PASDA - February 1999 Meeting

Wednesday, February 03, 1999

Participants

1. Debbie Basha

2. Brian Young
814-643-5091
hcpc@penn.com
Huntingdon County Planning

3. Richard Stahl
814-643-5091
stahl@vicon.net
Huntingdon County Planning Commission

4. Mike King
717-787-8733
mrking@legis.state.pa.us
Legislative Office for Research Liaison (LORL)

5. Donna Fiscus
717-238-0426
dfiscus@srbc.net
Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC)

6. Gary H. Bowles
215-345-7020 x117
hconserv@erols.com
Heritage Conservancy

7. Becky Reinhold
(724) 357-2251
breinhld@grove.iup.edu
Spatial Sciences Research Center - IUP

8. Chris Pfeiffer
814-865-1755
cxp7@psu.edu
Penn State University Libraries 

9. Bruce E. Stauffer
Phone: (717) 399-7007
E-Mail: atsinc@epix.net
Organization: Advanced Technology Solutions, Inc.

10. Joey Ezell
717-749-6044
jve1@psu.edu
psu libraries

11. Ron Uroda
717-948-6182
u22@psu.edu
Penn State Harrisburg-ISRA

12. Sean Gimbel
(717) 787-2079
sgimbel@legis.state.pa.us
LORL, PA House of Reps.

13. Carl W. Kreitzberg
215-895-2726
Carl.Kreitzberg@drexel.edu
Drexel University
Philadelphia, PA 19103

14. Thomas G. Whitfield
717 783 7269
whitfield.thomas@dcnr.state.pa.us
DCNR - Bureau of Topographic and Geologic Survey

15. Kenwood E. Giffhorn
717-787-7116
giffhorn.kenwood@a1.dep.state.pa.us
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection

16. Harry Rozmiarek
215-898-9026
rozmiar@pobox.upenn.edu
University of Pennsylvania/LORL

17. Eric Jespersen
570-788-4634
ecj@epix.net
PaMAGIC and Rettew Associates

18. L. Bradley Foltz
717-948-3830
brad1@hotmail.com
PennDOT, Bureau of Design

19. Scott Hoffman
(717) 730-6945
shoffman@usgs.gov
U.S. Geological Survey

20. Jack Sulzer
(814)865-3819
jsulzer@psu.edu
University Libraries

21. Frank DeSendi
(717) 772-3241
fdesendi@paonline.com
PennDOT

22. David L. Howard
814-863-4562
dlhoward@psu.edu
Deasy GeoGraphics Lab

23. Robert Edwards
717.238.0425
bobedwards@redrose.net
Susquehanna River Basin Commission

24. Robert Sechrist
(724)357-2251
rpsecrst@grove.iup.edu
SSRC Indiana Univ of PA

25. Donald M. Hoskins
717 783 7251
hoskins.donald@dcnr.state.pa.us
DCNR - Topographic and Geologic Survey

26. marty gutowski
814-863-4562
gutowski@essc.psu.edu
Penn State - Deasy GeoGraphics

Questions and Answers (Group Outliner)

1. General

1.1 What is a clearinghouse?

A location for accessing data

A place where meaningful data is stored in an organized manner.

Some place where I can give and receive information.

Storage area for distribution of standardized and non-standardized data.

It is an intelligent data sink.

A site for distribution of data

A site where materials are gathered, organized by experts, and re-disseminated to others

A clearinghouse is a place where 'stuff' is stored and disbursed.

Some type of one stop shopping center for data.

An easily accessible repository of information

A central depository of information, data, software utilities.

A place to submit and obtain data

A place where different types of information can be accessed by numerous users.

A distribution point for all types of data, spatial and otherwise, for users free of charge.

A place and way or receiving data and handling it in a way which makes it accessible and useful to a variety of users.

an accessible warehouse of data with a comprehensive 'card catalog'

A one-stop location to determine if what you need is available and get it there or point you in a direction to get it.

A collection of data (or anything) collected and made available to large numbers of people

An area where data has been collected or points to where data is located.

An archive of resources from disparate sources that provides mchanisms for retrieval, access and knowledge for display

Central, integrated, organization for data and information in an area or subject field

A clearinghouse is a facility that provides coordination services for given function. I'm not sure that PASDA is a clearinghouse - it is more of a data storage, maintenance and data serving facility.

At a minimum, it serves a library referencing function providing citations of data, including source, location, and description of the data. At broader view, it may actually store, retrieve, and download data to the person performing a query.

A place where you can find data you can use "right out of the box" in a standard that is usable by nearly all users. And it fits together with other data on the site. Plus it is at some standard of accuracy, not bad data that is there because it is the only data you have.

1.2 Why is this important?

Makes information available from many sources to many users so multidisciplinary studies can be conducted.

Easier access to data.

Cost efficient.

Save time.

Provides a one stop area for data.

Economy of scale and central access

This is important so that data can be shared

Provides a cost-affective way to collect existing data.

Makes a data access easier, quicker, and less costly.

It is important because it is a good way to get data from many sources at one place. Otherwise data must be gathered from many individual sources.

For retrieval purposes data must be input in a meaningful way. The questions and needs of the client must be considered before creating the database.

