Data managed by entities that have central curation for data, specimens, or photographs tend to be more secure than data managed by organizations that do not. While museums have a history of centralized curation, the specimens upon which their databases are derived can degrade or be lost due to lack of space or funding. Biological field stations usually expect individual researchers to curate their own data. Deposition of data at the field station is typically not required, although there are notable exceptions. The Organization of Tropical Studies in Costa Rica and several field stations associated with the LTER program have specified data management policies and to varying degrees maintain data sets collected by investigators at these sites.
Private organizations vary in their structure, policies, and methods of data curation.
TNC frequently works in conjunction with other organizations to establish ecological data bases. The Heritage Database, for example, is available through the Natural Heritage Programs run by most state fish and game departments. As mentioned above, the Endangered Species Act creates a mandate for the Natural Heritage Program, subjecting this portion of The Nature Conservancy data to political whims. Consequently, when this key figure retires or dies, the data may be lost due to inadequately documented metadata and the lack of time and energy required for others to resurrect the data. Individual researchers at universities and research institutions are the bulk of the ESA membership.