OREGON GIS UTILITY PROJECT—PHASE 1 REQUIREMENTS
FINALOREGON GIS UTILITY PROJECT—PHASE 1REQUIREMENTS ASSESSMENT AND BUSINESS CASEProject Risk Identification and Mitigation PlanDeliverables 5A and 5BSubmitted to:Cy Smith, Statewide GIS CoordinatorState of OregonDept. of Administrative Services—IRMDGeospatial Enterprise Office1225 Ferry Street SE, FI2Salem, OR 97301-4280(503) 378-6066Submitted by:Peter Croswell, Executive ConsultantPlanGraphics, Inc.112 E. Main StreetFrankfort, KY 40601(502) 223-1501Deliverable 5A: March 14, 2005Revision with Deliverable 5B: November 29, 2005
PREFACEThis report addresses Task Series 5 of the Phase 1 GIS Utility project. This reportidentifies risks associated with GIS Utility development and operation and recommendsstrategies to avoid or mitigate these risks. This is part of a crucial aspect of projectmanagement, which the Project Management Institute (PMI) refers to as “riskmanagement.” As explained by PMI’s PMBOK (Project Management Body ofKnowledge, Chapter 11), risk management is the “systematic process of identifying,analyzing, and responding to project risk.” Risk is defined by PMI as “an uncertain eventor condition that, if it occurs, has a positive or negative effect on a project objective.”This report will focus on potential risks that might have a negative impact on the projectschedule, cost, or quality. This risk analysis will be used in business case development,the conceptual design, and implementation planning for the GIS Utility.This report is organized into two parts:Part 1: GIS Utility Risk Identification, which addresses project Deliverable 5APart 2: Risk Mitigation and Risk Response Planning, which addresses projectDeliverable 5B.NOTE: Part 1 (Deliverable 5A) was delivered on March 14, 2005. This report includes afinalized Deliverable 5A and the completed Deliverable 5B.1339.5PlanGraphics, Inc.i
TABLE OF CONTENTSTitlePart 1:Part 2:PageGIS Utility Risk Identification. 1-11.1Introduction. 1-11.2Identification of Current Risks and GIS Utility Project Risks . 1-11.3GIS Utility Risk Impact Assessment . 1-9Risk Mitigation and Risk Response Planning. 2-1List of TablesTable 1-1: Status Quo Risk Identification. 1-2Table 1-2: GIS Utility Project Risk Identification . 1-4Table 1-3: Status Quo Risk Probability and Impact. 1-9Table 1-4: GIS Utility Project Risk Impact Type and Probability . 1-12Table 2-1: Project Risk Management and Reduction Strategies. 2-21339.5PlanGraphics, Inc.ii
PART 1GIS UTILITY RISK IDENTIFICATION1.1INTRODUCTIONRisks are potential events or conditions that cannot be fully predicted and which mayhave an impact on the schedule, cost, quality, or overall scope of GIS Utilitydevelopment or operation. Potential risks are identified as part of overall projectplanning. The risks identified here will be used in the business case analysis (Task Series6) to evaluate and compare the benefits of different development alternatives. Risks willalso be taken into account in the implementation plan so that all reasonable steps aretaken to avoid or mitigate negative impacts from risk.Part 1 identifies the potential risks for the GIS Utility project. Risks will be categorizedand described and placed in a context—particularly whether the risk is likely to be afactor during GIS utility development or during ongoing operation after deployment.Risks are organized into categories, and the probable risk impact is assigned as a basis forplanning and risk management. This risk identification will be examined as part ofbusiness case development (Task Series 6) in the comparison of alternatives for GISUtility development (different alternatives may vary in their ability to ameliorate ormitigate the potential negative consequences of risks).Part 2, the Risk Mitigation and Risk Response Planning strategy, examines the riskspresented in Part 1 and identifies approaches for avoiding risks or mitigating potentialnegative impacts. These two parts comprise an overall “risk management strategy” whichwill be an input to the implementation planning process in Task Series 7.1.2IDENTIFICATION OF CURRENT RISKS AND GIS UTILITY PROJECTRISKSTwo overall categories of risks are taken into account in the planning and business casepreparation for the GIS Utility: 1) the status quo and 2) GIS Utility development. Thefirst, “status quo risks,” addresses the negative consequences of continuing currentapproaches to mapping and geographic information management (i.e., not initiatingsignificant efforts to build the statewide GIS Utility). The status quo is characterized bythe current situation in which there is considerable use of GIS in a somewhat noncoordinated environment, inconsistently mature data sets for different areas of the state,and no statewide network or structure that supports effective sharing of geographic dataand services. In essence, the status quo risks imply that the GIS community in Oregonwill not have the opportunity to achieve the full set of tangible and intangible benefitsfrom the GIS Utility. Table 1-1 summarizes the primary “status quo risks” that areimportant for this project.1339.5PlanGraphics, Inc.1-1
