NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework Final Draft 20101203

A NATION PREPARED
NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework 2010

This governance model will serve as a framework for organizational structure and operations for the enhancement and efficient use
of geospatial technology. It serves as a resource to meet interagency GIS (Geographic Information System) program requirements
and initiatives within the wildland fire community. And finally, it provides recommendations to achieve the geospatial services
mission for integrated implementation and strategic governance of the wildland fire community’s GIS program.
FINAL DRAFT, December 1, 2010
Geospatial Community
Mission
Ensure geospatial leadership and coordination to facilitate the business of the interagency
wildland fire community
Vision
Provide seamless, integrated, and adaptive geospatial technologies across the landscape of the
NWCG geospatial community.
Guiding Principles
Safety: Follow highest related standards and remain diligent with
application of resources
Decision-making: Seek ways to deliver geospatial services through cohesive interaction
Innovation: Seek creative means to improve geospatial services meeting
challenges head on
Partnership: Work collaboratively with partners and each other to achieve
common goals
Public Stewardship: Manage resources prudently and provide highest quality
service cost efficiently
Reduce Workload: Make customers and their needs the highest priority and be
responsible for decisions and results while acknowledging
mistakes and working to correct them.
Goals
Goal 1: Develop and implement programmatic infrastructure necessary to meet the
geospatial needs of the wildland fire community
Goal 2: Coordinate and standardize interagency wildland fire data by instituting and
maintaining policies and procedures
Goal 3: Create enterprise architecture for a wildland fire geospatial database which
allows simple centralized access and supports multiple application utilization
Goal 4: Foster a proactive and adaptive approach to emerging and innovative
geospatial technologies and techniques
ii
Table of Contents
Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................... 1
1. Introduction .............................................................................................................................. 3
1.1. Current Status of the NWCG Geospatial Stakeholder Community ................................... 3
1.1.1. United States Forest Service Geospatial Fire Program ............................................ 3
1.1.2. Bureau of Land Management Geospatial Fire Program ........................................... 4
1.1.3. National Park Service Geospatial Fire Program ....................................................... 4
1.1.4. US Fish and Wildlife Geospatial Fire Program.......................................................... 4
1.1.5. US Bureau of Indian Affairs Geospatial Program...................................................... 4
1.1.6. US Department of Interior Office of Wildland Fire Coordination ................................ 5
1.1.7. United States Geological Survey .............................................................................. 5
1.2. Case for Change............................................................................................................... 5
1.2.1. People ...................................................................................................................... 8
1.2.2. Process..................................................................................................................... 9
1.2.3. Technology ............................................................................................................. 11
1.2.4. Physical Infrastructure ............................................................................................ 12
1.3. Challenges to Implementation ........................................................................................... 14
1.3.1. NWCG Infrastructure .............................................................................................. 14
1.3.2. Workforce Management ...................................................................................... 14
1.3.3. Limited Resources ............................................................................................... 14
1.3.4. Technology ........................................................................................................... 15
1.3.5. Change Management .......................................................................................... 15
1.4. Scope of NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework ...................................... 15
1.4.1. Needs Assessment ................................................................................................. 16
1.4.2. Stakeholder Analysis .............................................................................................. 18
1.4.3. Agency Policy and Guidance Analysis .................................................................... 19
1.4.4. Strategic Framework Development......................................................................... 20
1.5. Approach to Development of the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework
and the Framework Organization ............................................................................................... 21
1.5.1. Work Streams ......................................................................................................... 22
1.5.2. Phases Aligned with the Life-Cycle Time Periods................................................... 22
2. Detailed Description of the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework Elements . 26
2.1. Phase 1: Envision ........................................................................................................... 26
2.1.1. Element C.1.1: Envision Strategic Context of GIS Program ................................... 27
iii
2.1.2. Element C.1.2: Baseline of Current GIS Capabilities .............................................. 32

