The Geographic Support System Initiative

(GSS Initiative)

From R&D to Implementation

1

Leslie Godwin

ADC, Geographic Program Management

Geography Division

United States Census Bureau

For MAPPS; March 27, 2012

For the 2020 Census – The GSS Initiative

For the 2010 Census – conducted the MAF/TIGER Enhancement Program

For the 2000 Census – Introduced the Master Address File (MAF)

Census Geographic Support –

Major Initiatives Over Time

For the 1990 Census – Introduced TIGER

2

Why the GSS Initiative? • A logical next step, building upon:

• Accomplishments of the MAF/TIGER Enhancement

Program (MTEP)

• MAF/TIGER Accuracy Improvement Project (MTAIP)

• Improved positional accuracy of TIGER

• Contributions of our partners

• GIS files & imagery between 2003 to 2008 for MTAIP

• 2010 Local Update of Census Addresses (LUCA)

Program

• The recommendations of our stakeholder and oversight

communities

• Supports a targeted Address Canvassing in

preparation for the 2020 Census

3

Why the GSS Initiative?

• Stakeholder and oversight recommendations:

– The General Accountability Office, the Office of the Inspector General, and the National Academies of Science identified as issues:

• The lack of a comprehensive geographic update program between censuses

• Associated negative impact on ongoing programs such as the American Community Survey, other current surveys, and small areas estimates programs

4

Key Components

• An integrated program that utilizes

partnerships for:

– Improved address coverage

– Continual address and spatial feature updates

– Enhanced quality assessment and measurement

5

Address Updates

123 Testdata Road

Anytown, CA 94939

Lat 37 degrees, 9.6 minutes N

Lon 119 degrees, 45.1 minutes W

Street/Feature Updates

Quality Measurement

The Program Schedule – We are Working Toward

FY2011

Key decision

points

FY2012 FY2013 FY2014 FY2015 FY2016 FY2017 FY2018 FY2019 FY2020

Government (legal) boundary updates

Statistical boundary review and delineation

Street & other feature updates

Quality assessments

Develop: partner address list

receipt / processing systems

Develop: GPS capability

Procure GPS Receivers

Identify : Group

Quarters lists

Identify and Develop: Puerto Rico address update

capability (Establish MOA with USPS early 2014)

Develop: CAUS Puerto Rico

collection capabilty

Develop: new geocoding system

Identify: viable change detection techniques

Evaluate: Island Area addresses

Conduct

targeted AdCan

Update the MAF using partner address lists*

Update the MAF using Group Quarters lists*

Update the MAF using Puerto Rico lists*(Semi-annual Puerto Rico DSF Refresh)

?

?

CAUS GPS address listing of targeted blocks in Puerto Rico

(100 annually)*

Implement: new geocoding*

Add Island Area addresses to the MAF*

Implement: change detection technology*

?

?

?

? Targeted AdCan key decision point

Conduct annual BAS (40,000 governments)

Implement: statistical boundary review and delineation*Develop: statistical boundary review and delineation

systems* ?

Develop: partner feature receipt /

processing* Update TIGER using partner-supplied features*

GPS control point acquisition*

CAUS GPS feature collection in targeted blocks*

Address & feature source data and MAF / TIGER System quality assessment*

? * Subject to Annual Assessment

TIGER only feature quality assessment*

Improve MAF Coverage

20,000 blocks annually (GPS begins FY2014)* CAUS GPS address listing of targeted blocks*16,000 blocks annually (non - GPS) *

3/27/2012

Proposed Program

Existing

Expanded

Implementation

Research

Active Program

? Targeted AdCan

key decision point

6

The Vision

7

FY2011 = Research & Development Working Groups

8

Feature Coverage & Sources

Address Coverage & Sources

Quality, Assessments, &

Evaluations

MAF/TIGER Integration/Linkage

Project & Contract Management

Geocoding Research &

Development Partnerships

GPS Policy

Program Manager

“Managers” Group

GEO Division Chief

Steering Committee

Risk Review Board

Change Control Board

Technical Review Board

Beyond FY2011 = R&D Results WG Recommendations to the Steering Committee

9

Feature Coverage & Sources

Address Coverage & Sources

Quality, Assessments, &

Evaluations

MAF/TIGER Integration/Linkage

Geocoding Research &

Development Partnerships

GPS Policy

6 3 4

6 6

3 7

3

41 Submitted Recommendations

• The Steering Committee reviews and approves or rejects WG Recommendations

– The majority (too many for immediate implementation) have been approved

• Approved WG Recommendations are prioritized

– High (immediate implementation), medium, & low

– Recommendations are deemed high priority if they are determined to be essential to the 2015 targeted Address Canvassing decision, or

– Directly contribute to achieving the GSS Initiative goals, and

• Support the exchange of data and use of partnership files, or

• Provide standards, quantify/track quality

• Formation of Integrated Project Teams (IPTs)

– IPTs champion the immediate implementation of approved, high priority Recommendations

10

FY2012 = Implementation What are we doing with 41 WG Recommendations?