To expedite the shopping for something when time is money.

Saves time/resources for those trying to acquire information/data that others have already collected.

To bring together similar data to avoid multiple searches

Since society and problem solving is based on teamwork and group decisions, it is critical to have a means of sharing information.

It can save a lot of time and effort that otherwise would be devoted to finding data that is scattered about numerous locations.

Savings in time and money to access important information

avoid duplication

access to historic info for comparative purposes

Saves time and effort in finding needed data. It's hard when you dont know where to look for a specific type of information

So that the data is provided uniformly and widely to users.

Integrates info into useable related blocks or groups

Sharing data saves time and resources access to existing data provides for the development of more sophisticated applications

It enables users to go to one place to look for where needed data might be located.

When considering the number of people needing to know about the availability and relevancy of data, it is a real time saver.

Pasda is important because it potentially may become the basis for a statewide data access and data sharing infrastructure that could facilitate government and business decision making and economic planning and development.

It beats searching the web without a card catalogue.

Reduce overall costs, improve project speed

1.3 What clearinghouses do you currently use?

pasda

CDIAC, NCDC, PASDA

PASDA, EPA region II, NJDEP-Rutgers University

Several federal clearinghouses none GIS related

PASDA

None

none, personally

PASDA, NY GIS Clearinghouse

None

PASDA

USGS

In house library

New York State Clearinghouse.

Chesapeake Bay Program (CIMS) Chesapeake Information Management System.

Of course PASDA.

PASDA, other data sources are from a sole organization, e.g. USGS

Public Library, PASDA, USGS, Census Bureau, Southern Alleghenies Planning and Development Commission, Huntingdon County Planning Commission

US Census, CIESIN, PASDA, USGS

Multiple USGS sites; states of NY, NJ, WV; various university sites.

I use many sites that collect add-ons and patches for various pieces of software.

www.download.com, for instance, gathers patches for software and shareware/freeware applications in one place.

NGS, USGS

PASDA, EPA region 3, terraserver,USGS.gov

PASDA

Assoc of Research Libraries data warehouse, copyright database, etc.

Center for Research libraries

PASDA, USGS

USGS and PASDA

PASDA, more than our internal servers. USGS, Other States.

DOJ, PASDA, GPO

Clearinghouses used: national conference of state legislatures data and research clearinghouse; council of state governments data and research clearinghouse; pasda, and on-line census data clearinghouse at Oregon

State University.

2. Data

2.1 Do you currently use online data?

Yes - mainly from Pasda and EPA.

Yes, on a daily basis.

Yes, currently use data available at the pasda server

Yes, occasionally.

Yes, PASDA, Envirofacts, TerraServer

Yes

Yes

Yes.

Yes, frequently.

yes,

yes

Yes.

Yes. At least weekly.

Yes, often.

yes

Yes

Yes

Yes. All available locations with data for drainage into PA.

rarely, because my job is to find data sets not currently in clearinghouses

Yes, depending on the nature of a given project. If a secondary data source is acceptable.

Yes, PASDA, ESRI

Yes - what I use depends on the current project.

Yes - frequently

Yes, daily

Yes, very diverse types: statistics to bibliographic data

Yes, Pasda, EPA,

2.2 What types of data do you use?

Mostly environmental but also demographic and some economic data.

Digital raster graphics

GIS, engineering, modeling data

A variety of biomedical and other data available on the web.

natural resources, cultural/historic, demographic, DRG, DOQ

Indexes of data availability

Environmental, Transportation, simple graphics, raster images, vector

census, GIS boundaries

informational data of all sorts. I teach others to use online data.

usgs stream gauge data, drg's from PASDA, census data, planning data

geographical, biological

Whatever type of data I need. Most frequently socio-economic data.

Statistics on human resources, library collections, library use, finances

Tabular and geo-referenced.

boundary files-political and census, natural resources. Demographic and economic data.

environmental data: hydrologic, biological, natural resource, etc.; political data: county, civil divisions, legislative districts, etc.; transportation data.

DLGs, DEMs, DRGs, DOQs

raster, vector, ascii, digital imagery

geodetic control, environmental, tax parcels

DRGs DOQs Vector geology, streams, boundaries. Some DEMs

Census, GIS vector & raster, BEA, state agency

Census, es-202 series, labor force, labor market, government revenue and expenditures, boundary files of various kinds including legislative district, school districts and municipal/county boundaries, raster graphics and well as vector data, historical series of various kinds, especially re. inflation, etc.

DRG, DOQ, TIGER, road networks, municipal boundaries, environmental (watershed, hydrology), utilities

Water quality, water quantity, flow, land use, political, transportation, etc.

2.3 What types of data do you create?

Analyses from data obtained from clearinghouses.

Little to none.

county mapping for land use planning, other uses

Historic building surveys and municipal historic surveys.

Maps

Environmental data to support program specific requirements

includes hydrologic, land use, permitting, etc.

None

Roadway graphics, municipal and legislative boundaries

I don't really create much data. I'm primarily a user.

