1 / 27

Compass Points: Setting a Direction for Minnesota’s GIS Future

Compass Points: Setting a Direction for Minnesota’s GIS Future. A New Strategic Plan for Minnesota David Arbeit Fred Logman MN Governor’s Council on Geographic Information March 21, 2007. Compass Points: Setting a Direction for Minnesota’s GIS Future. Overview

cayla
Download Presentation

Compass Points: Setting a Direction for Minnesota’s GIS Future

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Compass Points:Setting a Direction for Minnesota’s GIS Future A New Strategic Plan for Minnesota David Arbeit Fred Logman MN Governor’s Council on Geographic Information March 21, 2007

  2. Compass Points:Setting a Direction for Minnesota’s GIS Future Overview • Our Foundation for Strategic Planning • Strategic Planning Retreat • For the Council’s Consideration

  3. Foundation for Coordinated GIS Building on decades of informal collaboration, Minnesota’s GIS community now needs to collaborate on a strategy that will bring the benefits of GIS to the entire state. • GCGI Strategic Framework • A Foundation for Coordinated GIS (2004) • Conceptual Architecture for Enterprise GIS(2005) • NSGIC and FGDC • 50 States Initiative(2006) • State Master Plan for IT

  4. A Foundation for Coordinated GISMinnesota’s Spatial Data Infrastructure Strengths • History of effective ad hoc coordination • LMIC as de facto coordinator and Clearinghouse steward • Governor’s Council as forum for advice & guidance • Strong partnerships with federal agencies • Commitment to standards • Track record of cooperative solutions to data acquisition • Growing awareness of GIS to support business needs

  5. A Foundation for Coordinated GISMinnesota’s Spatial Data Infrastructure Recommendations • Explicit authority and responsibility for overseeing the MSDI should be assigned to a state cabinet level agency. • Adequate resources should be provided to sustain coordination and development and implementation of the MSDI. • GIS implementation by state agencies should be coordinated within the state’s IT architecture framework.

  6. A Foundation for Coordinated GISMinnesota’s Spatial Data Infrastructure Organizational Issues • GIS implementation by state, local and regional agencies should be coordinated with similar efforts by state and federal agencies. • Emphasis should be placed on identifying emerging opportunities for effectively using GIS, for joint projects and for leveraging private and federal resources. • The continued development of the MN Geographic Data Clearinghouse should be supported as an e-government solution for distributing geospatial data.

  7. National States Geographic Information CouncilCoordination Criteria www.nsgic.org A 2005 study revealed that Minnesota had recently regressed and was lacking some important criteria for success!

  8. A full-time, paid coordinator position is designated and has authority to implement the state’s business and strategic plans26 of 48 states – Not Minnesota A clearly defined authority exists for statewide coordination of geospatial information technologies and data production20 of 48 states – Not Minnesota 3. The statewide coordination office has a formal relationship with the State’s CIO28 of 48 states – Not Minnesota National States Geographic Information Council9 Coordination Criteria

  9. National States Geographic Information Council9 Coordination Criteria • A Champion (political or executive decision maker) is aware and involved in the process of coordination16 of 48 states – Not Minnesota • Responsibilities for developing the NSDI and State Clearinghouse are assigned29 of 48 states – Includes Minnesota • The ability exists to work and coordinate with local governments, academia, and the private sector41 of 48 states – Includes Minnesota

  10. National States Geographic Information Council9 Coordination Criteria • Sustainable funding sources exist to meet projected needs12 of 48 states – Not Minnesota • Coordinators have the authority to enter into contracts and become capable of receiving and expending funds20 of 48 states – Includes Minnesota • The Federal government works through the statewide coordinating authority27 of 48 states – Includes Minnesota

  11. Compass Points:Setting a Direction for Minnesota’s GIS Future The Minnesota Information and Telecommunications Systems and Services Master Plan February 28, 2007

  12. Purpose of Master Planning • To guide policy and investments through: • Coordination • Cooperation • Convergence • Lay the foundation for effective management of information – data, technology, resources • Provide the context for transformation of state government programs • Improve performance of IT-supported business activities

  13. The Minnesota Enterprise Blueprint: A Federated Model The federated enterprise model balances three ways of managing IT business for the state Agency-specific Services Shared Services Utility Services

  14. Applications and services of a highly specialized nature for which there are no opportunities to add value through central management. Agency- Specific Services Services and applications required by more than one enterprise partner, and managed by one entity to improve service and efficiency. Shared Service Services and applications common to all enterprise partners, and managed by one entity for all agencies and jurisdictions to improve service and/or reduce costs. Utility Services IT Service Types

  15. OET’s Interest in GIS? • Investment in data and applications is significant and growing • Opportunities for sharing data and applications are obvious • Value to citizens and government has been demonstrated in many areas of interest • economic development and analysis • land use • public safety • environmental management • services delivery • tax administration • many more • Need for standards is apparent

  16. Agency COE Utility How might Shared Services Work for GIS? Specialized applications and thematic data Infrastructure (and hosting?) at OET Common applications and tools Baseline map info, standards and general data

  17. Moving Forward:We Need a Better Road Map! Now What?

  18. Compass Points:Setting a Direction for Minnesota’s GIS Future • Develop a second generation strategic plan • Build on previous work and commitments • Foundations for Coordinated GIS • Conceptual Architecture for Enterprise GIS • OET Master Plan • Focus on State agencies while recognizing the larger Minnesota geospatial community • Actively involve key stakeholders

  19. Next Step:A Strategic Planning Retreat • Sponsored by Commissioner of Administration and State CIO • Participants from all key stakeholder interests • Professionally facilitated • Planned by Core Group of stakeholders • Build on previous work • Constrained by legislative schedule and funding resources

  20. Next Step:A Strategic Planning Retreat Core Planning Group • David Arbeit (GDA) • Fred Logman (LMIC) • John Lally (OET) • Mike Barnes/Dan Ross (MnDOT) • Larry Palmer (Agriculture) • Rick Gelbman (GCGI) • Randy Johnson (MetroGIS) • Annette Theroux (ProWest)

  21. Our Vision Minnesota’s GIS technology and data organizational and operational infrastructures and resources will support the development and use of geospatially-enabled business applications that enhance the efficiency, effectiveness and economic competitiveness of public, private and non-profit organizations serving the people of Minnesota. Minnesota is a national leader for the Coordinated, Affordable, Reliable, and Effective use of GIS technology to enhance services throughout the state. Coordinated Affordable Reliable Effective

  22. Retreat Purpose Identify and develop strategies for achieving the vision of coordinated GIS within Minnesota. Recommendations about: • relationships among agencies, their partners and their customers, • assignment of roles and responsibilities, • organization of state GIS government functions, • strategies for securing necessary resources.

  23. Retreat Outcomes Identify and develop strategies for achieving the vision of coordinated GIS within Minnesota. Results will help shape a Strategic Plan for Coordinated Affordable Reliable Effective GIS

  24. Retreat Process Design Participants • Keep size to about 40 • Large enough for diversity • Small enough to manage process • Provides for breakouts into 4 small work groups • Target specific participants • Insures diversity of interests • Allows balance between business and technical people • Increases certainty of participation

  25. Start with SWOT exerciseStrengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, Threats SWOT Consider adjustments to to stop at this point. Retreat Process Design Participant Survey before retreat to identify current strengths and key issues

  26. Initial Project Milestones Draft Schedule

  27. For the Council’s Consideration Council review and endorsement is important to project success. Endorsement is requested for Vision Statement Feedback is requested for • Retreat Name • Retreat Purpose • Project Plan

More Related