Data.gov: Evolving Data.gov With You

• Data.GOV
• Chief Information Officers Council

Chuck Georgo

Member since 3 years ago

Badges

• Newbie

0 ideas posted

0 comments 0 votes

1 points View the Leaderboard

First name:

Chuck

Last name:

Georgo

Username:

chuckgeorgo

Chuck Georgo is a member of:

• Evolving Data.gov with You

Activity Stream

Ideas contributed by Chuck Georgo

• I agree

  9 votes

  I disagree
  This idea is active.
  Solution Architecture »

  Data.gov Dashboard - Use FEA BRM/SRM to model dashboard measures

  I would like to recommend that the Data.gov dashboard be developed (aligned) with the Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Business Reference Model (BRM) and Service Component Reference Model (SRM). The BRM provides a view of the federal government’s core lines of business (the products and services it delivers to its citizens, the private sector, and other government agencies), and the SRM classifies the internal ...more »

  I would like to recommend that the Data.gov dashboard be developed (aligned) with the Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) Business Reference Model (BRM) and Service Component Reference Model (SRM).

  The BRM provides a view of the federal government’s core lines of business (the products and services it delivers to its citizens, the private sector, and other government agencies), and the SRM classifies the internal activities (service components) that support delivery of the BRM business functions.

  Together the BRM and SRM can provide an excellent framework to develop the Data.gov dashboard. This will provide the means to measure the "products and services" or (OUTPUTS in GPRA vernacular) delivered by Federal agencies and the internal "services" (ACTIVITIES in GPRA vernacular) that agencies undertake to deliver those products and services.

  « less full details »

  2 comments for Idea: Data.gov Dashboard - Use FEA BRM/SRM to model dashboard measures

  Submitted by Chuck Georgo 3 years ago

• I agree

  14 votes

  I disagree
  This idea is active.
  Strategic Intent »

  Measuring success of Data.gov - a suggested (simple) framework

  The OMB Open Government Directive published on December 8, 2009 includes what are (in my opinion) some undefined terms and very unrealistic expectations and deadlines for federal agency compliance with the directive. It also did not include any method for assessing progress towards the spirit and intent of the stated objectives. I would like to offer a simple framework that the Data.gov effort can use to work (collaboratively) ...more »

  The OMB Open Government Directive published on December 8, 2009 includes what are (in my opinion) some undefined terms and very unrealistic expectations and deadlines for federal agency compliance with the directive. It also did not include any method for assessing progress towards the spirit and intent of the stated objectives.

  I would like to offer a simple framework that the Data.gov effort can use to work (collaboratively) with federal agencies to help achieve the objectives laid out in the directive. The framework includes the following five questions:

  1. Are we are clear about the performance questions that we want to answer with data to be made available from each of the contributing federal agencies?

  2. Have we identifed the availability of the desired data and have we appropriately addressed security and privacy risks or concerns related to making that data available through Data.gov?

  3. Do we understand the burden (level of effort) required to make each of the desired data streams available through Data.gov and is the funding available (either internally or externally) to make the effort a success?

  4. Do we understand how the various data consumer groups (the 'public') will want to see or access the data and does the infrastructure exist to make the data available in the desired format?

  5. Do we (Data.gov and the federal agency involved) have a documented and agreed to strategy that prepares us to digest and respond to public feedback, ideas for innovation, etc., received as a result of making data available through Data.gov?

  I would recommend this framwork be included in the next version of the Data.gov CONOP so as to provide a way for everyone involved to a) measure progress towards the objectives of the OMB directive and b) provide a tool for facilitating the dialogue with federal agencies and Congress that will be required to make Data.gov a success.

  « less full details »

  1 comment for Idea: Measuring success of Data.gov - a suggested (simple) framework

  Submitted by Chuck Georgo 3 years ago

• I agree

  23 votes

  I disagree
  This idea is active.
  Strategic Intent »

  Data Quality - Need process for assuring 'good data' on Data.gov

  On Page 9 of the CONOP, the example of Forbes' use of Federal data to develop the list of "America's Safest Cities" brings to light a significant risk associated with providing 'raw data' for public consumption. As you are aware, much of the crime data used for that survey is drawn from the Uniformed Crime Reporting effort of the FBI. As self-reported on the "Crime in the United States" website, "Figures used in this ...more »

  On Page 9 of the CONOP, the example of Forbes' use of Federal data to develop the list of "America's Safest Cities" brings to light a significant risk associated with providing 'raw data' for public consumption. As you are aware, much of the crime data used for that survey is drawn from the Uniformed Crime Reporting effort of the FBI. As self-reported on the "Crime in the United States" website, "Figures used in this Report are submitted voluntarily by law enforcement agencies throughout the country. Individuals using these tabulations are cautioned against drawing conclusions by making direct comparisons between cities. Comparisons lead to simplistic and/or incomplete analyses that often create misleading perceptions adversely affecting communities and their residents."