Data for water resources investigations.

addressing data, road centerlines, land use, water and sewer service areas, detailed water and sewer system data for my county

Statistical reports to Assoc of Research Libraries, online catalog records, library use data

Biological

Watersheds

digital mapping, digital orthophotography, digital terrain models

Geologic Formation vector, polygon and point data.

Groundwater wells

Oil and gas well locations with geologic parameters

Geologic hazards - sink hole locations

Earthquake epicenters

Do not create from scratch--may develop subsets of other existing information.

Vector polygons. Composite maps of data using DRGs and vector data. Visual display maps. Maps,maps,maps.

boundary information, site infrastructure, land use boundaries, geodetic control, syntesized data combinations/analysis

Very project specific, as in environmental impact studies for a new highway corridor. Also, have mapped flood plain boundaries for a County in MD. Data creation not a typical role - we tend to design databases and define standards for local government clients getting into GIS

map data files such as parcels, utility location data, survey research, field data collection

data bases of legislative biographies, statewide data on school property taxes by use, district and county, municipal and county revenue and expenditures, and assembly of various other data into longitudinal series with geographic referencing.

Water Quality, Stream habitat, Aquatic biological condition, water use.

County and municipal mapping, watershed GIS development, sewer lines, roads movement to DOQ with addressing

2.4 What hardware/software do you use?

PC on Internet; Fortan, Excel

IBM type hardware and a variety of commercially available software.

arc view 3.1

PC running NT 4.0...internet...Excel, Freehand, Authorware, Photoshop

IBM compatible with ARCVIEW.

Suite of ESRI products; Access; Ingres

Hardware

WIndows NT workstation, WIndows 95 Workstation, large size plotter, large size digitizer, GPS

Software

Arc/Info (ARC Scan, Arc COGO), ArcView (with several extensions), AutoCAD Map, GeoMedia, MS Access, MS Excel

DEC Vax - VMS operating system, Oracle DBMS

PCs - Windows NT operating system, ESRI ArcExplorer, ArcView, ArcInfo

Servers - Windows NT ERSI SDE, Internet Mapserver

Sun Microsystems - Unix, ArcInfo

Pentium 200 PC, ArcView, windows 95, microsoft office

Intergraph MGE, WebMap, GeoMedia, Oracle, Windows NT, Visual Basic, IPlot, Microstation, MS Office Suite on Pentium II Processors and an Ethernet network.

IBM and compatible, VERY diverse variety of software

CDRom h/s, and online; internet; commercial dbases; the usual microcsoft, aldus novell etc software, LANs of various kinds, IBM and Dell, Gateway computers.

ArcView GIS vs3.0a, Access, Excel, CMT GPS, HP plotter, large digitizer, Micron computer

Sun Sparc running Solaris 2.6, PC running NT 4.0; Arc/Info 7.x on UNIX; Arcview 3.1 and GeoMedia Pro on PC

PC's, workstatations

Servers

ArcInfo; ArcView; Grass - whatever works

PC with Windows NT/95, ArcInfo and ArcView, Atlas*GIS,GeoMedia, MS Access,Oracle

PC with ESRI products, MS Office, Netscape, GPS collection and analysis

PC running NT, NT network, ESRI products, Mapinfo, Microstation, microsoft products

SUN Unix - Arc/Info

NT - Arc/Info, ArcView, Geomedia

Web -ArcView Internet Map Server and Geomedia Web Map

Hardware - Sun UNIX boxes, moving over to Windows NT workstations. HP plotters. Software - Arc/Info 7..1.2 (NT and UNIX) and ArcView 3.0a. AutoCADD when forced.

WindowsNT, Intergraph MicroStation, softcopy workstations, Word97, Access, Excel, State server,

PC on internet, visual basic, arcview, access, paradox, excel. plotter, scanner.

Hardware - Dell, Windows NT, Windows 95, Run on NT server

Software - Microsoft Office, ArcView, ArcInfo PC, MapInfo

Novell Network of pentium class machines, HP plotter and printers, digitzers, digital camera.

Microsoft's suite of programs:Excel, Access, etc.

Arcview with extensions.

2.5 Do you currently share your data?

Yes.

no, we currently do not share data

Yes, with students through a courseware server on campus Intranet.

Yes.

Yes.

When we are not constrained by data sharing agreements.

Yes primarily through PASDA

Yes, but on a limited basis

I would say I share information, but not really data. Again, I don't generate much data.

Yes, with other libraries and library associations and other clearinghouses

Yes, we share our own data and act as a clearinghouse for other data collected by our agency.

Yes, soon through PASDA

We share with other libraries and library associations.

Yes with PADSA, Chesapeake Bay Foundation, NY GIS Clearinghouse, PA MAGIC

Yes! Visit our website@ www.dcnr.state.pa.us/topogeo/

Census, economic data, business data, health data, environmental data, products information, consumer data

Yes, primarily via CD-Roms and FTP.

only by specific request, and we do not advertise data holdings

Yes, good deal of it has been cataloged and donated to PASDA.

We are not owners of the data - we do projects for clients who own the data. Therefore, we do not share the data of our clients without client permission.

with members of legislature as matter of mission, with any other upon request.

Yes, but only when it is ready for release. Provisional data upon request will be shared. This is what the Commonwealth pays me to do.