2.1.3. Element C.1.3: Envision Future GIS Program Capabilities ..................................... 35
2.1.4. Element O.1.1: Envision Stakeholder Engagement ................................................ 38
2.1.5. Element O.1.2: Envision GIS Community Change Profile....................................... 42
2.1.6. Element P.1.1: Envision (Initiate Program Management) ....................................... 45
2.1.7. Element P.1.2: Initiate GIS Community Risk Strategy ............................................ 47
2.1.8. Element P.1.3: Initiate Geospatial Budget Plan ...................................................... 49
2.2. Phase 2: Design ............................................................................................................. 52
2.2.1. Element C.2.1: Identify GIS Technical Requirements (Hardware, Software, and
Data) 53
2.2.2. Element C.2.1 Implementation Plan ....................................................................... 55
2.2.3. Element C.2.2: Design GIS Capabilities (Hardware, Software, and Data) .............. 56
2.2.4. Element C.2.3: Design GIS Conceptual Solution Architecture ................................ 60
2.2.5. Element C.2.4: Design GIS Performance Management System ............................. 63
2.2.6. Element O.2.1: Design GIS Change Management Plan ......................................... 65
2.2.7. Element O.2.2: Design GIS Communications Plan ................................................. 68
2.2.8. Element O.2.3: Design High-Level Training Plan.................................................... 72
2.2.9. Element P.2.2: Design GIS Risk Management Plan ............................................... 74
2.2.10. Element P.2.3: Design Geospatial Budget Framework ........................................... 76
2.2.11. Element P.2.1: Design Geospatial Program Management Plan ............................. 78
2.3. Phase 3: Test ................................................................................................................. 81
2.3.1. Element C.3.1: Test Geospatial System Components ............................................ 82
2.3.2. Element O.3.1: Expand Geospatial Ownership Building ......................................... 83
2.3.3. Element O.3.2: Test Geospatial Communication Plan ............................................ 85
2.3.4. Element O.3.3: Test Geospatial Training Development .......................................... 87
2.3.5. Element P.3.2: Test Geospatial Budget Plan .......................................................... 88
2.3.6. Element P.3.1: Test Geospatial Program Management Plan.................................. 91
2.4. Phase 4: Implement ........................................................................................................ 93
2.4.1. Element C.4.1: Implement Detailed Geospatial Design/Build Solution ................... 94
2.4.2. Element O.4.1: Implement Geospatial Change Management Plan ......................... 95
2.4.3. Element O.4.2: Implement Geospatial Communications Plan ................................ 99
Element O.4.3: Implement Geospatial Training ................................................................... 101
2.4.4. Element P.4.1: Implement Geospatial Risk Management Plan ............................. 103
2.4.5. Element P.4.2: Implement Geospatial Program Management Plan ...................... 104
2.5. Phase 5: Evaluate......................................................................................................... 106
iv
2.5.1. Element C.5.1: Evaluate and Monitor Geospatial Implementation ........................ 107
2.5.2. Element C.5.2: Establish Continuous Improvement Process ................................ 110
2.5.3. Element P.5.1: Assess Budget and Performance Targets .................................... 112
2.5.4. Element P.5.2: Evaluate Geospatial Program Plan .............................................. 113
2.6. Strategic Framework Development............................................................................... 115
2.6.1. Internal Review ..................................................................................................... 115
2.6.2. Leadership Guidance and Staff Input ..................................................................... 116
3. Appendices .......................................................................................................................... 117
Appendix A: Charter Document .................................................................................................... 117
Appendix B: Organizational Intent ................................................................................................ 119
Appendix C: Organizational Assessments .................................................................................... 122
Appendix D: Executive Sponsor Activities .................................................................................... 123
Appendix E: Sponsorship Coalition Checklist ............................................................................... 124
Appendix F: Program Management Schedule .............................................................................. 125
Appendix G: Summary of Authorities ............................................................................................ 127
Appendix H: Acronyms ................................................................................................................. 139
Appendix I: Glossary..................................................................................................................... 141
List of Figures
Figure 1: Representative Issues and Challenges ............................................................................ 6
Figure 2: Duplicate Program Support of the Wildland Fire Community .......................................... 10
Figure 3: Use of Classified Information .......................................................................................... 13
Figure 4: Stakeholder Participation ................................................................................................. 16
Figure 5: Alignment of Key Stakeholder Job Functions to Wildland Business Areas ...................... 17
Figure 6: Federal Government Policy and Guidance ...................................................................... 20
Figure 7: Recommended Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework ......................................... 21
Figure 8: Implementation Status Icon Key ...................................................................................... 23
Figure 9: NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework ...................................................... 25
Figure 10: Key Wildland Fire Business Areas ................................................................................. 32
Figure 11: Geospatial Data Producer and Consumer Categorization ............................................. 33
Figure 12: Traditional MVGO Hierarchy.......................................................................................... 35
Figure 13: Notional Geospatial Governance MVGO Content ......................................................... 36
Figure 14: Key Wildland Fire Management Stakeholders ............................................................... 40
Figure 15: Geospatial Survey Questions ....................................................................................... 40
Figure 16: Key Stakeholder Sources of Information ....................................................................... 41
Figure 17: Sample Change Readiness Assessment....................................................................... 43
Figure 18: Change Profile Scales ................................................................................................... 44
Figure 19: Risk Strategy Elements ................................................................................................. 47
Figure 20: Risk Assessment Chart ................................................................................................. 48
v
Figure 21: Notional Return on Investment Curve ............................................................................ 50

