National Spatial Data Infrastructure Partnership Programs: Rethinking the Focus (2001)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

REVIEW OF NSDI PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMS 23 In the committee’s opinion, the total financial commitment to the CAP program represents a very minor investment. The total federal contribution to the CAP during these three years was approximately $2 million. By comparison, the Office of Management and Budget estimated that total federal expenditures on digital geospatial data activities in 1993 amounted to approximately $4 billion, and total sales of GIS software in these years were in the hundreds of millions. To emphasize this point, a recent commentary estimated the total worldwide expenditure on GIS and related activities was of the order of $15 billion to $20 billion (Longley et al., 2001; p. 360). An examination of personnel costs provides a useful perspective on the CAP investment. The $2 million investment would provide full-time employment for at most 20 suitably trained people for one year. That averages approximately half a person-year for each of the states that were successful in the program. Even under the most optimistic leverage scenarios, CAP funding was only a minor component of total geospatial data investment. It is to the FGDC’s credit that CAP recipients are so positive about the experience, and the program has seeded so many projects that have the potential for long-term effect. This is particularly noteworthy given obvious constraints the one-year budget cycle imposes on these projects. Framework Demonstration Projects Program The Framework Demonstration Projects Program (FDPP) was initiated in 1996 as a funding initiative separate from the CAP. In 1998 a joint announcement of both programs was made, and in 1999 the program was merged with the CAP program. Continued support for the FDPP was reflected by the funding of four projects in 2000, but the program was not included in the 2001 call for proposals. According to the FGDC (1996; p. 1), the FDPP was established to: “…support cooperative projects that test the means by which the geospatial data community can work together to build and maintain the data Framework for the NSDI…Funding is provided for implementations of multi-organization, multi-sector partnerships to coordinate data collection, maintenance, use and 

REVIEW OF NSDI PARTNERSHIP PROGRAMS 24 access in local and regional areas. Program participants will identify a basic information content for the Framework data and will develop technical, operational, and business contexts by which a distributed, collaborative data collection and maintenance effort will operate.” At approximately $100,000, the average FDPP award is substantially larger than the average CAP award made between 1994 and 1998, and almost an order of magnitude larger than the CAP awards of 1999. In 1996 the FDPP funded seven projects for a total of $810,000. Total funding for the program fell to $470,000 in 1997, but rebounded to $845,000 in 1998. The following examples illustrate the range of projects funded under the program: • A Statewide Framework of Public Lands Data Using Locally Derived Cadastres (North Carolina, 1996) “…will create a viable technical process for the maintenance of the Framework cadastral theme in North Carolina by improving statewide datasets of federally and state- owned property” (FGDC, 1997a; Appendix H). • The Baltimore-Washington Regional Digital Spatial Data Framework Demonstration Project for the Gwynns Falls Subwatershed (Maryland, 1996) “…will explore the administrative and technical issues of linking local and regional datasets for the Framework themes of geodetic control, digital orthoimagery, elevation, transportation, hydrography, governmental units, and cadastral data” (FGDC, 1997a; Appendix H). • Alaska Transportation Mapping Coordination Project Linking State and Local Programs to Build the NSDI (Alaska, 1998) “…to better organize Alaska’s state and local mapping authorities to address the transportation Framework layer” (FGDC, 1998; p. 1). Even though the funding level for these projects was more substantial than in the previous FGDC effort, the amounts remain small in comparison with the size of the geospatial data user community. Furthermore, the committee finds it difficult to determine whether the larger FDPP grants have been more effective than the smaller CAP grants, although it is apparent that the relatively small size of CAP awards and their short duration has created some problems of continuity. The