Yes, with PennDOT district offices, other state agencies and the public

Yes with students and watershed organization

Yes

2.6 What core data sets should be available?

Many kinds, especially so that it can be handled in a standard way.

Streams, roads, political boundaries, DOQs.

All data sets gathered with government funding should be available. As well as any other data that people can be convinced to share.

Commonwealth infrastructure - roads, utilities, streams, census data

road centerline, steam centerline, political boundaries, census geography, watersheds

Surface water (rivers/streams, open water)

Roads

Political Boundaries

Land Use (1:24K)

DOQ & DRG

Protected Land (public & private)

Infrastructure (public sewer & water)

Watersheds

soils

core data should be available

Streams, Roads, Municipal and Legislative Boundaries, flood plains, census

Climate, hydro, land use/type, demographic data

Core data sets need to include time series so that changes in land use

and environmental quantities can be assessed and compared with potential cause or effect data sets, including industrial production and demographic data.

streams, watersheds, lakes, roads, DRGs, DOQs, DEMs, political boundaries for the whole state; with very good attribute data

Watersheds, stream/river, roads, land use, geology, political boundaries

All government statistics/data sets for PA and related to PA concerns. Whatever is of serious use to the major users (are these the average Joe citizens or merely the professionals?) should be in the database.

In terms of point, line, and polygon map data, I would like things like water bodies, roads, political boundaries, schools, hospitals, etc. I would also like to see all other types of data that may be geographically referenced created by the government like public health, agricultural, labor, education, environmental, etc.

All standard vector and raster data sets produced through topographic map revision, including DEM's, DOQ's and DRG's

Geologic formation boundaries and attributed polygons

Streams, roads, political divisions, DRG, DOQQ, census, legislative districts, parcels (someday)

transportation, political boundaries including federal legislative districts, census boundaries, water bodies/streams, geology, school districts, DOQs

All the base data you can get. Vectors, polygons, etc. are the most important.

accurate political boundaries, tax parcels, roads, streams, topo with 5 foot intervals, school district boundaries, watershed limits, geodetic control info

Accuracy for roads, streams, political boundaries +/- 3 meters

Roads, streams, municipal borders, legislative boundaries

geodetic surveys

scanned imagery

digital mapping

DTM's, DEM's

From legislative standpoint, data that relate to the programs and functioning of the agencies over which the General Assembly has oversight and fiscal responsibility. Effort should be expended to aggregate data by legislative district and by other political jurisdictional boundaries so that they are optimally useful to the public officials within those jurisdictions (in addition to the present bases of aggregation for those data).

All 1:100,000 and 1:24,000 USGS products: DLGs, georeferenced DRGs, georeferenced DOQs, DEMs. Also, PennDOT centerline files with road attributes. Floodplains, soils, and other environemntal layers as available for PA. Keep initial focus at serving the planning audiance at County, Regional, and Statewide scales

contents of TIGER files conflated to DOQQ positional accuracy

Lines: Streams, Roads

Polygons: watersheds, geology, soils,political boundaries.

Name: Place names

waterbodies

2.7 Should a "standard" set of data be available (i.e. same projection, datum, etc.)

Yes.

yes, this would make data more user friendly for novice users

At the state level yes

Yes...same projection, datum, extent...gathered to standard territories (counties, watersheds, census blocks, whatever makes sense)...and rendered using cartographic standards (although these could be modified by individual users)

Yes, the core data should be available in the same dattum and projection for the entire state - perhaps at several different projections for local and regional use.

Yes, but not really practical unless one organization maintains and updates data. SImilar to NJDEP.

Perhaps. A large scale, e.g. 1:250,000, may be appropriate because some themes do not exist at 1:24,000 scale. If the vision for 2000 and beyond is to include more of the GIS-challenged population, large-scale data could be easier to serve on the Web.

Yes. Geographic or unprojected projection with a standard datum.

If possible.

Yes. But, should be in standardized form for novice users, yet in form that can be manipulated by a local user or system.

Yes. We end up converting all data we share to the specs asked for by customers. They have no expertise or software to get the data in native format and import it. A clearing house to do this for us would lift a burden.

Yes, it would make things easier for novice users and more advanced users could change it if they prefer. Plus, on initial download, all layers would match, saving time for the advanced users.

Yes, state level with the most used projections, datums, NAD27, NAD83, State plane, UTM

Yes, but perhaps for separate levels. For example, state, county, municipal. However, this may not be viable.

It depends. If technology can allow rapid transformation between projections and datums, then "Standard" sets are not required.

Yes, many people visiting a repository will want to download different layers and combine.

yes, it will create a place for users to add their own data coverages to and allow them to share. The standard can serve as a common base.

What a can of worms!! Pick one and be prepared. I think a USGS expert should be asked for a projection of the state that best fits with little distortion.

The standard set needed would include all {appropriate to the base map scale) political boundaries, main transportation routes, waterways and topography (at least watershed boundaries).

