1 / 19

Measuring Public Value Creation of Geospatial Commons ( QPV Study )

Measuring Public Value Creation of Geospatial Commons ( QPV Study ). Briefing of MnGeo Digital Cadastral Data Committee. Randall Johnson, MetroGIS Staff Coordinator and QPV Study Administrative Coordinator. December 3, 2010. Today’s Topics. Quantifying Public Value (QPV) Study.

cwen
Download Presentation

Measuring Public Value Creation of Geospatial Commons ( QPV Study )

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. Measuring Public Value Creation of Geospatial Commons (QPV Study) Briefing of MnGeo Digital Cadastral Data Committee Randall Johnson, MetroGIS Staff Coordinator and QPV Study Administrative Coordinator December 3, 2010

  2. Today’s Topics • Quantifying Public Value (QPV) Study • Objective, Value, and Importance • Sponsors and Roles • Support Team • Scope and Major Components • Progress Update

  3. Objective “Develop a trusted methodology capable of quantitatively measuring public value created when organizations actively participate in geospatial commons” Clarification: This is a research project, involving broad goals with County, MetroGIS stakeholders, and U.S. NSDI activities, relevancy to Hennepin with the sole outcome of assessing ROI approaches for SDIs and developing a prototype method

  4. Value - Hennepin County Community Value anticipated to be realized by stakeholders from this Quantify Public Value (QPV) study: • Discover opportunities for Hennepin County to improve its internal ROI • Discover strengths and weaknesses of the GITA-ROI approach (using Hennepin County as a testbed) • Better understand potential costs and benefits of cross- sector collaboration • Establish a means to quantify public value (…use of geospatial technology for parcels) • Provide policy makers with a tool to readily compare ROI analysis against to their respective operations “

  5. Importance - Metro Area and Beyond The vision of a US National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) dates back to 1994…. BUT progress to realize this vision has been limited, in large part, because a trusted means is lacking to: “quantify value created through collaborative solutions to shared geospatial needs in a manner that policy makers can readily compare against to their respective operations” …An Outcome Sought via this Study…

  6. Study Sponsors and Roles • 1000 Friends of Minnesota –Contacts for Interviews • Hennepin County – Subject of ROI Study • MetroGIS – Project Management • Metropolitan Council – Manage Grant Funds • Federal Geographic Data Committee - Funding

  7. Support Team Francis Harvey, Research Coordinator Randall Johnson, Administrative Coordinator Gary Swenson, Hennepin County Contact Danielle Scarfe and Molly Managan with W4Sight, LCC , Lead support for Tasks 1 and 3 Scientific Advisors – 10-12 experts on Spatial Data Infrastructure (SDI) from U.S. and abroad General Advisors – 10-12 Individuals with expertise and organizational affiliations important to the success of the study

  8. Scope The study scope is limited, recognizing the proof of concept/prototyping nature, to: • Data: Parcel data produced by Hennepin County • Geographic Extent: A broad range of organizations serving the taxpayers of Hennepin County

  9. Major Components: Internal and Community Focuses Measure public value creation potential through of use of geospatial technology to produce and use parcel data… For support of: • The data producer’s operations (Hennepin County) • Operations of organizations that serve the area comprising Hennepin County (taxpayer’s value perspective)

  10. Design and Timing This study involves the following major tasks: 1. Jun to Aug. 2010: Conduct GITA ROI Analysis for Hennepin County internal operations 2. Sept. to Dec.: Define Extended ROI Methodology – Those enhancements to the base ROI needed to account for a geospatial commons environment [aka - Quantify Public Value (QPV) Methodology V1] 3. Jan. to Mar. 2011: Apply QPV V1 Methodology to a range of non-public and public entities that serve the geographic extent of Hennepin County 4. Apr.: Refine QPV Methodology for application elsewhere [aka - QPV Methodology V2] 5. May-Jun.: Draft Final Project Report

  11. Interviewees –Task 1 Representatives of all Hennepin County operations that produce and/or use parcel data. Ten individuals, representing the following county departments participated: • Assessor • Emergency Preparedness • Environmental Services • Enterprise GIS • Leasing/Land Management • Sheriff • Surveyor • Transportation Planning

  12. Interviewees – Task 3 Representatives of a variety of non-profit, for-profit, utility, and government interests: • 1) Whose operations do/could benefit from access to parcel data produced by Hennepin County • AND • Who believe their value added data/web service/ applications do/could improve the cost - effectiveness of: • Hennepin County operations • AND/OR • b) Operations of one or more taxing jurisdictions that serve Hennepin County’s citizens.

  13. Funding Source A $50,000 NSDI CAP Grant was awarded in April 2010 for this study. These funds support: • Training on GITA’s ROI methodology. • W4Sight, LLC to conduct interviews and report findings in a series of ROI worksheets. • Stipends to recognized experts on Spatial Data Infrastructures (SDI) to advise the study. • Forums and webinars to obtain input from SDI and ROI experts across the country and abroad.

  14. Status Task 1: • First round of interviews with Hennepin County staff completed July 19-21. • Recognized that data needed to complete the ROI worksheets developed by GITA not available. • Sought and received permission from FGDC to continue study using home-grown method. Task 2: • The international scientific advisory team met 12/1 via Web to craft QPV methodology. • Local advisory team to meet on 12/15 to refine the proposed QPV methodology.

  15. Status Task 3: • Interviews tentatively planned for late January • Interview individuals representing wide variety of organizations that can/are creating public value as a result of access to parcel data produced by Hennepin County. Project Reports Submitted to FGDC: • April to June & July to September 2010 quarterly project reports • Available on project website at http://sdiqpv.net/sdiqpv/Project_Updates Project_Updates.html

  16. Questions /Information Francis Harvey (fharvey@umn.edu) Study Research Coordinator Randall Johnson (randy.johnson@metc.state.mn.us ) Study Administrative Coordinator Gary Swenson (Gary.Swenson@co.hennepin.mn.us) Hennepin County Project website: http://sdiqpv.net/sdiqpv/Welcome.html

  17. What is an SDI? (Spatial Data Infrastructure) “…institutionalized, networked geographic information systems…”** **January 2009interview with Professor Francis Harvey, University of MN

  18. What is an SDI? (Spatial Data Infrastructure) Other Public Works Public Safety Community Development 1. Framework Data-Web Services-Apps. 2. Meeting Cross-Sector Business Information Needs Climate Education Human Services Transportation Natural Resources Finance / Real Estate Telecommunications

More Related