Figure 22: Geospatial Output Products........................................................................................... 54
Figure 23: National Wildland Fire Enterprise .................................................................................. 61
Figure 24: Performance and Change Management ........................................................................ 64
Figure 25: Change Management Plan ............................................................................................ 65
Figure 26: Change Adoption Curve ................................................................................................ 66
Figure 27: Sample Communications Products ................................................................................ 69
Figure 28: Emerging GIS Cost Strategies ....................................................................................... 77
Figure 29: Sample Program Management Plan .............................................................................. 79
Figure 30: Sample Geospatial Business Case ............................................................................... 90
Figure 31: Managing Change Status .............................................................................................. 96
Figure 32: Temporal Concept of Change........................................................................................ 96
Figure 33: Elements of Change for Employees .............................................................................. 97
Figure 34: Change Transition Model............................................................................................... 98
Figure 35: Confirmation of Communications ................................................................................. 100
Figure 36: Continuous Improvement Performance Measurement Matrix ...................................... 111
List of Tables
Table 1: Stakeholder-Identified Threats and Weaknesses ............................................................... 7
Table 2: NWCG Wildland Fire Business Areas ............................................................................... 17
Table 3: Recommended Revised Geospatial Fire Business Areas................................................. 18
Table 4: Interagency Wildland Fire Geospatial Community SWOT Analysis Highlights ................. 29
Table 5: Stakeholder Policy and Guidance Review Results ........................................................... 30
Table 6: Element C.1.1 Implementation Activities........................................................................... 31
Table 7: Element C.1.2 Implementation Activities........................................................................... 34
Table 8: Element C.1.3. Implementation Activities.......................................................................... 37
Table 9: Element O.1.1 Implementation Activities .......................................................................... 41
Table 10: Element O.1.2 Implementation Plan ............................................................................... 44
Table 11: Element P.1.1 Implementation Plan ................................................................................ 46
Table 12: Element P.1.2 Implementation Activities ......................................................................... 48
Table 14: Element C.2.1 Implementation Activities......................................................................... 55
Table 16: Wildland Fire Community Example CONOPS and SOPs ............................................... 60
Table 19: Element O.2.1 Implementation Activities ........................................................................ 67
Table 27: Communications Goal and Objectives ............................................................................ 86
vi