Project Risk Identification and Mitigation PlanNovember 29, 2005Table 1-1: Status Quo Risk IdentificationRiskDescriptionSQ1: Continued LaborInefficienciesThe status quo implies uncoordinated use of GIS tools and data, where available, and, inmany cases, manual data sources and procedures for a myriad of public agency businessprocesses dependent on geographic information (response to information requests, plan andpermit review, field inspection and maintenance, map preparation, etc.)The status quo is characterized by an inconsistent patchwork of digital and manualGIS data collection and mapping programs. Duplication and redundancies result in highcosts for data and lack of a consistent approach for ongoing data maintenance.SQ2: High Costs forGeographic DataCompilation andUpdateSQ3: Impact onEffectiveness ofGovernmental ServiceProvisionSQ4: Negative LandUse ImpactsSQ5: Missed EconomicDevelopment andBusiness InvestmentSQ6: LimitedEmergency Responseand ManagementCapabilitySQ7: Higher Costs forRegulatory ComplianceSQ8: Missed Revenuefrom Taxation and FeeCollection ProgramsSQ9: High Costs forGIS ProgramOperationSQ10: Reduced DataAccess andCollaborationSQ11: FinancialImpact—Liability andInsurance ClaimsSQ12: Potential forCatastrophic Loss ofRecords or DataSQ13: Limitations inInfrastructure Planningand Management1339.5Federal, state, tribal, and local government agencies provide a large range of services tobusinesses and citizens (public health, social programs, utility service, environmentalquality, education). These services are directed at a geographically distributed customerbase. Location of facilities and people is not done efficiently on a statewide basis.Local and regional land use decisions can have negative impacts on environmental andcultural quality and can even result in major additional costs for government agencies—sometimes the case at the local or statewide level.Economic and business development initiatives at the local or state level demand detailed,current geographic information (base map, utility, demographic, etc.). The status quoprovides little of this in a comprehensive detailed manner and indirectly contributes toreduced competitiveness of State government and local governments to attract investors forcommercial, industrial, research, or other businesses.The status quo means that inconsistent, often incomplete, and sometimes nonexistentstatewide data vital for emergency planning, coordination, and response will continue. In theend, this implies a risk for damage to property or the loss of lives—lack of informationimpacts time and quality in emergency response. The GIS Utility supports emergencyplanning and coordination and will deliver information at the local level for first responders.Current and upcoming federal and state regulations and local ordinances often demandincreased governmental resources for response and compliance. The GIS Utility providesthe means for avoiding high costs of regulatory compliance that often require increasedgeographic data collection, analysis, and reporting. The status quo implies that additionalstaff time and costs will be incurred in compliance.Effective and equitable governmental programs for fee and property taxation are dependenton sound, up-to-date information. Even minor problems in such areas as property valuation,utility services billing, various types of land use fees, and even the collection of fines fromenforcement citations result in reductions in revenue. This will continue under the status quo,but the high-quality updated data in the GIS Utility will allow program managers to runprograms more efficiently and increase revenue.GIS development and operations at all levels of government will continue in a semicoordinated status with resulting duplication and overlap of projects and services provided.This results in higher costs for computer hardware, software licenses, annual support andmaintenance contracts, database development work, and duplication in personnel in somecases.The status quo is characterized by limited geographic data sharing among state agencies inmany cases and a low level of data sharing between local and regional agencies andjurisdictions. The very nature of the GIS Utility implies statewide participation andcollaboration with a range of tangible and intangible benefits—not often easy to put in placeunder the status quo.Governmental agencies are always exposed to liability damage claims (e.g., trafficaccidents, environmental impacts), and insurance costs for public property are high. Often,data sources are now insufficient to cost-effectively support legal and financial challenges.Lack of ability to perform effective risk analysis during program planning and design, as wellas inflexibility in evaluating legal claims, will continue resulting in higher than necessary costto state agencies and local governments.Poorly managed digital records and the large pool of hardcopy maps and geographicrecords stored by state and local agencies are subject to loss, damage, or destruction fromfire or other events, with an extremely high replacement cost. The GIS Utility will virtuallyeliminate chances of catastrophic loss of key geographic data.Long-range planning and design for infrastructure development—roads and utility systems—will continue to be limited by a lack of available base map and thematic information in manyareas of the state. This results in time delays and much higher costs for project planning anddesign.PlanGraphics, Inc.1-2