Base map scales would include at least the state scale and a different county scale.

yes same datum and projection, perhaps possible with forthcoming "NAD 2000"

Yes, but selecting one is politically and practically difficult. Perhaps a two-tiered standard that incorporates something the planning, zoning and other highly detailed, engineering-spec data, and another for more general, less detailed use.

yes, map accuracy standards, state plane coordinates, projections at specific map scales

Yes, try to define a projection and Datum suitable for statewide applications (e.g. Lambert Conformal Conic), and a second projection standard for Counties (e.g. state plane). Also, need to consider when we adopt metric versus english measurements for state plane projections.

Yes, Unprojected(Geographic) Lat/Long NAD83

Start with Unprojected data (Geographic lat/long) and have utility on clearinghouse that will allow the user to convert to what they want

Most low-end users which will be 90% of John Q. Public, will not have the ability to project data. They will be forced to use data "as is"

3. Metadata

3.1 Do you currently document your data?

Yes

Yes

No.

Yes, formal documentation.

we have created some documentation of our data

No...but I don't really create data that needs documentation.

I would like to think we do. In reality it happens approximately 50%

of the time. One of the areas we look to PASDA to assist.

Very rarely

Yes, but on a very limited basis.

Yes. Required by Federal law.

Yes

No... Only in conjunction with PASDA

To some extent it is documented, but not to FGDC standards.

N/A

Yes in a metadata database using a both the FGDC format and a modified FGDC format for organizational use.

No

Yes, both formally and informally through "read me" files

Very little documentation

Yes, formal documentation.

Yes, by strict mandate.

Yes, in house but more work needs done.

Yes - but to standards established w/i organization.

yes but only to the corporate standard and not to some external standard i.e.- for file management, archive purposes and legal protection

I try hard to document the data source and processing steps in enough detail to recreate the results. The format is informal and not necessarily readable by others. It is in electronic format but not particularly computer searchable.

yes, archive in office and district files

Yes, have adopted the TSSDS for local facility managers and FGDC for local and county governments.

3.2 Do you use a standard such as the FGDC or your own standard?

A modified version of the FGDC standards

A modified version of the FGDC that contains the minimum set of RGDC require documentation with some additional documentation used for agency needs.

Mostly standard.

we have created our own standard

Not applicable

We are moving toward the federal standard. Most data varies by

program

Own standard mainly because FGDC is too time consuming and costly.

Our own standard using a simple Excel spreadsheet with about 15 fields.

Yes. required by law.

Not applicable

In-house standard

We don't use any standard to document our data.

No

Anglo-American Cataloging rules; Library of Congress MARC; ANSI Z39.50

FGDC standard is used as a base for modified organizational metadata.

Own informal standard

For geologic vector data sets we are using the FGDC standard

Yes, by strict mandate

In the process of moving to the FGDC standards

Match our own (such as it is)

Federal mapping standards

Started out with our own prior to a national standard. Have since adopted FGDC now that it is available.

3.3 What role does metadata play in the clearinghouse?

It is the cataloging or indexing information. Use it to select what meets criteria.

Standardization and indexing.

Metadata plays a vital role. Without metadata associated with a theme/coverage. I have found that the coverage is just a pretty picture (not useful).

Meta data should be a primary role at least from a state agency

data sharing perspective.

information provided for projection, datum,etc. is very important for using data

It is important to know the source and accuracy of the data being used. It is also important to know dattum and projection.

Should play a key role. It is essential to know who created the data, for what purpose the data was created, the scale at which the data was intended for and the projection and datum of the data.

A critical role...it is what allows the datasets to be catalogued and searched. Without metadata, the clearinghouse is merely a useless amalgam; with metadata, it becomes a collection that can be used efficiently to garner information that suits specific needs.

It is the most important role. As a user I need to know what it is I am going to download and use in my analysis. If the metadata is weak or not correct and my job depends on the results of my analysis, odds are I will not use the data.

It is essential in order to retreive the information in an efficient way.

INDEXING & ACCESS

A very important one. It might finding what you want very simple.

It tells everyone what they are looking at provided they understand the terminology.

Extremely important. It is difficult and sometimes unethical to use data of unknown lineage.

It should be available but volumes of meta-data should not be a requirement to put data on a clearinghouse... perhaps contact information about the data may be more important.

Need information on projection, datum, and creation date, info source for questions.

To provide basic information to establish accuracy and credibility

Helps users come in and look through the metadata to determine if this is what you actually need.

It is the pivotal function. w/o - don't know what you have

clearinghouse is only useful if contains metadata, and perhaps metadata is the only type data that a statewide clearinghouse must have, with pointers to actual data archive site

None at this time

Extremely important, as it is the sole basis to ascertain whether a particular dataset is relevant, timely, accurate, for a given project.

3.4 Would a clearinghouse reduce cost and increase data sharing?

For some and Yes

Yes to both questions. Or at least it should if it is being done right.

I envision this to be one of the primary reasons to establish a

clearinghouse

yes this would help in retrieving data from other sources

Of course...how could it not (if you include time in cost)?

It already has! It would have taken our office considerable time and effort to scan and assemble DRG's for our county (about 30 in all). Within one day our staff had downloaded them. Currently, I believe that it is easier to receive that to give GIS data. Perhaps we need an incentive.

Probably. One hopes. But it would also cost.

