Oregon’s Address Point Data Repository Project

1. Oregon’s Address Point Data Repository Project Cy Smith, State Geospatial Information Officer Dept. of Administrative Services Office of the State CIO GIS in Action - April 16, 2014

2. Background – GIS Coordination • Geospatial Enterprise Office (GEO) • navigatOR program operated by GIO and 7 staff • 2013-15 program budget: $2,500,000 • GEO operates under Executive Order 00-02 • Coordinate the GIS activities of all levels of government in Oregon • Provide library of shared geospatial data • Provide support to Oregon Geographic Information Council

3. Some Specific GEO Activities • Esri Enterprise License for state agencies • Statewide Broadband Map (FCC-funded) • https://broadband.oregon.gov/StateMap • Statewide Address Points Project (911-funded) • Public Safety Common Operating Picture • Energy mapping (alternative fuels & biomass inventory) • Local government web viewers • http://gis.oregon.gov/DAS/CIO/GEO/web_services/Lake/index.html • Oregon Explorer & Spatial Data Library • http://oregonexplorer.info • ArcGIS Online for state government • http://Geo.maps.arcgis.com

4. State/Local Geospatial Investment • Amount Spent Annually on Geospatial Data • Use, Management, Collection, Maintenance • State Government ~ $2,235,576,000 • County Government ~ $1,121,239,000 • City Government ~ $1,480,729,000 • TOTAL ~ $4,837,544,000 • navigatOR budget = .03% of total spend

5. GIS Integrates Information Across the Enterprise $$ Improve Services to Citizens $$ Coordinate Public Services to Help Guide Development $$ Improve Management of Natural and Human Resources $$ Provide Effective Response to Emergencies Local Governments Academic Institutions Federal Agencies State Agencies Regional Organizations GIS Framework Activities Managed With A Focus On Outcomes

6. Framework Data National Standards Oregon Standards Land Ownership Landcover/Use Transportation Bioscience Hydrography Climate Utilities Boundaries Elevation Critical Infr. Aerial Imagery Geoscience Geodetic Control Hazards

7. Framework Data Initiative • Fourteen Working Committees – 450+ people • Operates Under Auspices of Governor’s GIS Council • Tasked with Implementation Plan and Standard for each data theme • Data Standards Development & Adoption Process • Expanding to Include Application Governance • Biggest Challenge is Communication

8. Addresses are Geographic • Most common navigation aid used to find people, places and events • Addressing is done logically and systematically • It is visible on the landscape, and usually at least minimally tagged with street name signs and address numbers in the real world • The system and logic allow people to find their way to a specific location using the signs posted

9. Mapping Addresses • Allows for analysis of patterns of events associated with addresses • Allows for efficient routing of emergency and non-emergency services to specific locations or a group of locations • Associates data from multiple sources with a single address location

10. Creating statewide address repository Compilation of local address points Oregon has 290+ address authorities Different capabilities, technologies Addressing process is similar for all Messy, not standardized statewide No address repository exists now Address Point Data Repository

11. Primary business driver is public safety Coordinating with 911, Broadband, GIS Held meetings with address authorities Summits in 4 places with large groups Address Authorities, PSAPs, GIS Managers Working with regional address data aggregators on technical processes Data structure based on national standards Address Point Data Repository

12. An enterprise address repository Supporting authoritative addresses and data connectivity across the enterprise of government in Oregon Making the Address Repository the “go-to” place for addresses for government agencies Quality assurance and documentation provide “evidence” of the value of the data Places GIS and addresses at the center of enterprise business processes Addresses are the common thread through most organizations’ applications and work flows Connecting to ExistingApplications

13. The FGDC Address Standard • A multi-purpose, comprehensive standard • Thoroughfare addresses (streets, walks, rivers) • Landmark addresses (named public objects) • Postal addresses (PO Boxes, Rural routes) • Describes the parts of an address • Address numbers • Street Names • Sub-addresses (apts., condos, units, etc.) • Place Names • State, Postal and Country Names and Codes • Postal Elements

14. NENA’s Next Generation 911 Standards • Coordinated with FGDC Standard on addresses • Differences from FGDC: • Records are location of phone calls, not addresses • Emphasis on ability to dispatch quickly • Abbreviations permitted, some inconsistencies w/FGDC • QC and attribute elements of FGDC largely omitted • Not required for emergency dispatch

15. Standardizing the Data Extract/Transform/Load Tools • Computer code that: • Extracts the address data from a given source • Transforms the data into the standard format required by the address repository • Loads the data into the repository • Means no one has to change their process • Does NOT change the address information

16. Address Database Field Name Conversion LCOG Address Fields RLIS Address Fields Proposed Model Address Fields

17. QA/QC Procedures • Initial File Checks – Format – Extent – Schema – Completeness • Review Random Sample of Points – Geometry accuracy – Attribute accuracy

22. Secure, role-based log in

23. Easy to navigate, familiar look and feel

24. Easy navigation, search tools

25. Multiple base maps, including current aerial photography

26. Straightforward data entry or editing

27. Next Steps • Evaluating COTS and open source tools for address creation/editing • Initiating pilot projects with threecounties to test various work flow situations (Curry, Josephine, HR) • Contract initiated with Spatial Focusto develop FME scripts to do ETL for pilot counties, transforming data to FGDC data model they developed • Considering contract with LCOG to transform additional local address data sets

28. Leveraging Broadband Grant Resources • Initial grant created data model, populated with four counties’ data • Cost about $275,000, subcontracted to Sanborn • Supplemental grant allows additional work (approx. $175,000) for project manager, ETL tool, and web-based repository maintenance tool

29. Leveraging 911 Resources • Oregon Emergency Management is already spending $6,000/month/PSAP on data • That amounts to about $3.3M/year • Some amount of that (not sure how much) is dedicated to address points • A local company has contracts with 18 counties to develop address points using 911 funds

30. Coordination Efforts • Our team & OEM met several times with the company creating address points • Discussed and agreed on data model • Developed understanding of QA/QC they do • Tightened relationship for future work • Our team met with many address authorities in small groups around the state • Inform them about the Address Repository project • Find out about their work flows • Get their endorsement of the project

31. Project Charter • Co-sponsored by OEM and CIO • Project goal: create a statewide address point repository from local, authoritative data, accessible to all government agencies • Project will build on existing investments in address point creation and planning efforts • Project funding will be provided jointly by OEM and CIO

32. Thank You For further information, please contact: Dave Snader, Local Govt. GIS Coordinator, Oregon GEO david.snader@state.or.us or Cy Smith, State Geospatial Information Officer, Oregon GEO cy.smith@state.or.us