Table 30: DOI Geospatial Model Funding Alternatives ................................................................... 89
Table 35: Element O.4.2 Implementation Activities ...................................................................... 101
Table 36: Element O.4.3 Implementation Plan ............................................................................. 102
Table 37: Risk Management Planning Approach .......................................................................... 103
Table 38: Element P.4.1 Implementation Activities ....................................................................... 104
Table 40: Element C.5.1 Implementation Activities....................................................................... 108
Table 41: Continuous Improvement Process Steps ...................................................................... 110
Table 42: Element C.5.2 Implementation Activities....................................................................... 112
Table 45: Agency Policy and Guidance Reviewed by NWCG Geospatial Core Team ................... 115
vii
Executive Summary
The interagency wildland fire community is faced with increasingly complex responsibilities in
managing wildland fire. Geospatial systems1 have become critical to the operation of federal,
state, and local wildland fire programs. The community’s business activities depend upon
geospatial technologies to assess resource relationships and fulfill vital National Wildfire
Coordinating Group (NWCG) mission requirements. To date, however, a comprehensive
interagency geospatial approach has not been available for the wildland fire community to
collaborate on geospatial data creation, maintenance, or access. The community requires clear
and streamlined processes for geospatial data development, management, and discovery to
ensure that key information is available when and where it is required.
NWCG membership – consisting of the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Bureau of Land
Management (BLM), Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), National Park Service (NPS), U.S. Forest
Service (USFS), USFS Fire Research, U.S. Fire Administration, National Association of State
Foresters, and Intertribal Timber Council – collectively provide geospatial leadership and
coordination to facilitate the business of the interagency wildland fire community.
This document provides a status of the interagency geospatial stakeholder community, an

assessment of current NWCG mission strategies and capabilities, and best estimates of future
requirements for wildland fire management related to geospatial technologies. The NWCG
Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework defined in this document provides a model for the
enhancement and efficient use of geospatial technologies and data by the interagency wildland
fire community. By highlighting interagency geospatial program requirements and initiatives
within the wildland fire community, the strategic framework is designed to support the geospatial
services mission with key improvement mechanisms including leadership, governance, and
facilitation.
In support of the work described in this document, the members of the NWCG Geospatial Task
Group (GTG) quickly realized that any interagency approach requires both management and
implementation elements that together would serve to support the community’s future direction
and establish ownership for the path forward. The NWCG interagency wildland fire community
geospatial mission, strategies, goals, and objectives are set forth in this document to provide an
overall direction for achieving improved geospatial capabilities; enhanced communication and
integrated geospatial policies, procedures, and data production; and streamlined activities aligned
to stakeholder priorities and requirements.
At the same time, implementation of the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework will
require the interagency wildland fire community to coordinate and collaborate on differences
among various agency policies and strategic plans. Moreover, potential shifts in mission
strategies may require realigning current capabilities, developing additional workforce skills
across functions and within the incident-management team organization, modernizing capital
assets, and identifying other innovative approaches in support of mission requirements.
1 Geospatial systems consist of technologies and data used for visualization, measurement, and analysis of
topological features; they includes technologies—global positioning systems (GPS), geographical information
systems (GIS), and remote sensing (RS)— related to mapping of features on the surface of the earth.
1
Successful implementation of the strategic framework model will also require a culture shift that
includes the optimization and standardization of interagency geospatial programs, systems, and
data assets among the interagency wildland fire community, processes, technology, and
infrastructure. As a result, the framework applied in the model describes what the interagency
wildland fire community needs to address across key dimensions of change—i.e., people,
processes, technology, and physical infrastructure.
Moreover, the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework is built upon an integrated
approach that includes three inter-related work streams (Capability Development, Ownership
Building, and Program Management) spread across five life-cycle phases (Envision, Design, Test,
Implement, and Evaluate). The model as a whole provides a framework for focusing on what the
interagency community needs to address, how the community might address various elements of
the work streams simultaneously, and how it might measure progress in sequential order through
an entire geospatial life cycle.
Other primary roles and responsibilities for meeting the community’s geospatial mission and
objectives are defined by the specific activities and tasks set forth in the strategic framework,
especially as detailed through best practices for fulfilling program stewardship roles. Note that
this document centers on creating a strategic shift in the delivery of future geospatial data and
services. Such an approach is intended to provide the foundation for sustainable implementation of
a service delivery model for the interagency wildland fire business and improvement of GIS
services and products.
2
1. Introduction
The interagency wildland fire community is faced with a complex mission in managing wildland
fire while protecting values at risk and meeting resource objectives. Geospatial technologies are
critical to decision-making support activities related to wildland fire planning and management.
The community’s business activities depend upon geospatial technologies to assess resource
relationships and to fulfill the vital requirements of the interagency wildland fire mission.
The purpose of the National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) Geospatial Technology
Strategic Framework is to provide for enhancement and efficient use of geospatial technologies
and data by the interagency wildland fire community. By highlighting interagency geospatial
program requirements and initiatives within the wildland fire community, the strategic framework is
designed to support the geospatial services mission with key mission elements, including
leadership, governance, and facilitation.
1.1. Current Status of the NWCG Geospatial Stakeholder Community