Yes, it has done both in our organization.

Yes, it would increase data sharing. Data sharing allows one to evaluate what others are doing and could improve the quality of the information.

Costs: Yes and No. Costs would be reduced by reducing duplication of effort of creating coverages that already exist. A clearinghouse would be a benefit in that regard. However, there could be added costs to individual agencies if certain standards need to be adhere to in order for the clearinghouse to work efficiently. I believe those are acceptable costs due to possible benefits.

It would most likely reduce cost. I don't think it would increase data sharing. Groups that don't share data, do so for reasons other than a clearinghouse not being available.

Not necessarily reduce cost; not necessarily increase sharing; BUT provide provision for cost saving and incentive to share.

Yes especially for retrieving data outside the PA state lines.

The potential is yes. As more people have access to the Web, as well as local governments, the economic impact could be significant. At the very least it could get involvement on issues started at the grassroots level and people would be more informed because of the on-line access to data.

It should make sharing easier, but I can't be convinced that the time and effort that goes into operating the clearinghouse reduces costs. Someone has to pay.

Definately increase data sharing if the clearinghouse is well advertised and maintained.

That is a noble objective. Only time will tell!

Yes to both.

It would depend on how much conversion and standardization of data the clearinghouse would take on. Otherwise I would still have expenditures when customers could not use data in native format. This is a yes and no answer; a lot of 'it depends' questions.

Absolutely! too many agencies are re-inventing the wheel through data duplication. If a standard projection can be agreed upon that all the data would be available in, regardless of source, it would be the best of all worlds.

Absolutely - that's why we're all here!

Yes, there would be no duplication on work while increasing data sharing

Naturally if made to be user friendly

only if everyone who accesses data agrees to submit their own documented data

of course

No doubt about it.

Metadata Services (Vote)

Voting Results

Rank Order (Allow bypass)

Number of ballot items: 9

Total number of voters (N): 26

Rank Sum

199 1. Create metadata for all core data sets if absent

159 2. Maintain standards

151 3. Metadata Creation Training

148 4. Validate existing metadata.

125 5. Involve Community, non-proft, academics in metadata development and creation

122 6. Create Metadata by Request

114 7. Archive the metadata

111 8. Further Develop Standards

41 9. Guarantee the perpetuity of metadata

Number of Votes in Each Rating

1 2 3 4 5

1. Create me 12 6 2 2 1

2. Maintain 4 3 7 2 3

3. Metadata 4 3 2 4 6

4. Validate 4 5 3 3 2

5. Involve C 1 1 3 4 6

6. Create Me 0 4 5 1 2

7. Archive t 0 3 2 4 3

8. Further D 1 1 2 5 2

9. Guarantee 0 0 0 1 1

6 7 8 9 Mean

1. Create me 3 0 0 0 2.35

2. Maintain 3 3 1 0 3.88

3. Metadata 2 5 0 0 4.19

4. Validate 2 3 2 2 4.31

5. Involve C 4 4 2 1 5.19

6. Create Me 4 5 3 2 5.31

7. Archive t 4 1 9 0 5.62

8. Further D 4 4 5 2 5.73

9. Guarantee 0 1 4 19 8.42

STD n

1. Create me 1.74 26

2. Maintain 2.12 26

3. Metadata 2.08 26

4. Validate 2.65 26

5. Involve C 1.94 26

6. Create Me 2.35 26

7. Archive t 2.17 26

8. Further D 2.20 26

9. Guarantee 1.27 26

Group consensus (1.00 = most consensus): 0.37

Ballot Items in Original Order

1. Create metadata for all core data sets if absent

2. Metadata Creation Training

3. Create Metadata by Request

4. Maintain standards

5. Further Develop Standards

6. Involve Community, non-proft, academics in metadata development and creation

7. Validate existing metadata.

8. Archive the metadata

9. Guarantee the perpetuity of metadata

Data Services (Vote)

Voting Results

Rank Order (Allow bypass)

Number of ballot items: 10

Total number of voters (N): 25

Rank Sum

208 1. Provide for storage of data sets or access to remotely held data sets

201 2. Be the custodian of core data sets

198 3. Maintain current version of data sets

168 4. Maintain the integrity of the data

157 5. Data Manipulation--Standardizing Data

143 6. Maintain historical (previous version) data

122 7. Developing MOUs with agencies

99 8. Interactive mapping and complex data retrieval

44 9. Maintain secure data sets

35 10. Implement procedures in relation to privacy and security of sensitive information