• Integrated Project Teams (IPTs) manage Recommendation implementation

• Identify resource needs

• If hardware and/or software development is required

– Determine Buy-or-Build

– Manage interface/integration with existing hardware/software

– Identify future maintenance needs

• Develop the project

– Schedule

– Dependencies

– Assumptions and Expectations

– Risk Register

– Communication Plan

– Architecture, Customer Requirements Document or Software Requirements Specification, as applicable

– Ensure adherence to Change Management

– Keep senior managers informed of progress/problems

11

FY2012 = Implementation Integrated Project Teams

FY2012 = Implementation Integrated Project Teams

12

iSIMPLE

Problem Capture Tool

Features Source Evaluation

Metadata Improvements

MTAG Preferred

Guidelines for Address data

The CATT

Quality Indicators Improving Group

Quarters data

To date, 9 IPTs formed

Program Manager

Curtis Dunson

FY2012 High Priority

Recommendations • Identify and resolve existing MAF/TIGER Database

(MTDB) data deficiencies

• Identify geographic areas requiring spatial updates or with “irregular” linear features in order to prioritize building partnerships and obtaining GIS files

• Resolve “ungeocoded” addresses

• Identify high level indicators for assessing MTDB quality

• Improve spatial feature metadata

• Provide a method of producing, recording, and reporting quality rankings for geographic areas continuously over time as updates occur (longitudinal analysis)

13

FY2012 = Contracting For GPS Point Collection

14

• Last decade Geography Division contracted for the

collection of 110 GPS points per county to determine

the positional accuracy of proposed source data for

MTDB feature realignment – Points were randomly selected MTDB road intersections

• This decade, Geography Division once again will

contract for GPS points – 800 counties still lack GPS points

– Some collections were in “multi-county” area; plan to fill in these

areas

– Control points will be used to prove in the positional accuracy of

imagery, which will then be used to validate feature updates (new

intersections) being added to the MTDB

FY2012 = Continued Market Research For Geospatial Information Sharing

15

• The Census Bureau issued an RFI for a

collaborative partnership activity focused on

geospatial information sharing

• The GSS Initiative proposes continual feature

updates via intake of data; the RFI is a proof of

concept

• We will be working with the 3 companies that

responded to the RFI with viable proposals

FY2012 = Implementation Continued Input from Outside Experts

16

• 4 Outside Experts – Stephen Guptill, Ph.D. (US Geological Survey, Retired)

– David Cowen, Ph.D. (Professor Emeritus, University of South Carolina)

– Michael Dobson, Ph.D. (Chief Cartographer Rand McNally & Co, Retired; TeleMapics, LLC, President)

– John Jensen, Ph.D. (Professor, University of South Carolina)

• 2 Reports – Change Detection

• An review of the Geography Division’s in-house change detection capability (for features reliance on USDA National Agriculture Imagery Program orthoimagery) and investigation of other potential sources of remote sensor data, more automated methods of extracting accurate change information, and whether the change detection should be performed in-house, by outside contractors, or a hybrid approach. Report + recommendations deliverable August, 2012

– Master Address File (MAF) Evaluation

• A description and analysis of the content that comprises the MAF, an analysis of how useful the data in the MAF have been in creating viable address products, and potential methods for improving the MAF. Report + recommendations deliverable August, 2012

FY2012 = Implementation Partnerships – Address Pilots

17

• Geography Division hosted an “Address Summit”

– in September 2011

• Results include Address Pilot Projects

– Federal/State/Tribal/Local Address Management Coordination

• To create a formalized model to allow for the development, maintenance, and bi-directional (state-local-tribal and state-federal) sharing of high quality, multiple use, address data

– Data Sharing – Local/State/USPS/Census

• Create a model that will allow for address data sharing between local governments, state governments, the USPS, and the Census Bureau

– Address Authority Outreach and Support for Data Sharing Efforts

• To research and develop an approach for identifying and creating an inventory of address authorities which facilitates the continual update of address data sharing activities, and provides guidance on overcoming barriers (legal/policy) at the local level

– FGDC Address Standards and Implementation

• To educate local authorities on the benefits, use, and implementation of the Federal Geographic Data Committee’s United States Thoroughfare, Landmark, and Postal Address Data Standard (FGDC Address Standard)

– Hidden/Hard to Capture Address Pilot

• To educate local authorities on the benefits, use, and implementation of the Federal Geographic Data Committee’s United States Thoroughfare, Landmark, and Postal Address Data Standard (FGDC Address Standard)

18

FY2012 = Implementation Other Activities

19

• TIGERweb – a publically available service

– TIGERweb Viewer is a new web-based tool that allows users to visualize

Census geography • The geographic data includes legal and statistical geography as well as the roads, railroads,

and water layers in the TIGER database.

• Contains the 2010 Census population and housing unit counts for the various geographic

entities

– The TIGERweb Viewer is built

on ArcGIS Template Viewer

2.2 using Microsoft Silverlight.

– Users can access the “how to”

video on the introductory web

page

http://tigerweb.geo.census.gov

FY2012 = Implementation Other Activities

20

• On the (Near? Far?) Horizon

– We are investigating improved conflation (overcoming the difficulties

of ingesting data to a topological database) – internal development

coupled with the user of vendor technology?

– WG Recommendations for

• Developing a secure, web-based data exchange system

• Utilizing Crowd Sourcing as one TIGER update avenue

• A methodology for receiving Volunteered Geographic Information (VGI)

FY2012 and Beyond Future, Continued Funding?

21

• The GSS Initiative is funded as part of Geographic Support

• The GSS Initiative is a 10-year life cycle program

• Though “preparatory” work begin in FY2011, actual funding

began in FY2012

• There is an FY2013 funding reduction proposal that impact

the GSS Initiative