United States	IRM Steering
Environmental Protection	Committee	June 1992
Agency
Geographic Initiatives Subcommittee on Data Integration
*>EPA
Framework for
Data Integration
in Geographic
Initiatives
Executive Summary

-------
Framework for
Data Integration in
Geographic Initiatives
Executive Summary
Geographic Initiatives Subcommittee on Data Integration
United States Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, SW
Washington, DC 20460

-------
Executive Summary
Introduction Information is a critical ingredient for success.
The quality of any organization's leadership and decisions rests on the
quality of the facts behind them. It is time for EPA actions to be
grounded in the facts. It is time to establish data integration capabilities
promoting solutions which reduce environmental risks in designated
geographic areas.
Today EPA is establishing approaches to meet the challenges of the
1990s that will shape the next millennium. The American public is
now aware of dynamic ecosystem conditions, such as acid rain,
stratospheric ozone depletion, global warming, and deforestation, that
until recently were mainly of concern to scientists. This new
appreciation of the environment is creating an unprecedented demand
for information. Much of this information is new for EPA, and many
of its uses are new.
Our challenge is to apply the wisdom gained from past efforts—some
successful and others not—to define a multi-media approach to
environmental protection for EPA's future. We must improve our
ability to analyze environmental problems not solely from an air,
water, or land perspective, but from a holistic, cross-media perspective
that accounts for the interdependencies within an ecosystem.
We have an opportunity, grounded in our broad environmental agenda
for the 1990s and a population sensitive to environmental issues, to
restructure the Agency's data and analytical capabilities to integrate
single-media information. EPA's geographic initiatives are excellent
mechanisms for seizing the opportunity to change the way EPA does
business. Refinements in how data are managed and integrated can be
prototyped within geographic initiatives. Successes can then be trans-
ferred so others may learn from them and expand their use.
Purpose	In June 1991, EPA's IRM Steering Committee responded to a request
from the Deputy Administrator to define the role of data integration in
achieving the Agency's four primary goals:
•	Provide leadership in the nation's environmental science, research,
and assessment efforts
•	Make sound regulatory and program decisions
Page 1 Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
Executive Summary
•	Effectively carry out EPA's programs and policies
•	Improve the global environment.
Three subcommittees reporting to the IRM Steering Committee were
created to assess the Agency's needs and to recommend priority
actions for improving the integration of geographic, program, and
scientific data.
The Geographic Initiatives Subcommittee on Data Integration was co-
chaired by Joseph R. Franzmathes, then Assistant Regional
Administrator for Policy and Management in Region 4, and Alvin P.
Pesachowitz, Director of the Office of Information Resources
Management (OIRM). The subcommittee was composed of active
members who participated in meetings, videoconferences, and
interviews as well as contributors who reviewed and commented on
the subcommittee's work. Members were selected for their hands-on
experience with geographic-based programs. Active subcommittee
members included Jack Sweeney of Region 4; Steve Schilling of
OIRM; Chuck Spooner of the Chesapeake Bay Program; Pranas
Pranckevicius of the Great Lakes Program; Bryon Griffith representing
the Gulf of Mexico Program; Mike MacDougall and Greg Charest of
Region 1; Bob Messina and Alice Jennick of Region 2; Lynn Kring of
Region 7; Bill Gillespie of Region 8; Dave Henderson of Region 9;
Ben Eusebio of Region 10; Tommy DeWald representing OIRM's
National GIS Program; Steve Young then of the Office of Toxic
Substances (OTS); Jeff Byron and Barbara Lamborne of OIRM; and
Dan Valero of the Office of Research and Development (ORD)
representing the Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
(EMAP).
