SDI Evaluation Frameworks • Presented to: Pan Canadian SDI Summit • Presented by: Gordon Plunkett November 24, 2015
Jan 18, 2018
SDI Evaluation Frameworks
• Presented to: Pan Canadian SDI Summit
• Presented by: Gordon Plunkett
November 24, 2015
What is an SDI Evaluation Framework?
• An SDI is made up of a number of diverse components that when fitted together and when working properly, provide data and services to end users.
• A Framework is the articulation of the diverse components required to make an SDI work.
• An SDI Evaluation Framework is a way of assessing each individual component including how these components work together.
Three SDI Evaluation Frameworks
• Modified GSDI Evaluation Framework (2010)• German Marine SDI Evaluation Framework (2012)
• Report Card on the U.S. NSDI (2015)• GeoAlliance Canada (2015)
Modified GSDI Evaluation (2010)
• Feasibility Study for a National Spatial Data Infrastructure in Jordan
• https://www.infodev.org/infodev-files/resource/InfodevDocuments_1119.pdf
• Feasibility Study for a National Spatial Data Infrastructure in Uganda
• https://www.infodev.org/infodev-files/resource/InfodevDocuments_1134.pdf
Evaluation FrameworkFactor Decision Criteria1. Organizational • Political Vision
• Institutional leadership• Umbrella legal Agreements
2. Data availability • Digital Cartography Available• Metadata available
3. People • Human Capital• SDI culture-education• Individual leadership
4. Access Network • Web connectivity• Telecom infrastructure• Geospatial s/w available
5. Financial Resources • Government central funding• Policy for ROI• Private Sector activity
$
German Marine SDI Framework (2012)
• A framework for the evaluation of marine spatial data infrastructures accompanied by an international case-study.
• http://www.agile-online.org/Conference_Paper/CDs/agile_2012/proceedings/posters/Poster_Rueh_A_framework_for_the_evaluation_of_marine_spatial_data_infrastructures_Accompanied_by_an_internal_case-study_2012.pdf
Evaluation Framework1. Policy Level
• Policy (government SDI policy, IP rights, privacy, pricing, acquisition and use of spatial data)
2. Management Level• Standards (technical, institutional arrangements, core datasets)• Access Network (pricing, delivery mechanisms, access, value added
arrangements)
3. Operational Level• Access Network (type, data volume, response time)• Data (format, capture, core datasets, maintenance, quality, accuracy)
4. Other Influencing Factors• People (# organizations, # people, training, market situation)
5. Performance Assessment• Meeting objectives, satisfaction, diffusion & use of data
Evaluation Indicators & AssessmentArea Technical indicator Organization indicatorData Core datasets {VG} Degree of organizational
involvement {VG}Coordinate reference system {VG}
Metadata Catalogue availability {G} Coordination {VG}
Data quality and accuracy {G}
Services & interfaces
Availability {G} Access, custodianship {N/A}
Performance {N/A}
Clearinghouse & portal {G}
Standards Interoperability {VG}
Modelling (Policy)
Government SDI policy, architecture, business models {VG}
US NSDI Evaluation Framework (2015)
• Report Card on the U.S. National Spatial Data Infrastructure
• http://www.cogo.pro/uploads/COGO-Report_Card_on_NSDI.pdf
• Esri Canada blog post• http://www.esri.ca/en/blog/do-we-need-report-card-performance-canadian-geospatial-data-infrastructure
Framework Data Evaluation Framework
Subject
1. Cadastral Data
2. Geodetic Control
3. Elevation Data
4. Hydrography Data
5. Orthoimagery Data
6. Government Units Data7. Transportation Data
8. Overall Data Grade
Grade Data Evaluation CriteriaA Fit for the FutureB Adequate for nowC Requires attentionD At riskF Unfit for purpose
Evaluation criteriaTheme and descriptionLead agencyCollaboration and partneringStandardsEstimate of completenessAccessibilityAuthority, governance and management
Comprehensive Evaluation Framework Category Description
Capacity The Framework’s capacity to meet current and future demands
Condition The existing or near term condition of the Framework themes as an integrated whole.
Funding The funding capability of the Framework.
Future Need Whether future funding prospects will be able to meet the need.
Operation and Maintenance
The ability of key lead organizations to develop and maintain the Framework and to adopt new technology, procedures, and standards.
Public Use The Framework’s ability to provide data resources that meet the everyday needs of organizations and the general public, and to provide data resources that meet the need to respond to public safety incidents, natural disasters, and other Emergencies
Resilience The ability of the geospatial community to participate in development of the Framework and to contribute to its sustainability as a long term asset of value for the nation
Framework Data AssessmentSubject NSDI CGDI Comments on CGDI data gradeCadastral Data D+ D- In many provinces, cadastral data is only
available as a fee-based serviceGeodetic Control B+ A- Geodetic control data is readily available and
generally accurate on a national basisElevation Data C+ C- CDED data has some deficiencies in quality and
resolution, but has national coverageHydrography Data C C+ The National Hydrographic Network is quite
good, but often has deficiencies in data currency
Orthoimagery Data C+ D There is no national imagery strategy resulting in a patchwork of out-of-date imagery
Government Units Data
C C+ Administrative boundaries data is generally of good quality and currency
Transportation Data D D+ The National Road Network generally suffers from data currency issues
Overall Data Grade C C While several data layers are currently useable, overall CGDI framework data requires attention
Comprehensive AssessmentSubject NSDI CGDI Comments on CGDI comprehensive gradeCapacity C C Many CGDI framework data themes do not meet
current or future needsCondition D D Many CGDI framework data themes are out of date
Funding D D CGDI and framework data funding is low and continues to decline
Future Need D C Future funding could help some data layers, but cadastral data improvements require new policies
Operation and Maintenance
C D+ Many key lead organizations are no longer able to maintain and develop their framework data
Public Use C D Most framework data is not accessible in a consistent manner by the general public
Resilience C B- The geospatial community has several methods of participating and providing input
Overall Grade C- C- The overall comprehensive grade indicates that the CGDI still requires attention and funding
GeoAlliance Canada (2015)
• Work originally started by NRCan ~2013
• Results used by the Canadian Geomatics Community Roundtable
• Currently being updated by source organizations on behalf of GeoAlliance Canada
Evaluation FrameworkFactor Criteria1. Initiative • SDI Initiative present
• Name of Initiative• Governance
2. Technology • Portals and Registries• Web Services• Tools and Applications• Atlases
3. Data • Themes of data• Fee or Free
4. Standards • Data / Metadata / Web Services / Other5. Policies • Data licenses
• Data Access6. Miscellaneous • Interesting and important information
• Contacts
Thank You
Gordon [email protected]