From the perspective of the interagency wildland fire stakeholder community, the wildland fire
mission unites the community with a common purpose. The strength of this bond drives a group of
dedicated individuals who are focused on accomplishing difficult tasks to get the job done
effectively. In doing so, the community has proven to be resourceful in identifying workable and
flexible solutions to frequently occurring problems. For instance, issues with information
collection, data sharing, and the production of geospatial products have all been dealt with in an
―as-much-as-able,‖ but nevertheless successful, way for some time.
Despite this collective, admirable effort, the interagency wildland fire community would benefit from
more structured solutions in support of continued success over an unpredictable future. As the
2009 Quadrennial Fire Report (QFR) states, ―Given the threats and risks of the escalating wildfire
challenge, the path forward must seek to ensure that the efforts of all of the stakeholders in fire
management reinforce and multiply each other—so the whole will be greater than the sum of the
parts.‖ The parent organizations of this community have begun to address these requirements
internally in various ways. Several of the organizations that participated in the NWCG
Geospatial Task Group (GTG) have already created their own respective geospatial strategic
plans. Moreover, the geospatial community has been working collectively to support mission and
operational requirements to adopt a comprehensive, and crosscutting, strategic framework.
The parent organizations maintain significant geospatial resources and have each invested
significant amount of time and effort in the efficient use of tools and technologies related to their
respective missions. In fact, various activities conducted across the interagency wildland fire
community have resulted in a need to promote consistent use of the most current technology and a
need for standard operating procedures (SOPs). Based on data collected over the past year, the
NWCG GTG created ―snapshots,‖ which are presented in the following paragraphs, of the
geospatial activities and geospatial context of each of the organizations that constitute the
interagency wildland fire community.
1.1.1. United States Forest Service Geospatial Fire Program

U.S. Forest Service (USFS) geospatial stakeholders are currently conducting a strategic planning
process of their own with release of a future strategic vision planned for the near term. Within the
3
broader wildland fire community, the USFS maintains a leadership role in the development of
geospatial applications, remote sensing capabilities, and field support. This leadership is focused
on facilitation and management of joint and cost-shared geospatial data development,
management, and acquisition; planning and implementation of the spatial data clearinghouse and
data archiving; development and coordination of GIS and information management plans,
standards, and policies; coordination of geospatial data management educational and training
opportunities; and facilitation of information and data sharing within the USFS wildland fire
geospatial community.
1.1.2. Bureau of Land Management Geospatial Fire Program

Bureau of Land Management (BLM) stakeholders have been occupied similarly to the USFS
geospatial stakeholders. BLM’s ―Geospatial Services Model: Serving the Geographic Business
Needs of the U.S. Department of Interior‖ was created in July 2007 to define how geospatial data
and technology are being used to enhance the business activities of the U.S. Department of the
Interior (DOI), especially for key linkages in the wildland fire community. BLM is moving toward a
―corporate-type‖ information structure and away from localized data storage and analysis in
coordination with DOI’s Enterprise Geographic Information Management (EGIM) team. The
adoption of geospatial data standards will help to ensure that data is created and managed in a
more effective manner and to provide key information across the agency. Finally, the BLM’s
recommendations for DOI business transformation have created a precedent to manage
geospatial investments as a cohesive set of assets and services.
1.1.3. National Park Service Geospatial Fire Program

The goal of National Park Service (NPS) geospatial wildland fire community leadership is to
provide usable spatial data required for the scientifically based management of park resources
and park planning. The NPS Natural Resource Geospatial Program in the wildland fire community
works to perform the following functions: (1) coordination of GIS implementation within the
Natural Resource Program Center (NRPC), Regions, and NPS Units and (2) coordination of
partnerships with other agencies and organizations. The NPS geospatial wildland fire
community’s leadership facilitates management of joint and cost-shared geospatial data
development with the DOI EGIM. In support of the NPS wildland fire mission, the number of NPS
staff members is increasing at the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) to assist in overall
management of geospatial technologies at all levels. Finally, the NPS manages a large volume of
public lands and has been applying geospatial technologies in this capacity for a number of years.
1.1.4. US Fish and Wildlife Geospatial Fire Program

