MetroGIS Logo: A Common Ground. MetroGIS Logo: Sharing Information Across Boundaries.
   Serving the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area Home   |   Search   |   Contact Us    
 
What is MetroGIS? 
Deliverables & Outcomes 
Business Planning 
What's New 
Major Accomplishments 
Annual Reports 
Affiliations 
Awards 
Grants 
History 

Overview 
Short Quotes 
Testimonials 
Studies 
Performance Measurement 

Looking for GIS Data? 
Looking for GIS Applications? 
About DataFinder 
Info Needs and Datasets 
About Info Needs 
Standards/Best Practices 
Web Map Services 

Meeting Calendar 
Policy Board 
Coordinating Committee 
Technical Advisory Team 
Special Purpose Workgroups 
Organizational Structure 
Operating Guidelines 
Dissolved Teams 

Presentations 
Major Reports 
Articles & Publications 

 

Common Information Needs

Jurisdictional Boundaries


Overview of MetroGIS's Jurisdictional Boundaries Information Need top of page

The information need Jurisdictional Boundaries was defined as one of the original thirteen priority common information needs of the MetroGIS community. Click here to view the Jurisdictional Boundaries Business Object Framing Model Fragment.

A Jurisdictional Boundaries Peer Review Forum was held on June 2, 1997. The group concluded that "jurisdictional boundaries" means the boundaries of local government entities that possess taxing authority: cities, counties, school and watershed districts. The participants also identified generalized desired data specifications for each of these entities. Refer to the Forum summary (Turnaround Document) for more information about the participants, process and conclusions.

Subsequently, Washington County agreed, as one of its projects funded through its GIS Data and Cost Sharing Agreement, to: a) refine the general data specifications through a pilot project; b) identify roles and responsibilities necessary to build and maintain the primary source data and to assemble the primary source data into regional datasets, and c) identify organizations with the business need and appropriate expertise to serve as the primary producers and regional custodians.


Datasets that meet the Jurisdictional Boundaries Information Need top of page
  • County/MCD Boundaries
  • School District Boundaries (work in progress)
    • Status: In November 2000, Washington County completed a pilot study for MetroGIS that recommended guidelines for counties' primary data capture of school district boundaries, aggregation to a regional dataset, custodial roles and responsibilities and candidate custodians. These recommendations were accepted by the Policy Advisory Team (PAT) on February 14, 2001. The PAT subsequently created a subcommittee to explore the recommendation that MetroGIS rely upon the Minnesota Department of Education (DoE) to serve as the regional custodian. The committee concluded that it should postpone contacting DoE until a pending DoE-related project utilizing the services of LMIC was well in hand. The related project involved mapping school district attendance areas throughout the state. Contacting DoE to investigate the proposed regional custodian role is an activity identified in the Coordinating Committee's 2004 workplan.
  • Watershed District Boundaries (work in progress)
    • Status: Preliminary work has been initiated by Washington County on development of data specifications for a regional watershed boundaries solution. The County's work with the Washington County Water Consortium is proposed to serve a s a pilot for a possible MetroGIS endorsed solution for the entire region. A report from Washington County on the findings of the pilot study is expected by fall 2004.

Background on MetroGIS's "Information Needs" Concept top of page

A central part of MetroGIS's work is to identify common information needs of GIS users in the Minneapolis/St. Paul Metropolitan Area and facilitate the policy and data specifications needed to address each of these common information needs.

An investigation to understand these common needs was conducted by MetroGIS from September 1996 to March 1997. The result of this study was the identification of thirteen priority common information needs of the MetroGIS community. Since that time, a priority function of MetroGIS has been to facilitate the development and/or assembly of regional datasets needed to address each of these common information needs.

Each information need is addressed through a replicable process. In general, the process begins by assembling a team of content experts and through a facilitated group process (Peer Review Forum), the team begins with the business object framing model fragment to identify dataset(s) required to meet the information need. In some cases, this process takes place in a forum of content experts and in other cases it is not such a formalized process because the dataset(s) that meet the information need are intuitively recognized.

Once the dataset(s) required to meet an information need is identified, a working group of content experts is created to:

  1. Refine the desired specifications identified at the Peer Review Forum,
  2. Identify desired data standards and guidelines,
  3. Identify desired roles and responsibilities for the custodian organization(s) - organizations responsible for data creation, maintenance, documentation, and distribution; and,
  4. Identify candidate custodial organizations that have a business need and appropriate expertise to carry out the desired roles and responsibilities.

The process is complete when the Policy Board has adopted, as policy for the MetroGIS community, parameters defined through the stated tasks. The parameters are posted on a Web page for each “MetroGIS endorsed regional dataset”. Once an endorsed dataset is operational, MetroGIS monitors user satisfaction to continually enhance it.

To learn more, please see the About Information Needs page and the pages for each endorsed regional dataset.

   
   Page last updated on June 10, 2005. Home   |   Search   |   Contact Us