In addition, the subcommittee's work was supported by reviewers who
had the opportunity to comment on the subcommittee's working papers
and reports. These contributors include Bruce Baker of the State of
Wisconsin; Jim Setser of the State of Georgia; Dave Davis of the
Office of Water (OW); Dorian Reines and Bill Hathaway of Region 6;
Dave Rejeski of the Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation
(OPPE); Nick Morgan of the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency
Response (OSWER); Jean Sammon of OIRM; Doug Lipka of the Gulf
of Mexico Program; and Chris Grundler of the Great Lakes Program.
The subcommittee reviewed several examples of geographic-based
approaches to integrating information. They then developed a frame-
work for recommending actions to improve geographic-based
decision-making capabilities throughout the Agency. This report
summarizes the findings and recommendations of the subcommittee.
Page 2
Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
•xecutive Summary
There is an increasingly geographic perspective in how the Agency
addresses its mission. Environmental managers are recognizing that
geographic-based programs generate clients and constituencies. These
customers demand improved services. They actively monitor how well
the Agency meets its promises to reduce risks and improve the quality
of their community, their lake, or their backyard. They also actively
monitor the equity of decisions which affect their daily lives, from
plant closings to transportation costs to bottle deposits. Information is
the common currency in geographic initiatives for communicating
what EPA and other responsible agents need to do. It is also the
common currency for demonstrating progress and accounting for the
public's investments in environmental programs.
The IRM Steering Committee defined "data integration" (as shown in
Exhibit 1, below) as a common framework for discussion. The IRM
Steering Committee's definition emphasizes the results of data
integration. The measure of success is straightforward. Data
integration is successful if the quality of the environment is better
understood. This means that the information has to be delivered and
the information has to be analyzed in ways that raise and address better
questions. Better questions depend upon the ability to bring together
all relevant information in a way that gives new perspective and
insight. Good examples are the use of maps and graphics to illustrate
associations and statistical relationships. The Geographic Initiatives
Subcommittee found that this requires the ability to integrate data both
within and across media for any geographic area of concern.
Furthermore, it requires integration of more strictly "environmental"
data with other information that indicates relationships and risks, such
as land use, human demographics, and habitat characteristics.
Exhibit 1
Definition of Data Integration
"Meeting the needs and expectations of
multi-program users to be able to access
and use data from all necessary sources
for improving
our environmental decisions."
Page 3
Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
Executive Summary
Vision	The subcommittee's vision for integrating data for geographic
initiatives is presented in Exhibit 2. The vision statement serves as a
set of criteria against which the success of data integration can be
measured.
Exhibit 2
Five-Year Vision of
Geographic Data Integration
Over the next five years, EPA will establish a
data integration program for geographic initiatives
that enables improved environmental decision
making by:
•	Providing supporting technology and
infrastructure so that environmental
professionals can identify, access at their
desktop, and use information from all
sources;
•	Presenting all environmental observations
and interactions data with auditable and
verifiable confidence; and
•	Empowering environmental managers and
the public to view environmental
relationships spatially as a foundation for
improved risk assessment.
During these five years, this process will
motivate continuing improvements in data
stewardship and create additional catalysts for
data integration.
An examination of the vision statement reveals the importance of three
capabilities: the ability to create data in a standardized way, the ability
to identify and access data efficiently, and the ability to analyze data
spatially. These three capabilities are critical to achieving data
integration and enhancing environmental decision making.
Page 4 Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
The Geographic Initiatives Subcommittee defined several priorities
based on their findings which are highlighted in the next section:
•	Achievement of the strategic themes enumerated in the Admin-
istrator's Strategic Plan for the 1990s depends on the use of—and
hinges on the capability to integrate—data not only from all EPA
data repositories but also from outside sources, such as the States
and other governmental partners, the research community, and
international organizations.
•	Therefore, a key data integration activity for EPA is to ensure
linkages exist among Agency data bases, created from the presence
of complete, accurate, common information among the data bases,
such as location identification data specified in the Locational Data
Policy.
•	Every EPA manager of media programs and environmental
initiatives has the responsibility, as members of a larger enterprise,
to ensure the presence of these data in all their data bases and to
institute whatever procedures are necessary to fulfill this require-
ment.