Number of Votes in Each Rating

1 2 3 4 5

1. Provide f 11 2 2 5 4

2. Be the cu 5 10 2 2 3

3. Maintain 1 8 7 8 0

4. Maintain 3 2 6 4 1

5. Data Mani 2 2 3 2 5

6. Maintain 0 1 4 4 6

7. Developin 3 0 0 0 6

8. Interacti 0 0 1 0 0

9. Maintain 0 0 0 0 0

10. Implemen 0 0 0 0 0

6 7 8 9 10

1. Provide f 1 0 0 0 0

2. Be the cu 1 2 0 0 0

3. Maintain 0 1 0 0 0

4. Maintain 4 3 2 0 0

5. Data Mani 7 4 0 0 0

6. Maintain 3 2 5 0 0

7. Developin 4 2 9 0 1

8. Interacti 5 11 7 0 1

9. Maintain 0 0 1 17 7

10. Implemen 0 0 1 8 16

Mean STD n

1. Provide f 2.68 1.75 25

2. Be the cu 2.96 1.88 25

3. Maintain 3.08 1.22 25

4. Maintain 4.28 2.19 25

5. Data Mani 4.72 1.88 25

6. Maintain 5.28 1.86 25

7. Developin 6.12 2.37 25

8. Interacti 7.04 1.24 25

9. Maintain 9.24 0.52 25

10. Implemen 9.60 0.58 25

Group consensus (1.00 = most consensus): 0.68

Ballot Items in Original Order

1. Provide for storage of data sets or access to remotely held data sets

2. Be the custodian of core data sets

3. Maintain current version of data sets

4. Data Manipulation--Standardizing Data

5. Interactive mapping and complex data retrieval

6. Developing MOUs with agencies

7. Maintain secure data sets

8. Implement procedures in relation to privacy and security of sensitive information

9. Maintain historical (previous version) data

10. Maintain the integrity of the data

User Assistance/Outreach (Vote)

Voting Results

Rank Order (Allow bypass)

Number of ballot items: 7

Total number of voters (N): 25

Rank Sum

152 1. Assist users with accessing data

124 2. Coordination with other data clearinghouses

101 3. Assist in GIS coordination in the state

98 4. Hold annual review/evaluation on PASDA

89 5. Links to other tools and utilities

71 6. Bring GIS knowledge to other non-traditional environments such as schools, non-profit orgs

65 7. Sponsor meetings/symposiums

Number of Votes in Each Rating

1 2 3 4 5

1. Assist us 16 2 4 0 2

2. Coordinat 3 9 5 3 2

3. Assist in 5 4 2 3 3

4. Hold annu 0 4 7 3 6

5. Links to 0 5 2 7 3

6. Bring GIS 1 1 1 6 5

7. Sponsor m 0 0 4 3 4

6 7 Mean STD n

1. Assist us 1 0 1.92 1.50 25

2. Coordinat 3 0 3.04 1.57 25

3. Assist in 3 5 3.96 2.26 25

4. Hold annu 4 1 4.08 1.50 25

5. Links to 4 4 4.44 1.73 25

6. Bring GIS 3 8 5.16 1.70 25

7. Sponsor m 7 7 5.40 1.44 25

Group consensus (1.00 = most consensus): 0.31

Ballot Items in Original Order

1. Assist users with accessing data

2. Hold annual review/evaluation on PASDA

3. Sponsor meetings/symposiums

4. Bring GIS knowledge to other non-traditional environments such as schools, non-profit orgs

5. Assist in GIS coordination in the state

6. Coordination with other data clearinghouses

7. Links to other tools and utilities

Next Steps (Topic Commenter)

1. Who, by position, should participate in a clearinghouse advisory committee?

Principal advisors should be from major users and representatives of user groups. Data providers should listen to their advice.

Representatives from:

Federal Govt

State Govt

County Govt

Local Govt

Non-Profit Organizations

Academia

Private Business/Consultants

This group may be somewhat top heavy with government officials but since government is the single largest producer of GIS data, they should be so represented in the advisory committe.

Head of University Libraries, reps from agencies that have data on the site, identify a couple of users and have them

Representation from universities, private and non-profit GIS related entities, and state and local governments.

Rep from each state agency

Dir. Boroughs Association

Dir. PSATS

Rep county commissioners assoc

Rep city association

Chairman, Pennsylvania Spatial Data Council (to be established) this will most likely reside in PaDEP

A representative from secondary school geography teachers

Someone from policy making groups: House of Representatives.

Someone from each using groups.

Someone from the agency doing the work.

Public representative; those who gather raw data largely in a volunteer capacity.

Librarians, community leaders, government officials (local, county, state), data producers/providers, users/consumers, health officials, people with deep pockets.

Some directors. etc., the people who control the purse strings, but not too many. Include the techno people, the ones who will be stuck with getting things to work and the ones who use the data and have to deal with compatibility problems everyday.

A representative from each organization participating in PASDA should act as a sub-committee. This would make for a large number of people; therefor, an individual from each area or general discipline (private, state, etc.) should be elected at the representative for the individuals in the sub-committee.

Individuals from Penn State as well as from State and local government that are acting as GIS Specialists. Should have an extensive background in GIS as well as data sharing and metadata creation.

County and local government GIS Coordinators

State agency GIS representatives

Federal agency representatives

Private sector data providers and consultants

The advisory committee should not be so large as to be unwieldy. Having said that, representation from data donators (state agency - deputy secretaries overseeing GIS activities) legislature (not clear who or what, but perhaps executive director of Legislative Data Processing, LORL, or legislators chairing committees with cognate jurisdiction), university representation (GIS coordinators), county & municipal (perhaps association officers), not-for-profit and private (again, perhaps associations representing interested groups)

me

All stakeholders should be represented. This makes a large group, but possibly types of institutions or regions might select one person who will represent many stakeholders.

