A Data Management Approach to Developing Corporate GIS Assets
A Data Management Approach to Developing Corporate GIS Assets ESRI International User Conference July 13, 2011
Thomas Chatfield Lorena Creely Elizabeth Sabeff
Outline • • • •
Background and Challenges Goals Approach Conclusion/Summary
About the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) • BLM manages over 245 million acres of public land for multiple uses • 12 State/150 + Field Offices • Key business operations rely on geospatial data and technologies
Background and Challenges Diversity is inherent within the BLM: • Dispersed data development environment • Policy, guidance and coordination varies across programs and local areas • Diverse GIS skills, platforms, data formats • No one organizational unit manages geospatial Stovepipe environments result in multiple, different local datasets rather than one national dataset
Geospatial Services Strategic Plan A spatially enabled Bureau supporting accurate and effective decisions
Governance
Business Processes Data Architecture
Education & Outreach Technology Architecture
Application Architecture
Our Goal: Identify, develop and implement data management practices (including data standards) needed to carry out business processes
Why Data Standards? Grazing related data supports multiple programmatic areas related to: • • • •
Rangeland Assets Resource Management Plans Resource Improvements and Land Health Rangeland Administration System (RAS) & Revenue Generation Grazing Data Standard assures that all business processes can be addressed
Data Standards - Overall Approach Business requirements drive development of all data standards • Business Information • Logical Model • Physical Data Model • Implementation Multi-disciplinary approach with subjectmatter experts, policy experts,and GIS analysts
Approach – Business Requirements y y "ORGANIZATION IDENTIFIER" [PK1] [FK] Non-Key Attributes "PARENT BLM ORGANIZATION IDENTIFIER" "BLM ORGANIZATION CODE" [FK] "BLM ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT EFFECTIVE DATE" "BLM ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT END DATE" "LAND RESPONSIBILITY CODE" [FK] "BLM ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT LEVEL NUMBER" "BLM UNIT TYPE NAME" [FK]
• Identify business information required to make decisions • Define Business Rules • Develop Logical Data Model • Write Data Standard Report is related
delineates
RELATED LOCATION Primary Key "LOCATION IDENTIFIER" [PK2] [FK] "RELATED LOCATION IDENTIFIER" [PK1] "RELATED LOCATION REASON DATE" [PK3] Non-Key Attributes "RELATED LOCATION REASON NAME"
TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT LOCATION Primary Key "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT LOCATION EFFECTIVE DATE" [PK1] "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT IDENTIFIER" [PK2] [FK] Non-Key Attributes "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT LOCATION END DATE" "LOCATION IDENTIFIER" [FK]
Entity Name
Entity Description
Logical Data Element Name
Type
Siz e
Required ?
delineates
Key *
TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT Primary Key "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT IDENTIFIER" [PK1] Non-Key Attributes "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT NUMBER" "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT NAME" "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT HISTORICAL DATE" "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT ORIGINAL ACRE MEASURE" "ORGANIZATION IDENTIFIER" [FK]
Definition
DRAFT ENTITY TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT A district that was identified based on the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 which regulates grazing on federal public lands. Lands within a Taylor Grazing Act district can be vacant, unappropriated, and unreserved lands from any part of the public domain of the United States (exclusive of Alaska), which are not in National Forests, National parks and National Park Service monuments, Indian reservations, revested Oregon and California Railroad grant lands, or revested Coos Bay Wagon Road grant lands, and which are chiefly valuable for grazing and raising forage crops; provided, that no lands withdrawn or reserved for any other purpose shall be included in any such district. Permits are given for grazing privileges. integer Yes PK The designed primary key that will uniquely identify a TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT single occurrence of the entity. IDENTIFIER characte 40 Yes The name that is given to a Taylor Grazing District to TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT r distinguish it via a label rather than the number. NAME date Yes The date on which the original Taylor Grazing District was TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT created. HISTORICAL DATE characte 4 Yes TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT The number assigned to a Taylor Grazing District. r NUMBER ORGANIZATION IDENTIFIER The designed primary key that will uniquely identify a single occurrence of the entity. integer Yes FK The measure that indicates the original public land area of TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT the Taylor Grazing District. ORIGINAL ACRE MEASURE decimal Opt
manages
Approach – Business Rules • Translate business rules into geospatial context • Define any additional GIS-specific rules Data Standard Business Rule 6. Conforming Boundaries for BLM Administrative Field Offices Field Office (FO) boundaries should conform, as much as possible, with authorized State and local Government boundaries and the FO boundaries of other Federal agencies. However, geography, transportation, use patterns, and other similar factors must also be assessed to ensure that the boundaries chosen best serve the needs of the public and the BLM.