•	Creativity and cooperation will be required from all managers in
the face of steady-state or even reduced budgets.
•	EPA's geographic initiatives should be used as a proving ground
for data integration improvements. Successful prototypes that
demonstrate their value to the Agency can be transferred to other
programs or improved with further investments.
•	The approaches implemented to ensure data integration should be
considered investments in a long-term process, transcending
Agency changes, with all interim activities directed toward meeting
the long-term objectives.
•	The Administrator should direct necessary resources to his
Assistant and Regional Administrators to enable:
-	Media and initiative program managers to collect and manage
data for geographic-based environmental analysis
-	OIRM to provide the leadership necessary for Agency-wide
coordination of all activities pursuant to Agency-wide data
integration.
•	The Administrator should consider forming a Quality Action Team
(QAT) to oversee effective implementation of data integration
recommendations. The QAT could be composed of Deputy Assis-
tant Administrators (DAAs) and Deputy Regional Administrators
(DRAs) or could be formed under the IRM Steering Committee.
Page 5 Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
Executive Summary
Lastly, it is clear to subcommittee members that partnerships must be
forged in this venture, ensuring that all members of the enterprise are
working toward the goal of data integration. Neither OIRM nor EPA as
a whole has the capacity to do the job alone.
The subcommittee concludes that action is required in five areas of
improvement:
•	Leadership to sustain direction and investments toward accom-
plishing the vision for EPA's data integration program
•	Discipline in creating data conforming to Agency standards and
formats which are designed to promote integration
•	Adherence to Agency standards and formats through a Data
Administration Program
•	Access to all needed data sources, within and outside the Agency
•	Analysis techniques supporting geographic-based environmental
management at the desktop.
These conclusions are based on assessment of data integration efforts
already underway in the Agency and a survey of EPA managers
responsible for geographic initiatives. The survey solicited input on
the lessons learned in building current data integration capabilities,
assessment of obstacles, and recommendations of priority actions to
overcome these barriers.
Findings
Current
Initiatives
Not surprisingly, EPA has demonstrated experience in integrating data,
and much of this experience is centered around geographic initiatives,
such as the Puget Sound and the Chesapeake Bay Programs. The
Agency's existing data integration capabilities are not, however,
limited to these initiatives. It is also no surprise that the subcommittee
identified many obstacles, based on this experience, which inhibit the
achievement of their vision of data integration. The subcommittee's
findings are summarized below.
Today's data management environment reflects EPA's shift from a
regulatory to a risk reduction and ecosystem approach. This new
approach to doing business is exemplified by the numerous national
and regional geographic initiatives summarized in Exhibit 3. These
initiatives serve as proving grounds for testing the usefulness and
practicality of various approaches.
Page 6 Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
Executive Summary
Exhibit 3
EPA GEOGRAPHIC INITIATIVES
Regional Geographic Initiatives:
Region 1, Boston
Merrimack River
Chesepocott (Connecticut) Multi-Media
Enforcement Targeting
Blackstone River (Massachusetts)
Casco Bay
Gulf of Maine
Narragansett Bay
Connecticut River Valley
Region 2, New York
Long Island Component of the Coastal
Water Initiative
Caribbean Distinctive Habits Module of
the Caribbean Water Initiative
Niagara River Frontier
Cortland-Homer-Preble County Aquifer
Arthur Kill Project
Region 3, Philadelphia
Baltimore/Washington Urban Initiative
Pesticides in Groundwater Strategy
Region 4, Atlanta
South Florida
Region 5, Chicago
Geographic Enforcement (NW Indiana,
SE Michigan)
Lead Education and Abatement Project
Region 6, Dallas
U.S./Mexico Border
Region 7, Kansas City
Central Flyways
Region 8, Denver
Sand Creek
Region 9, San Francisco
San Francisco Bay - Delta Estuary
Region 10, Seattle
Puget Sound
Interstate Groundwater Assessment
for Wellhead Protection
Ecosystem Initiatives:

Chesapeake Bay Program
Great Lakes Program
Gulf of Mexico Program
Page 7 Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
Executive Summary
In addition to geographic initiatives, EPA has made substantial
investments in other national data integration initiatives. These data
integration approaches are briefly described here to provide per-
spective on the status of ongoing efforts that may merit expansion and
emphasis.