Project Risk Identification and Mitigation PlanNovember 29, 2005The second major category, “GIS Utility Program Risks,” relates specifically to theGIS Utility development effort and ongoing operation. These risks relate to conditions orevents that have the potential for causing project delays, increase in costs, or otherimpacts on the scope and quality of the project results.While risks cannot be fully predicted in the beginning of the project, they can beidentified as possibilities and taken into consideration in the planning process. Risks areorganized into the following categories:Funding/Resource Allocation: Includes risks associated with allocating andsustaining funding and staff resources for GIS Utility development and operation.Organizational/Political: Includes all aspects of organizational relationships,project management, governance structure for the GIS Utility, and high-levellegislative and executive support for the multi-year project. Risks that may havean impact on these factors are identified.Technical/Procedural: Includes risks associated with the technological andoperational aspects of the project, including hardware and software, networkconfiguration, and database development, and the procedural workflowsassociated with technology acquisition and implementation. These risks reflectpotential technical obstacles in system development that could impact costs or theschedule.Table 1-2 describes the potential risks that have been identified for the GIS Utilityproject. These potential risks will be factors during the development and operation of theGIS Utility.1339.5PlanGraphics, Inc.1-3
OR GIS Utility-Project Risk Identification and Mitigation PlanNovember 29, 2005Table 1-2: GIS Utility Project Risk tionOperationRiskDevelopmentTiming forRisk**PSPPPPPSA. Funding/Resource AllocationA1. Insufficientfunding allocationSufficient funds for development and operation are not allocated to the GIS Utility effort.“Sufficient funds” means funding levels that match budget requirement projections resultingfrom the GIS Utility Conceptual Design. This risk encompasses funding from all sources,including state and local government general funds and special fund budget allocations, projectpartnerships with outside agencies and private companies, grants, etc. An important factorcontributing to risk is the poor fiscal situation in state government that limits allocation offunding.This risk addresses the allocation of staff dedicated to GIS Utility management and operations(in GEO or another designated unit). Program management and operational support will beA2. Dedicated staffdependent on dedicated staff during development and long-term operation of theGIS Utility. If staff resources are not allocated for the program or if they are diverted to otherresources notsufficient or available activities, a lower than planned staffing level will be available. A related staffing concern is theavailability of staff with the proper skills and the potential for staff turnover that could impact theproject.A3. Resourcesupportcommitments fromstate agenciesinsufficientThe GIS Utility will depend, in part, upon non-financial support (people, data, technical support)from state agencies and other levels of government. Such commitments of resources reflect thenature of the GIS Utility—a network of users and providers of data and systems with sharedresources. Resource commitments may be defined through formal or informal agreementsbetween government agencies.A4. Cost projectionsdo not meet actualcostsThis potential risk would arise if costs unexpectedly increased during the multi-yeardevelopment processes or if new cost items not included in original budget projections wererequired. These cases would result in costs that exceed budgets and funds allocated for theproject. Legislative actionFormal allocations from agencybudgetsFormal staff positionsestablished or filled (budgetallocation and personnelaction)Executive action for hiringfreezeFormal commitment of staffsupportFormal decisions to providedata or system supportFormal agreements definingcommitmentFormal bids for services andproductsAdvertised prices for products*Triggers/Indicators: Formal actions or events that could result in or alleviate the negative consequences of risk**Timing of Risk: Indication about when (during development or operation) the risk will be a factor. P Primary Concern (first three years); S Secondary Concern1339.5PlanGraphics, Inc.1-4
Project Risk Identification and Mitigation PlanNovember 29, 2005Table 1-2: GIS Utility Project Risk Identification nOperationRiskDevelopmentTiming forRisk**PSPSPPB. Organizational/Political B1. Insufficientsupport in the statelegislatureB2. Lack ofawareness/supportat senior executivelevelB3. Insufficientsupport andparticipation amongregional and localgovernmentsThe GIS Utility program needs long-term legislative support through appropriate statutoryauthority, legislative resolutions, and direct engagement of legislative committees and supportstaff. With an insufficient level of support or a drop in support over time, the GIS Utility programcould be impacted by loss of funds, a decreasing level of authority and ability to lead thestatewide program, and reduction in overall priority.Just as legislative support (B1) is critical, so is a high level of awareness and support at theexecutive level. This includes the Governor’s Office, other constitutional officers, and senioragency executives. Awareness and support are indicated by participation in a formalgovernance body for the GIS Utility, executive actions, allocation of resources, andaccountability for accomplishment of objectives. Since these individuals are decision makers,assign program priorities, and direct allocation and use of resources, the GIS Utility must beviewed as a program and tool that support the program areas important to these executives.Loss of awareness and support could negatively impact resources available