• GIS Topology Rules: • (BLM) Polygon Boundary Must be covered by (county) Line • (BLM) Polygon Must not overlap
Approach – Physical Data Model Translate the logical to the physical
Approach – Physical GIS Schema Develop Standardized Geodatabase • • • •
Tools: ArcCatalog, ArcDiagrammer, Visio Define Domains Define topology rules (separate .rul file) Utilize naming conventions
GIS Schema reflects business information defined in the Data Standard Report
Approach – Geodatabase Implementation Guidelines mirror details of the Geodatabase
Includes logical and physical attribute names, GIS alias, data format, default values, attribute definitions, domain tables
Approach – Geodatabase Review
• Rules, instructions, and supplemental info may be included • Implementation Guidelines and Proposed GIS schema sent out for review
GIS review is part of feedback loop within Data Standards Process
Approach – Pilot Testing • GDB is tested in an Enterprise environment • Field personnel pilot GDB with real data • Unforeseen issues may be uncovered • The GDB and Data Standard updated and retested if necessary Tests against current GIS workflows and ongoing review by subject matter experts
Approach – Domains Managing Domains in an Enterprise Environment requires a dual approach • Common vs. Standard-Specific • Common domains reside in the enterprise, and are used by multiple feature classes • Standard-specific domains are distributed with the geodatabase • Domains may also be retrieved from an Access Database located on SharePoint site
Approach – Metadata Document the Intended Content and the Context of the GIS data • Preliminary FGDC compliant metadata • Includes entity and attribute information and definitions, abstract and intended purpose of dataset • Default disclaimers and constraints • Citation naming conventions Utility of the national dataset will rely on accurate metadata
Approach – Quality Assessment Does the data satisfy the stated business requirements? • QA/QC Plan (Spreadsheet) • Phases of QA/QC plan: 1) Does data load into enterprise environment? 2) Does data meet minimum business requirements for internal publication? 3) Continuous data quality improvement (geometry, topology, attribution, etc.)
Utility of the national dataset will rely on effective quality measures and checks
Publish “Standards Package” Information related to the Data Standard is made available to implementers • • • • •
Data Standard documents and model diagrams Geodatabase XML Topology rules (.rul file) Special instructions A second geodatabase XML populated with sample data has proven beneficial
State State Data State Data State Data State Data State Data State Data Data O
ne -
w
ay
Data Migration
re pl ic as
State State Data State Data State Data State Data State Data Data
12 QC Databases
Compiled Nat’l Data w/metadata
BLM ArcSDE Data
QA/QC Process
PUBLIC ArcSDE Data
Data migrated to national server within ArcSDE replication environment
Lessons Learned to Date • Field testing the geodatabase is critical • User community requires varying levels of support for successful implementation • Need to bridge the gap between business expectations and GIS-user expectations • Front-end application may be needed Standards are dynamic Must engage both the business and the GIS user community
Remaining Challenges • “Interpretation” issues – Some users still confused about how to populate GDB • Communication between & amongst multidisciplinary teams • Federal directives or software updates may cause a need for a change to the GDB • Data load can uncover unforeseen issues
Conclusion
Corporate GIS assets are well-suited to a collaborative, data management approach
Questions? Contacts: [email protected] (303) 236-1936 [email protected] (303) 236-2268 [email protected] (303) 236-2695
Thomas Chatfield Lorena Creely Elizabeth Sabeff
Outline • • • •
Background and Challenges Goals Approach Conclusion/Summary
About the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) • BLM manages over 245 million acres of public land for multiple uses • 12 State/150 + Field Offices • Key business operations rely on geospatial data and technologies
Background and Challenges Diversity is inherent within the BLM: • Dispersed data development environment • Policy, guidance and coordination varies across programs and local areas • Diverse GIS skills, platforms, data formats • No one organizational unit manages geospatial Stovepipe environments result in multiple, different local datasets rather than one national dataset
Geospatial Services Strategic Plan A spatially enabled Bureau supporting accurate and effective decisions
Governance
Business Processes Data Architecture
Education & Outreach Technology Architecture