•	Gateway! Envirofacts—The Gateway/Envirofacts program is de-
signed to enhance the availability and utilization of environmental
information. The program sets out to accomplish this goal by
extracting frequently used data sets from multiple program systems
and providing access through a single, easy-to-use interface.
•	IDEA—Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA)
integrates compliance and enforcement data from numerous data
systems, including the AIRS Facility Subsystem (AFS), the
CERCLA Information System (CERCLIS), and the Facility INDex
System (FINDS). IDEA is used primarily as an analytical tool for
enforcement screening and targeting, but also supports geographic
analysis.
•	EMAP—The Environmental Monitoring and Assessment Program
(EMAP) is a comprehensive, multi-agency, multi-disciplinary
program that represents a long-term commitment to periodically
document the condition of the nation's ecological resources, to
identify emerging problems before they become widespread and
irreversible, and to have rapid response capabilities to collect data
for decision-making. EMAP's goal is to monitor the status of, and
trends in, seven representative ecosystems—estuaries, forests,
inland surface waters, wetlands, arid lands, agro-ecosystems, and
the Great Lakes—that are at risk from multiple environmental
stresses.
•	Center for Environmental Statistics—The Center for Environ-
mental Statistics (CES) will serve as a national and international
focal point for statistical data on the environment, provide support
to Headquarters and regional staffs in designing statistical studies,
and report national and regional environmental conditions and
trends. CES' mission is to provide information to assess the status
of the national environment and to evaluate the results of
environmental improvement programs. CES also provides a focal
point for communicating environmental information to the public
for use in informed decision-making and for planning the nation's
environmental future.
Capabilities	Data integration has played an integral role in EPA's geographic
initiatives. Many different types of data integration capabilities have
been developed nationally and regionally. These existing capabilities
have supported EPA's efforts to monitor, evaluate, and improve
environmental quality:
Page 8 Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
Executive Summary
•	Geographic Information Systems—A geographic information
system (GIS) is a tool which presents data spatially. The
development of GIS applications for geographic areas helps to
emphasize the importance and impacts of each media's decision on
other program issues or the overall physical environmental
ecosystem. This cross-media interdependence brings previously
isolated decisions into the appropriate global, statewide, or regional
impact perspective. Under guidance from EPA'S National GIS
Program, managed by OIRM, all of EPA's Program and Regional
Offices have applied this new technology.
•	Data Bases and Models for Analysis—Analytical systems and/or
data bases are computerized information tools which allow easy
analysis of, and access to, environmental data (source, ambient,
and ancillary information). These capabilities are established to
ensure that data are identified, stored, and managed to facilitate in
geographic-based analyses. For example, the Chesapeake Bay Stats
and the Puget Sound Multi-Media data bases are enhancements
based on information from EPA's national media systems (i.e.,
STORET, AIRS, RCRIS, and PCS).
•	Access Systems—Data integration access systems are the means by
which multi- program users, and often the public, are able to access
and use data from all necessary sources for improving our
environmental decisions. An example of such a system is the
Chesapeake Bay CHESSEE system, which provides general
information on the progress of the program.
•	Research and Development Projects—The Agency's geographic
initiatives are involved in a variety of research and development
activities which support efforts to monitor, evaluate, and improve
the environmental quality of the nation's ecosystems. For example,
the Great Lakes CASTNET (Clean Air Status and Trends Network)
is a program established to fill in gaps in monitoring created by the
Clean Air Act amendments.
