U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Geospatial Data and Systems Management

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

Geospatial Data and Systems Management

NANCY H. GREELEY, KELLY M. DILKS, CHAD M. ADAMS, AND GREGG C. HOGE

INTRODUCTION

value of GD&S and with the resources and abilities

to implement it have often been successful. However,

The US Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) is in

there are many hurdles to successful use and manage-

the business of geospatial data creation, yet we do

ment of GD&S including decreasing funds, increas-

not have a corporate plan for consistent implementa-

ing technological requirements for hardware and soft-

tion and use of Geospatial Data and Systems (GD&S)

ware, exponentially increasing amounts of geospatial

throughout the organization. Headquarters and each

data, and increasing expectations of direct-funding

District, Division, laboratory, center, and field oper-

customers and the public.

ating office has different functions, funding sources,

USACE must be competitive with other federal

personnel, and technology environments. The respon-

agencies in the geospatial data arena or we will lose

sibility for GD&S at each District and Division is left

business to those who maintain their expertise. We

to local managers. The result is that the GD&S envi-

must serve our customers and the public the way they

ronments at some District and Divisions are produc-

now expect to be served in this arena. To do all this,

tive and forward-looking but at others are just pass-

USACE managers need the resources to empower

able and reactive.

their employees to develop, maintain, and use the

An example of differences within USACE's GD&S

highly sophisticated GD&S technology. Managers of

community can be seen in how they have dealt

the separate stovepipes within each command that can

with the task of geospatial metadata creation. Since

offer something to and need something from GD&S

1994, USACE employees have been required to cre-

need to work together, looking at ways to optimize the

ate geospatial metadata corresponding to their geo-

GD&S within their organization. Leaders of the man-

spatial data files (Executive Order 12909, USACE

agers must be sure they are doing so.

ER 1110-1-8156, and USACE EM 1110-1-2909). Some

Districts have embraced the directive and routinely

create metadata for all new data files. However, many

PURPOSE

USACE employees don't know what geospatial meta-

data is, how to create it, or what to do with it when

The purpose of this report is to

it is created. Many managers don't know how to fund

creation of the required metadata.

Identify strengths and weaknesses in the way

Managing geospatial data and geospatial data sys-

that USACE manages its GD&S.

tems requires a high degree of technological sophisti-

Investigate alternatives and recommend changes

cation. Yet because USACE commands do not have a

to correct weak management strategies.

centralized GD&S office, there is no one proponent

Offer descriptions of stronger management strat-

for GD&S at any given site. There is no one agent

egies in USACE experience so that managers

assigned to manage the databases, or the required soft-

with a GD&S aspect in their programs can deter-

ware or hardware, to report up the chain of command

mine if these strategies could work in their

on local successes, or to champion funding needs.

GD&S groups.

At some commands the local Information Man-

We hope that this report will be used as a resource

agement (IM) specialists work closely with those

by USACE leadership, managers, and staff involved

using geographic information systems (GIS) or com-

in GD&S, enabling them to take a new look at their

puter-aided drafting and design (CADD) systems,

GD&S capacities and options. Ideally, it will be the

and at others, IM personnel are not involved at all.

springboard for greater communication within the

Individual managers and employees with the will-

USACE GD&S community.

ingness, ingenuity, and foresight to see the potential