Application Architecture
Our Goal: Identify, develop and implement data management practices (including data standards) needed to carry out business processes
Why Data Standards? Grazing related data supports multiple programmatic areas related to: • • • •
Rangeland Assets Resource Management Plans Resource Improvements and Land Health Rangeland Administration System (RAS) & Revenue Generation Grazing Data Standard assures that all business processes can be addressed
Data Standards - Overall Approach Business requirements drive development of all data standards • Business Information • Logical Model • Physical Data Model • Implementation Multi-disciplinary approach with subjectmatter experts, policy experts,and GIS analysts
Approach – Business Requirements y y "ORGANIZATION IDENTIFIER" [PK1] [FK] Non-Key Attributes "PARENT BLM ORGANIZATION IDENTIFIER" "BLM ORGANIZATION CODE" [FK] "BLM ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT EFFECTIVE DATE" "BLM ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT END DATE" "LAND RESPONSIBILITY CODE" [FK] "BLM ADMINISTRATIVE UNIT LEVEL NUMBER" "BLM UNIT TYPE NAME" [FK]
• Identify business information required to make decisions • Define Business Rules • Develop Logical Data Model • Write Data Standard Report is related
delineates
RELATED LOCATION Primary Key "LOCATION IDENTIFIER" [PK2] [FK] "RELATED LOCATION IDENTIFIER" [PK1] "RELATED LOCATION REASON DATE" [PK3] Non-Key Attributes "RELATED LOCATION REASON NAME"
TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT LOCATION Primary Key "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT LOCATION EFFECTIVE DATE" [PK1] "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT IDENTIFIER" [PK2] [FK] Non-Key Attributes "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT LOCATION END DATE" "LOCATION IDENTIFIER" [FK]
Entity Name
Entity Description
Logical Data Element Name
Type
Siz e
Required ?
delineates
Key *
TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT Primary Key "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT IDENTIFIER" [PK1] Non-Key Attributes "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT NUMBER" "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT NAME" "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT HISTORICAL DATE" "TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT ORIGINAL ACRE MEASURE" "ORGANIZATION IDENTIFIER" [FK]
Definition
DRAFT ENTITY TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT A district that was identified based on the Taylor Grazing Act of 1934 which regulates grazing on federal public lands. Lands within a Taylor Grazing Act district can be vacant, unappropriated, and unreserved lands from any part of the public domain of the United States (exclusive of Alaska), which are not in National Forests, National parks and National Park Service monuments, Indian reservations, revested Oregon and California Railroad grant lands, or revested Coos Bay Wagon Road grant lands, and which are chiefly valuable for grazing and raising forage crops; provided, that no lands withdrawn or reserved for any other purpose shall be included in any such district. Permits are given for grazing privileges. integer Yes PK The designed primary key that will uniquely identify a TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT single occurrence of the entity. IDENTIFIER characte 40 Yes The name that is given to a Taylor Grazing District to TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT r distinguish it via a label rather than the number. NAME date Yes The date on which the original Taylor Grazing District was TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT created. HISTORICAL DATE characte 4 Yes TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT The number assigned to a Taylor Grazing District. r NUMBER ORGANIZATION IDENTIFIER The designed primary key that will uniquely identify a single occurrence of the entity. integer Yes FK The measure that indicates the original public land area of TAYLOR GRAZING DISTRICT the Taylor Grazing District. ORIGINAL ACRE MEASURE decimal Opt
manages
Approach – Business Rules • Translate business rules into geospatial context • Define any additional GIS-specific rules Data Standard Business Rule 6. Conforming Boundaries for BLM Administrative Field Offices Field Office (FO) boundaries should conform, as much as possible, with authorized State and local Government boundaries and the FO boundaries of other Federal agencies. However, geography, transportation, use patterns, and other similar factors must also be assessed to ensure that the boundaries chosen best serve the needs of the public and the BLM.