  Because Data.gov seeks to make raw data available to a broad set of potential users, how will Data.gov address the issue of data quality within the feeds provided through Data.gov? Currently, federal agency Annual Performance Reports required under the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA) of 1993 require some assurance of data accuracy of the data reported; will there be a similar process for federal agency data made accessible through Data.gov? If not, what measures wll be put in-place to ensure that conclusions drawn from the Data.gov data sources reflect the risks associated with 'raw' data? And, how will we know that the data made available through Data.gov is accurate and up-to-date?

  « less full details »

  5 comments for Idea: Data Quality - Need process for assuring 'good data' on Data.gov

  Submitted by Chuck Georgo 3 years ago

• I agree

  5 votes

  I disagree
  This idea is active.
  Key Partnerships »

  Key Partnerships - Engage Congress to participate in Data.gov

  To some, Data.gov can be viewed as an end-run around the many congressional committees who have official responsibility for oversight of federal agency performance. Aside from general concepts of government transparency, Data.gov could (should) be a very valuable resource to our legislatorss. Towards that end, I recommend that Data.gov open a dialogue with Congress to help ensure that Data.gov addresses the data needs ...more »

  To some, Data.gov can be viewed as an end-run around the many congressional committees who have official responsibility for oversight of federal agency performance. Aside from general concepts of government transparency, Data.gov could (should) be a very valuable resource to our legislatorss.

  Towards that end, I recommend that Data.gov open a dialogue with Congress to help ensure that Data.gov addresses the data needs of these oversight committees so that Senators and Congressmen alike can make better informed decisions that ultimately affect agency responsibilities, staffing, performance expectations, and funding.

  « less full details »

  4 comments for Idea: Key Partnerships - Engage Congress to participate in Data.gov

  Submitted by Chuck Georgo 3 years ago

• I agree

  9 votes

  I disagree
  This idea is active.
  Strategic Intent »

  Strategy - Revise CONOP to addess the value to American citizens

  As currently written, the CONOP only addresses internal activities (means) and doesn't identify the outcomes (ends) that would result from successful implementation of Data.gov. In paragraph 1 the CONOP states "Data.gov is a flagship Administration initiative intended to allow the public to easily find, access, understand, and use data that are generated by the Federal government.", yet there is no discussion about "what ...more »

  As currently written, the CONOP only addresses internal activities (means) and doesn't identify the outcomes (ends) that would result from successful implementation of Data.gov. In paragraph 1 the CONOP states "Data.gov is a flagship Administration initiative intended to allow the public to easily find, access, understand, and use data that are generated by the Federal government.", yet there is no discussion about "what data" the "public" wants or needs to know about. The examples given in the document are anecdotal at best and (in my opinion) do not reflect what the average citizen will want to see--all apologies to Aneesh Chopra and Vivek Kundra, but I do not believe (as they spoke in the December 8th webcast) that citizens really care much about things like average airline delay times, visa application wait times, or who visited the Whitehouse yesterday. In paragraph 1.3 the CONOP states "An important value proposition of Data.gov is that it allows members of the public to leverage Federal data for robust discovery of information, knowledge and innovation, yet these terms are not defined--what are they to mean to the average citizen (public)?

  I would suggest the Data.gov effort begin with a dialogue of the 'public' they envision using the data feeds on Data.gov; a few questions I would recommend they ask include:

  1. What issues about federal agency performance is important to them?

  2. What specific questions do they have about those issues?

  3. In what format(s) would they like to see the data?

  I would also suggest stratifying the "public" into the different categories of potential users, for example:

  1. General taxpayer public, non-government employee

  2. Government employee seeking data to do their job

  3. Government agency with oversight responsibility

  4. Commercial/non-profit organization providing voluntary oversight

  5. Press, newsmedia, blogs, and mashups using data to generate 'buzz'

  « less full details »

  1 comment for Idea: Strategy - Revise CONOP to addess the value to American citizens

  Submitted by Chuck Georgo 3 years ago

• I agree

  35 votes

  I disagree
  This idea is active.
  Strategic Intent »

  Funding - Data.gov cannot be another unfunded federal mandate

  Federal agencies are already trying their best to respond to a stream of unfunded mandates. Requiring federal agencies to a) expose their raw data as a service and b) collect, analyze, and respond to public comments requires resources. The requirement to make data accessible to (through) Data.gov should be formally established as a component of one of the Federal strategic planning and performance management frameworks ...more »

  Federal agencies are already trying their best to respond to a stream of unfunded mandates. Requiring federal agencies to a) expose their raw data as a service and b) collect, analyze, and respond to public comments requires resources. The requirement to make data accessible to (through) Data.gov should be formally established as a component of one of the Federal strategic planning and performance management frameworks (GPRA, OMB PART, PMA) and each agency should be funded (resourced) to help ensure agency committment towards the Data.gov effort. Without direct linkage to a planning framework and allocation of dedicated resources, success of Data.gov will vary considerably across the federal government.

  « less full details »

  1 comment for Idea: Funding - Data.gov cannot be another unfunded federal mandate

  Submitted by Chuck Georgo 3 years ago

Displaying all 6 Ideas