•	Information Resources Directories—An information resources
directory is a document management and text retrieval system
which provides information about available data bases, libraries,
contacts, key documents, etc. An IRD is under development by the
Great Lakes Program.
Obstacles	Based on experience with current data integration projects, EPA
managers have identified obstacles which inhibit achievement of their
vision of data integration. These obstacles fall into the categories of
management, data, and technology. The challenges faced by manage-
ment include:
Page 9 Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
Executive Summary
•	Data are most often collected to satisfy a single application, and
there is a lack of leadership and motivation from senior manage-
ment to prepare those data for additional uses.
•	There is a lack of institutional knowledge in conducting spatial
analyses, due to a high turnover in staff with relevant expertise.
•	Data processes, such as acquisition and conversion, are time-
consuming and expensive. These processes are often circumvented
because of the day-to-day pressures to acquire and display data
quickly. As a result, confidence in the outcome of the analyses is
reduced and secondary use of the data for reasons not anticipated at
the time may not be possible.
•	There is a widespread lack of awareness of the existence of
geographically-based information resources.
•	Many analysts are comfortable with dated analytical techniques or
are unable to invest the time to be trained in newer techniques.
•	Many data custodians are reluctant to allow access to their
information resources. They continue to view information as
power, not as a shared resource.
Several obstacles to integration were attributed to difficulties with
obtaining and utilizing appropriate data:
•	There still remains a high degree of non-conformance to EPA data
management practices, particularly to data standards. Many data
systems do not even have the capability to house required data
elements. There is also variability in the labeling and/or definition
of data elements.
•	Digitized spatial data are often unavailable or inaccessible to EPA
users.
•	Unavailable or inconsistent documentation of data quality results in
a high degree of uncertainty in the conclusions that are drawn from
analyses based on this data.
•	The absence of data formatting and transfer standards results in
incompatible EPA data and no basis for acquisition of compatible
data from sources outside EPA.
Current technological problems also prevent EPA from achieving data
integration, as defined in the vision statement:
•	Rapid technological changes cause incompatibilities in data
collected by different methods or analyzed using different tech-
niques (e.g., remote sensing and continuous emissions monitoring).
It also results in an absence of industry or Federal standards to
Page 10 Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
Executive Summary
ensure compatibility of data and management caution in deter-
mining the appropriate methods and technologies to embrace.
•	Telecommunication networks are not prepared to carry the
volumes and types of data needed for risk reduction and ecosystem
assessment to the desktops of EPA, other Federal and State, as well
as other partners in geographic-based programs. Other problems
include lack of communications links, storage problems, and
incompatible equipment.
•	Expertise is needed to take advantage of recent innovations in
desktop technologies, incorporating these tools into day-to-day
analysis and decision making.
Each of the management, data, and technology obstacles inhibit the
ability to perform the activities key to data integration, but once
identified, form the basis for the subcommittee's recommendations.
Recommendations
The Geographic Initiatives Subcommittee recommends the following
34 improvements to bring existing capabilities closer to the sub-
committee's vision of data integration for geographic initiatives.
These recommendations are organized by five priority action areas:
•	Leadership
•	Data Creation
•	Data Administration
•	Access
•	Analysis.
The relative priority and timeframe for action is indicated for each
recommendation.
EPA leadership is essential for the implementation of these recommen-
dations and resulting improvements in data integration capabilities.
EPA's leadership role should reflect its position as one of the most
significant consumers of environmental information from all sources.
This leadership role should also enable EPA's partners—particularly
the States—to use information as their common currency in working
together to achieve the ecosystem goals of geographic-based environ-
mental programs.