• GIS Topology Rules: • (BLM) Polygon Boundary Must be covered by (county) Line • (BLM) Polygon Must not overlap
Approach – Physical Data Model Translate the logical to the physical
Approach – Physical GIS Schema Develop Standardized Geodatabase • • • •
Tools: ArcCatalog, ArcDiagrammer, Visio Define Domains Define topology rules (separate .rul file) Utilize naming conventions
GIS Schema reflects business information defined in the Data Standard Report
Approach – Geodatabase Implementation Guidelines mirror details of the Geodatabase
Includes logical and physical attribute names, GIS alias, data format, default values, attribute definitions, domain tables
Approach – Geodatabase Review
• Rules, instructions, and supplemental info may be included • Implementation Guidelines and Proposed GIS schema sent out for review
GIS review is part of feedback loop within Data Standards Process
Approach – Pilot Testing • GDB is tested in an Enterprise environment • Field personnel pilot GDB with real data • Unforeseen issues may be uncovered • The GDB and Data Standard updated and retested if necessary Tests against current GIS workflows and ongoing review by subject matter experts
Approach – Domains Managing Domains in an Enterprise Environment requires a dual approach • Common vs. Standard-Specific • Common domains reside in the enterprise, and are used by multiple feature classes • Standard-specific domains are distributed with the geodatabase • Domains may also be retrieved from an Access Database located on SharePoint site
Approach – Metadata Document the Intended Content and the Context of the GIS data • Preliminary FGDC compliant metadata • Includes entity and attribute information and definitions, abstract and intended purpose of dataset • Default disclaimers and constraints • Citation naming conventions Utility of the national dataset will rely on accurate metadata
Approach – Quality Assessment Does the data satisfy the stated business requirements? • QA/QC Plan (Spreadsheet) • Phases of QA/QC plan: 1) Does data load into enterprise environment? 2) Does data meet minimum business requirements for internal publication? 3) Continuous data quality improvement (geometry, topology, attribution, etc.)
Utility of the national dataset will rely on effective quality measures and checks
Publish “Standards Package” Information related to the Data Standard is made available to implementers • • • • •
Data Standard documents and model diagrams Geodatabase XML Topology rules (.rul file) Special instructions A second geodatabase XML populated with sample data has proven beneficial
State State Data State Data State Data State Data State Data State Data Data O
ne -
w
ay
Data Migration
re pl ic as
State State Data State Data State Data State Data State Data Data
12 QC Databases
Compiled Nat’l Data w/metadata
BLM ArcSDE Data
QA/QC Process
PUBLIC ArcSDE Data
Data migrated to national server within ArcSDE replication environment
Lessons Learned to Date • Field testing the geodatabase is critical • User community requires varying levels of support for successful implementation • Need to bridge the gap between business expectations and GIS-user expectations • Front-end application may be needed Standards are dynamic Must engage both the business and the GIS user community
Remaining Challenges • “Interpretation” issues – Some users still confused about how to populate GDB • Communication between & amongst multidisciplinary teams • Federal directives or software updates may cause a need for a change to the GDB • Data load can uncover unforeseen issues
Conclusion
Corporate GIS assets are well-suited to a collaborative, data management approach
Questions? Contacts: [email protected] (303) 236-1936 [email protected] (303) 236-2268 [email protected] (303) 236-2695