to the GIS Utility orcould lessen its regular use.Long-term success requires substantial buy-in by local and regional governments andagencies. Implementing and promoting effective coordination and support relationships areimportant, and breakdowns in these relationships will hurt the overall program. Regional andlocal participation will be formalized through signing of agreements for data sharing, allocationof resources, acceptance of certain standards and policies for system access and operation,and sharing accountability for accomplishing objectives. It is also important to keep activeinvolvement and establish equitable representation of this segment of the user community in along-term oversight body (as is the case now, to some extent, through the project SteeringCommittee and involvement of OGIC). Acknowledgment and activeinterest by legislativecommittees“Champions” supporting projectFormal action by legislature(statute, resolution, budgetallocation)Participation in oversight bodyIssuance of formal executiveorders or policy directivesAcceptance of standards andpolicies for GIS utilitycoordinationAllocation of resourcesParticipation in an oversightbodyFormal acceptance by localgoverning bodies (boards,commissions, councils) Executive decisions to allocateresources and to acceptprocedural standards*Triggers/Indicators: Formal actions or events that could result in or alleviate the negative consequences of risk**Timing of Risk: Indication about when (during development or operation) the risk will be a factor. P Primary Concern (first three years); S Secondary Concern1339.5PlanGraphics, Inc.1-5
Project Risk Identification and Mitigation PlanNovember 29, 2005Table 1-2: GIS Utility Project Risk Identification nOperationRiskDevelopmentTiming forRisk**PPPPPSPPB. Organizational/Political (continued)B4. Insufficientparticipation andsupport by nonpublic sectororganizationsNon-public sector groups (private companies, academic institutions, not-for-profit organizations)will also be important participants as users, providers of data, and partners in funding certaininitiatives. GIS Utility success depends on a growing number of non-governmental entities.Private sector participation will be formalized through signing of agreements for data sharing,acceptance of certain standards and policies for system access and operation, and sharedaccountability for achieving objectives. It is also important for representatives of the privatesector to remain actively involved in a long-term oversight body (as is the case now, to someextent, through the project Steering Committee).B5. Ineffectivecoordination withfederal agenciesMultiple federal agencies are active in Oregon and play a major role in GIS data developmentand use
Part 1: GIS Utility Risk Identification, which addresses project Deliverable 5A Part 2: Risk Mitigation and Risk Response Planning, which addresses project Deliverable 5B. NOTE: Part 1 (Deliverable 5A) was delivered on March 14, 2005. This report includes a finalized Deliverable 5A and th
1 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 GIS? 1.1.1 Components of a GIS 1.1.2 A Brief History of GIS 1.1.3 GIS Software Products Box 1.1 A List of GIS Software Producers and Their Main Products 1.2 GIS Applications Box 1.2 Google Maps, Microsoft Virtual Earth, and
Background –Chris Owen . 2004 - MACECOM 911 hires GIS to provide them road and addressing data 2005 / 2006 - new GIS Technicians and Analysts hired 2007 - GIS was moved from Public Works Road Fund and made an "Enterprise Fund" 2008 / 2009 - GIS Manager quits. GIS Manager position is not rehired.
tarikh tarikh . penghargaan . 2.4 kriteria penentuan lokasi rumah kos rendah bab 3.0 aplikasi gis dalam perancangan 3.1 pengenalan 3.2 gis dalam perancangan 3.3 gis untuk perumahan 3.4 peranan sistem maklumat gis 3.5 sejarah pembangunan gis 3.6 definisi gis 3.7 pangkalan data ii ill vi vi vi 1-1 1-1 1.2 1-3 1-4
MIT 11.188/11.520 Web Service Notes 1 Internet GIS and Geospatial Web Services Introduction Section 1 -- What is Internet GIS? Section 2 -- Internet GIS: state of practice Section 3 -- Future development of Internet GIS Section 4 -- Function comparisons of current Internet GIS programs Section 5 -- Internet GIS applications Section 6 – I
i. Definition of Utility Mapping. ii. History of Utility Mapping. iii. Objectives of Utility Survey & Mapping in Malaysia. iv. The scope of Utility Mapping in standard guidelines for underground utility mapping. v. The role of utility owner, surveyor and JUPEM in underground utility mapping. 1 UNDERSTAND THE UTILITY QUALITY LEVEL ATTRIBUTES i.
Understanding the basic concepts of GIS is a good start of the literature to allow the people who do not have an idea about GIS to know what GIS is. Internet is a very rich source of published papers, journals and technical reports to explore some published works about GIS applications in transportation analysis and planning (GIS-T). Also, the technologies used in this area such as using .
desktop GIS, remote sensing software and 3D visualization tools). Only summarized descriptions for the rest of open source GIS software have been provided due to the white paper page limits. 2.1 Basic desktop GIS Basic desktop GIS software can provide basic GIS functions, such as data input, map display
GIS Substation Design and Execution HV and EHV GIS application and design considerations Jean-Louis Habert Alstom Grid GIS product Line. 2014/04 - Houston - CED – GIS - 2 List of contents Session 1 – April 8th, 2014 zGIS