Page 11 Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
Executive Summary
Recommendations for Data Integration:
Leadership
Near-Term Recommendations:
1.	Invest OIRM with authority to create an effective data integration program with
possible implementation through a proposed Quality Action Team (QAT)—The
Administrator should give OIRM the authority to lead data integration efforts that guide
implementation by senior program managers in Headquarters and the field. [High]
2.	Demonstrate top management commitment in planning and resource allocation—This
includes addressing needs in the budget and planning processes and providing the
necessary time and support personnel. [High]
3.	Dedicate adequate resources to data integration—EPA must establish an infrastructure
for conducting data integration activities with resources from all program and
administrative offices. [High]
4.	Direct data integration efforts towards support of the Agency's strategic goals—
Meeting EPA's and States' strategic goals should be the motivation for geographically
integrating data for decision making. [High]
Long-Term Recommendations:
5.	Establish a data stewardship policy—Such a policy will make data integration the
responsibility of each individual program. [High]
6.	Develop a work force of skilled staff—Personnel management practices must be revised
to attract, train, and retain staff with the appropriate technical background. [High]
7.	Plan for and phase all activities to promote geographic data integration—
Achievement of geographic data integration is best accomplished in carefully planned
(including an analysis and comparison of options) and implemented stages to minimize
disruption and maximize resource effectiveness. [High]
8.	Build State capabilities—Programs with regulatory authority must provide leadership,
resources, and guidance to their State partners to promote and foster data integration
efforts and build capabilities within the States that EPA could also benefit from.
[Medium]
9.	Have EPA play a strong national data integration role—EPA must assume an active
role in the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and the National Institute of
Standards and Technology (NIST) to coordinate data collection and assessment.
[Medium]
10.	Develop inter-agency Memoranda of Understanding for data integration—MOUs with
other Federal agencies are necessary to routinely obtain non-EPA data and to have other
agencies adopt EPA's data management practices. [Medium]
Page 12 Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
Executive Summary'
Recommendations for Data Integration:
Data Creation
Near-Term Recommendations:
11.	Continue and strengthen the Data Standards Program—EPA must renew efforts to
develop and implement spatial format and transfer standards to support spatial
environmental analysis. [High]
12.	Expedite enhancements to FINDS—EPA must enhance the Facility INDex System
(FINDS) to support data integration by performing address matching to obtain a
general latitude/longitude for each facility and capturing and storing routinely
latitude/longitudes for each facility in the alias record. The proposed QAT may
enhance implementation. [High]
13.	Coordinate development oflocational data collection capabilities—EPA must build
systematically the capability to collect locational data by providing the means to obtain
equipment (e.g., global positioning systems) necessary to collect locational data and by
providing training for using the equipment and other relevant techniques (e.g., map
interpolation). [High/Medium]
Long-Term Recommendations:
14.	Develop metadata definitions and use protocols—All programs must institute the
maintenance of "metadata" (data describing the characteristics of each data set) to be
maintained in a central reference directory and be a part of every data collection to
promote the secondary use of the data. [High]
15.	Include data quality documentation in all major data collections—OIRM must
establish a requirement to include data quality descriptors with all data sets to ensure
that conclusions are made with known degrees of certainty from analysis performed by
merging data from different sources. Also, establish procedures for use of data with
undocumented quality. [High]
16.	Implement data acquisition programs—OIRM must be enabled to purchase cost-
effectively the major data sets (e.g., digitized maps and census data) of relevance to all
participants in geographic-based environmental programs and to serve as the single
source of agreements with non-EPA data producers (e.g., other Federal agencies) for
routine sharing of information resources. [Medium]
Page 13 Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
Executive Summary
Recommendations for Data Integration:
Data Administration
Near-Term Recommendations:
17.	Manage information repositories—EPA must establish a program to assume custodial
responsibility for repositories of environmental data acquired from other organizations
(e.g., States, academia) necessary to measure progress against strategic ecosystem
