on patterns in the

content or context

Geospatial Pattern Matching
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 71

Table A8 provides a mapping of the service components to ConOps common processes.

Table A 8: Service Component to ConOps Process Mapping

Service

Domain

Service

Type

Service Component

D

efin

e

Fin

d

A

c

q

uire

P

u

blis

h

Dis

s

e

min

ate

U

p

d

ate

M

aintain

StoreU

s

e

Data Exchange X X X X X

Extraction & Transformation X X X X X

Data Mart X X X X X

Data Warehouse X X X X

Metadata Management X X X X

Data Cleansing X X

Back office Data

Management

Data Classification X X

Analysis & Geographic Analysis* X X X X

Statistics Imagery Analysis* X X X X

Visualization Mapping / Geospatial / Elevation / GPS X

Data Mining X X X X X

Modeling X X X X

Knowledge

Discovery

Simulation X X X X

Business

Intelligence

Decision Support & Planning X X X X X

Ad Hoc X

Standardized / Canned X

Business

Analytical

Services

Reporting

OLAP X
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 72

Service

Domain

Service

Type

Service Component

D

efin

e

Fin

d

A

c

q

uire

P

u

blis

h

Dis

s

e

min

ate

U

p

d

ate

M

aintain

StoreU

s

e

Content

Management

Tagging & Aggregation X X X

Information Retrieval X X

Information Mapping / Taxonomy X X X X

Information Sharing X X

Categorization X X X

Knowledge Capture X X

Knowledge

Management

Knowledge Distribution and Delivery X X

Record Linking / Association X X

Digital Asset

Services

Records

Management Digital Rights Management X

Business Catalog Management X X

Management

Services

Supply Chain

Management Ordering / Purchasing X

Security Access Control X X X X X X X X X

Services Role / Privilege Management X X X X X X X X X

Query X X

Precision / Recall Ranking X X

Classification X X

Support

Services

Search

Pattern Matching X X

Bold Italics represent new service components
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 73

Table A9 maps the functions of the ConOps to the FEA TRM.

Table A 9: TRM to Concept of Operations Mapping

Service

Areas

Service

Category

Service

Standard

Technology

Comments D

efin

e

Fin

d

A

c

q

uire

P

u

blis

h

Dis

s

e

min

ate

U

p

d

ate

M

aintain

StoreU

s

e

Service

Access and

Delivery

Access

Channels Web Browser HTML/HTTP

X X X

Wireless/PDA Various X X X X

Collaboration /

Communications email X X X

Other Electronic

Channels Web Services X X X X X X

Delivery

Channels Internet X X X X

Intranet X X X X

Extranet X X X X

Peer-to-peer X X X X

VPN X X X X

Service

Requirements

Legislative

Compliance

OMB A-16,

Section 508, X X X X X X X X

Authentication/

Single Sign-on

eAuthentication,

HSPD-12 X X X X X

Hosting X X X X X

Service

Transport

Supporting

Network Services X X X X X X X

Service Transport X X X X X X X
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 74

Service

Areas

Service

Category

Service

Standard

Technology

Comments D

efin

e

Fin

d

A

c

q

uire

P

u

blis

h

Dis

s

e

min

ate

U

p

d

ate

M

aintain

StoreU

s

e

Service

Platform and

Infrastructure

Support

Platforms Wireless/Mobile

X X X X

Platformindependent X X X X X X X

Delivery

Servers Web servers X X X X X X

Application servers X X X X X X X

Portal servers X X X

Software

Engineering

Software

Configuration

Management

X X X X X

Test Management X X X X X

Database/

Storage Database

Geospatial format,

indexing, and

processing (OGC

SF-SQL)

X X X X X

Storage X X

Hardware/

Infrastructure Servers/Computers

X X X X X X X X X

Wide-Area

Network (WAN)

There a need to

match bandwidth

requirements

across the data

services enterprise.

X X X X X X X

Local Area

Network (LAN)

There a need to

match bandwidth

X X X X X X X X X
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 75

Service

Areas

Service

Category

Service

Standard

Technology

Comments D

efin

e

Fin

d

A

c

q

uire

P

u

blis

h

Dis

s

e

min

ate

U

p

d

ate

M

aintain

StoreU

s

e

requirements

across the data

services enterprise.

Component

Framework Security

Certificates /

Digital Signature X X X X

Supporting

Security Services X X X X X

Presentation/

Interface Static Display

X X X X X X

Dynamic Serverside DisplayOGC Web Map

Server, ISO 19128 X X X

Content Rendering

OGC Style Layer

Descriptor X X

OGC Web Map

Server, ISO 19128 X X

Wireless/Mobile

OGC

OpenLocation

Services 1.0

X X X X

Data

Interchange Data Exchange

OGC Web Feature

Service, ISO 19142 X X X X X

OGC Web

Coverage Service X X X X

OGC Filter

Encoding, ISO

19143 (Filter)

X X
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 76

Service

Areas

Service

Category

Service

Standard

Technology

Comments D

efin

e

Fin

d

A

c

q

uire

P

u

blis

h

Dis

s

e

min

ate

U

p

d

ate

M

aintain

StoreU

s

e

Spatial Data

Transfer Standard,

ANSI INCITS 320

X X

OGC GML 3.1.1,

ISO 19136 X X

Data

Management

Database

Connectivity X X X

Reporting and

Analysis X X X X X X X

Service

Interface and

Integration Integration Middleware

SQL-Multi-Media

(Spatial

Extensions) ISO

13249-3:2003;

X X X

ISO 23950 X X X X X

OGC

SimpleFeatures

SQL

X X X

Enterprise

Application

Integration

X X X X X X

Interoperability

Data Format/

Classification

OGC Web Map

Context

X

OGC GML, ISO

19136 X X

HDF, HDF EOS,

net-CDF X X X

Data FGDC CSDGM X X X X
Geospatial Line of Business

Common Solutions and Target Architecture

August 21, 2006 Page 77

Service

Areas

Service

Category

Service

Standard

Technology

Comments D

efin

e

Fin

d

A

c

q

uire

P

u

blis

h

Dis

s

e

min

ate

U

p

d

ate

M

aintain

StoreU

s

e

Types/Validation

ISO Metadata

19115/19139 X X X

ANSI INCITS

Framework Data

Standards (Draft)

X X X

Data

Transformation

OGC Coordinate

Transformation

Service

X X

OGC Web Map

Service ISO 19128 X X X

Interface Service Discovery

OGC Catalogue

Service X X X X X

UDDI X X X X X

Service

Description/

Interface

OGC OWS

Common

X

Web Service

Description

Language (WSDL)

X X