Greg Matthews, Transportation and VGI - Support and Technical Coordinator, USGS Presented at the 2011 Texas GIS Forum

1. Volunteered Geographic Information for
The National Map
Presentation for the NGP Leadership Team
June 23, 2011
Eric B. Wolf, Greg D. Matthews, Barbara S. Poore, Kevin McNinch
+ 6,924,805,389 other people on the planet!
1

2. Outline
• Background: Why we investigated VGI
• What we have done in FY10/11
• USGS VGI Workshop in January 2010
• OSMCP Phase 1
• OSMCP Phase 2
• Showing the results
• What we propose for FY12
2

3. Why VGI
3
OSM Images from Mikel Maron, GPS image from Harry Wood

4. Why VGI
4
OSM Images from Mikel Maron, GPS image from Harry Wood

5. Diagram from Breakout Session
Tag Ontology
Edits
NAIP images
OSM.gov OSM
The National Map
License change
QC
“OSM.gov” is a separate instance of OSM
software, populated with public domain
Official Govt Data data.
“OSM” is the original OpenStreetMap.
5

6. OpenStreetMap Collaborative Prototype
OSMCP Phase 1 Goals:
• Establish an OSM instance in a
“.gov” environment.
• Organize input through a well-
defined set of features –
determined by TNM Best
Practices schema and standards.
• Determine if a non-USGS entity
can successfully edit features
through the OSM interface.
6

7. Phase 1 Results
7

8. OSMCP Phase 2
• Structures Data
• Build on Existing Platform
• Engage Volunteer Contributors
• Examine quality of contributions
• Incorporate data collected into TNM
8

9. Data
9

10. Software
10

11. 11

12. Communication with Volunteers
12

13. Training
13

14. Results
14

15. Results – Summary of Changes By Step
15

16. Results
16

17. Results: Type of Change of Modified Points
17

18. Preliminary Findings of Internal Review
• General Observations
The data were greatly improved with the addition of many new points, the
identification of obsolete points to be removed, and the update and addition of
correct attribute information.
• Observation 1 Directions were followed very well.
• Observation 2 Many issues with the data were related to non-critical attributes.
18

19. LEVEL OF EFFORT COMPARISON
19

20. Recommended Next Steps
• Improve cost/benefit with an expanded project which takes advantage of the
“crowd” in crowd-sourcing . Include an “adopt-a-quad” approach for data
evaluation.
• Per FY12 Guidance: Move OSMCP platform to a cloud computing
environment.
• Work with partners on outreach for the projects recommended.
• Strengthen web information/create public interface.
• Work on Structures and Trails in the State of Colorado.
• Include an “America’s Great Outdoors” theme for Trails collection in
cooperation with NPS; possibly include an “adopt-a-quad” approach.
20

21. Phase 3
• Structures Collaboration and Volunteers – Not currently in FY 12 budget.
• Requesting project support at the same levels as FY11 ($205,545).
• Reduce unit cost.
• State of Colorado.
• Data - Seed from GAZ + volunteers + possibly State data facilitated through
the State Liaison Program – Carol Giffin.
• 17 priority Structures.
• Improve usability of software interface.
• Improve automated processing of data validation and checks.
• Demonstrate an “Adopt A Quad” system for quality control.
• Demonstrate a Rewards System.
• Ease of use – make collection process possible for Fifth Graders to contribute.
21

22. Trails VGI Investigation
• FY 12 Transportation Initiative
• Current Planned FY 12 Budget: $86,646
• Demonstrate authoritative dataset of federal trails over AOI
• Collaborate with other federal agency (NPS)
• AOI in portion of Colorado (possibly one or more national parks)
• Target outdoor groups as volunteer pool
• Web interface for editing trails and uploading GPS tracks
• QC by individual land management jurisdictions
• Coordinate with other NGTOC FY12 projects to evaluate federal trails data
• Supports the President’s America’s Great Outdoors initiative to connect
Americans to the outdoors.
22