improvement goals, including assurance of the presence of common environmental
and reference data. [High]
18.	Maintain documentation for data management—Documentation must be maintained
for each data collection on the exact method and type of data acquired, so that its
sources can be identified and updates can be performed on the same data. [High]
19.	Prioritize data collections for integration—EPA must target certain data as highest
priority for integration, based on the value of those data for inter-program activities
(e.g., geographic initiatives, multi-media enforcement). [High]
20.	Coordinate EMAP and geographic initiatives— An approach for optimizing EMAP's
statistical and spatial analysis capabilities must be developed and implemented by
linking Tier 1 and 2 (national- and ecosystem-level) EMAP data to Tier 3 and 4 (area-
and site-level) data of geographic initiatives. [Medium]
21.	Develop procedures for ensuring security and disaster recovery—EPA must develop
procedures to protect irreplaceable data resources and ensure their integrity. [Low]
Long-Term Recommendations:
22.	Maintain a comprehensive inventory of data resources—EPA must create a central
inventory which identifies Federal, State and local-level geographically-based data
sources. Requires metadata, as described in recommendation #15. [Medium/High]
23.	Use standard system engineering methodologies in all system development efforts—A
standardized information systems development process must be continued Agency-
wide to ensure compatibility in all new and redesigned systems. [Medium]
24.	Convert to relational database management systems—A new, relational approach to
information management must be used by all programs to facilitate simpler access to
and manipulation of data. [Medium]
25.	Establish internal and external networks—The capabilities, activities, and resources of
the Regional GIS Work Group and other formal staff networks must be promoted to
take advantage of available expertise and to share progress. OIRM must develop and
implement a strategy to ensure effective communication and coordination among these
networks. [Medium]
Page 14 Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
Executive Summary'
Recommendations for Data Integration:
Access
Near-Term Recommendations:
26.	Expand! increase support for ongoing data access projects—Several ongoing projects,
including the Gateway/Envirofacts, must be expanded for wide-scale implementation
to ensure that current investments are optimized. [High]
27.	Standardize access capabilities (logical/physical)—A process for data access must be
established that streamlines the current, cumbersome process, including a common
user access procedure and activity records for secondary data sets. [Medium/High]
28.	Enhance public access capabilities—EPA must develop protocols and procedures for
public access to its data, ensuring that data are not inappropriately summarized or
modified when distributed to the public, that complete contextual data are provided for
all data that are released, and access is impeded to sensitive or confidential data
collections. [Medium]
Page 15 Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------
Executive Summary
Recommendations for Data Integration:
Analysis
Near-Term Recommendations:
29.	Support GIS application development efforts—EPA must provide desk-top access to
GIS analytical capabilities in standard, easy-to-use formats, to promote greater use of
its information resources. EPA must also continue to expand the scope of GIS
applications to assess whole ecosystems and large geographic regions. To accomplish
this, the responsibilities of, and support for, EPA's National GIS Program, managed by
OIRM, must be expanded. [High]
30.	Provide additional support for and commitment to geographic initiatives—Resources
and commitment must be devoted to ensure that there is national coordination and
support from senior levels of management for geographic initiatives such as the
Chesapeake Bay Program. [High]
Long-Term Recommendations:
31.	Establish a repository of analytical tools—A centralized inventory and repository of
tools for geographic analysis should be provided and maintained by EPA to ensure a
return on investment. [High]
32.	Standardize analyses—Models and other tools for integrating and analyzing geo-
graphic data must be standardized to demonstrate the value of integrated geographic
analysis and to ensure that repeated or similar analyses are comparable. [High]
33.	Expand descriptive and predictive modeling development efforts—EPA must enable
use of advanced models for environmental analysis of complex ecosystems and
provide access to the Bay City high performance computing center. [Medium]
34.	Create program and administrative tracking linkages—Connectivity must be
established between the program data resources, containing environmental and
regulatory data, and the administrative tracking systems, containing activity,
milestones, and expenditure data, to assess effectiveness of resource use and target
future activities. [Low]
Page 16 Framework for Data Integration in Geographic Initiatives

-------