State agencies - DEP, DCNR, PenDot

All state universities/colleges

County governments and/or municipalites

Grassroot organizations

Business

Legislative branch

PAMagic rep, rep from secondary schools, nonprofit agencies. Think of greater representation from people who will be using data instead of just including producers of data.

GIS Coordinators of PA DOT, DEP, DCNR etc.,

Representative of State Universities with GIS,

Non-profit user, County-level GIS Department

PA MAJIC, Municipal-level GIS Department

Local librarian (since all have internet access),

Regional Agency with GIS

Private GIS Consultant

Endusers of the PASDA data.

Public Sector Transportation Rep

Environmental Protection Rep

Conservation & Natural Resources Rep

Academia

Consultant to Local Govt.

Local Govt. Rep

Private sector Transportation Rep

Environmental Consultant

Library

Representatives for the following areas and number, hoping to get a geographic distribution for the state:

state gov. (2)

federal gov. (2)

local gov. (5)

nonprofit org. (2)

university (4)

PASDA (1)

Governors' Office (1)

at large (high school, college student, ?) (3)

PennDOT, BEQ - Director, Wayne Kober

PennDOT, Director of Cartography

PennDOT, District GIS coordinators

County GIS Managers

Township GIS Managers

Laeding consulting firm CEO's in GIS

PEMA, 3 county GIS coordinators, 3 municipal GIS coordinators, Office of Admin, DOT, DEP, DCNR, PF&BC,GC,PA Dept AG, USGS mapping div'n, USGS water div'n, USDA-NRCS, PSATS, Legislature,academia, PaMAGIC, private industry

local/regional planners

Some of 1., 2. and 4;

all of 3 that accept invitation

Data providers: agency representatives (stae,local,federal}

Data users: academics, NGOs, govt elected officials

Sponsors: all significant funding sources

Technical Specialists: hardware &software;

information specialists (electronic librarians)

public media representatives

Should be comprised on persons with views and opinions from different spatial scales.

PaDEP representatives (3)

Western, Central, Eastern Academic reps.

PAMAGIC representative.

Chairpersons from each clearinghouse subcommittee.

Exec Director of PA Township Supervisors.

Local COGS (i.e., SEDA-Cog)

Useful meeting overall. General concerns as follows:

standards should be developed as a cooperative effort with public, private, and academic participation

adoption of standards should be through education and outreach as to the benefits of standards

the Clearinghouse should serve as a gateway to accessing GIS information and having the necessary information regarding the utility of information for a given need. As such, collecting metadata and standardizing data are relevant services. Do not stray into providing services that are being, or can be, offered by the private sector such as creating and maintaining the data.

2. General comments

A positive experience, all in all.

The work session was great. Loved the interactive nature of the software. Great facility and excellent presentations.

I really like groupware

Groupware is great.

Much better than last year, although last year great, also. This year we got lunch!

This was a very educational experience for me. I am looking forward to the results.

Excellent group to bring together -- represents many varied interests but all

have a common interest in GIS

Valid responses based on the nonintimidating environment

I was pleased to have an opportunity to see where PASDA may be heading and possibly have some say in where it actually will go. Excellent groupware. Very accommodating and efficient.

Liked groupware. Wished there was a little more time for discussions.

Well conducted session. The time was right; not too detailed and drawn out but complete enough to cover the subject. Opportunity to ask questions was good. How about an opportunity to comment on subject material? I would recommend this for a future session; perhaps even a separate session on content of material and data to be collected.

Well worth the time invested.

The wind is behind you and the sails are full, follow the heading we've given you today.

Broaden data served beyond strictly environmental to include as much geographically referenced, government (at all levels) created, non-confidential data as is fiscally possible.

If broaden beyond environmental - need mechanism to set priorities re. new acquisitions if costs are issue.

Thanks for this opportunity!!!

Excited to have input.

There should have been more time allocated to discussion about responses to questions and rankings. You will be making judgements about responses without being able to check the accuracy of those judgements with participants.

I would like to know who was invited to participate. It was a little unclear from the invitation whether this meeting was intended for general GIS users and technical people or more for policy makers. I enjoyed the meeting and the format (using Group Systems).

Groupware is fun. Have a vegetarian option for lunch next time. Thanks. I would have liked to hear comments and questions from more people because the group is so diverse.

Meeting length was perfect to keep participates moving

I would have appreciated more info on excepted short term developments at PASDA, but that was not the purpose of this meeting.

This is the first time that I have participated in such a group session. An excellent means of efficiently and effectively getting information and covering a lot of information.

Need more time for comments. Have suggestions, but will respond thru PASDA. Like intetactive forum.

Nice compact session. Think that the bias toward a single clearinghouse rather than multiple nodes is clear and probably not healthy in the long run. Place more emphasis on how to get others to document their data. Perhaps consider separating the clearinghouse from an analytical site with interactive mapping.

The environment to survey and gather responses (Groupware) is great. Perhaps the PASDA advisory committee would operate in a similar fashion. I think for PASDA to be effective, clearly defined goals and services provided must be determined. If it tries to be everything to everybody it will never achieve its mission.