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) wildland fire community’s leadership is currently
expanding its involvement in geospatial activities, with an emphasis on spatial data and key
linkages to its parent organization. In support of wildland fire mission, the number of FWS staff
members at NIFC is increasing to assist in overall management of geospatial technologies at all
levels. Although the FWS wildland fire community does not currently have a GIS strategic plan,
the FWS GIS community is currently developing a strategic planning process for future use.
1.1.5. US Bureau of Indian Affairs Geospatial Program

The U.S. Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Geospatial program is working to provide Bureau-wide
standardization for geospatial staffing, planning, procedures, and core data sets. In support of its
4
wildland fire mission, the BIA historically utilized contract staff at a central location to perform
much of the internal management efforts. At its field geographies, staff creates and collects
geospatial data and provides on-site incident support. Nevertheless, an overarching geospatial
strategy for the BIA wildland fire geospatial community is the subject of ongoing discussion.
1.1.6. US Department of Interior Office of Wildland Fire Coordination

The business activity of the DOI’s Office of Wildland Fire Coordination (OWFC) depends on
geospatial information to support the wildland fire community. The purpose of its ongoing GIS
efforts is to define how geospatial data and technology will be used to enhance DOI business
activities and the achievement of mission and goals, with linkages to the DOI EGIM. Geospatial
data and technology are strategic, national assets involving major investments, and the OWFC
reports on ongoing efforts to coordinate the wildland fire community’s GIS capability among
various information technology (IT) applications.
1.1.7. United States Geological Survey

The United States Geological Survey (USGS) provides expertise in investigations, resource
assessments, and development, analysis, and distribution of geospatial databases, maps, and
derivative products. While USGS is not a member of the NWCG, it maintains wildfire-specific staff
and operates fire-specific applications to provide support to fire suppression and recovery efforts.
1.2. Case for Change

Geospatial technologies and data have become critical to the operation of federal, state, and local
wildland fire programs. In support of their specific mission requirements, wildland fire management
stakeholders continue to evolve formal and informal solutions through geospatial tools in a manner
that is largely uncoordinated and specific to the needs of individual agencies. The stakeholder
interviews revealed unanimous concern with a lack of Common Operating Data (COD) for the
interagency geospatial community. In moving forward with future activities, the participating
wildland fire management agencies must focus their collective efforts to avoid wasteful duplication
of products and geospatial data and provide a means of working together to provide more effective
execution of each agency’s fire management program for geospatial technology.
Figure 1 illustrates several overarching themes drawn from the GTG’s recent analysis of current
issues related to geospatial technologies and the results of that analysis plus the challenges they
revealed.
5
Current Issues Results/Challenges

 No overall geospatial strategy is available Inefficient data management and
for wildland fire community to collaborate development processes
around data creation, maintenance, or
access Duplicative efforts between agencies, offices,
and projects
 Current geospatial standards are specific to
individual agency policy, project, or No central location for wildland agencies to
application access and retrieve (share) geospatial data
 Geospatial data is frequently created and Significant time spent creating and acquiring
modified to meet the individual key data in support of fire incidents even
requirements of various wildland fire-related though it may exist in undiscovered partner
activities agency systems
 No environment exists to handle the Project funds often spent on creating and
geospatial data needs of the entire acquiring data to meet specific project needs
interagency fire community even though it might be available elsewhere
 Data is being created but not vetted through Inconsistent focus on technology can take
interagency fire business channels away from mission accomplishment
Figure 1: Representative Issues and Challenges
Shifts in mission strategies will require realigning current capabilities, building additional skills in
the workforce across functions and within the incident management team organization,
modernizing capital assets, and developing innovative approaches to support achievement of mission
requirements. These needs go well beyond simply reorganizing work processes and refining
coordination mechanisms. The 2009 QFR mentions efforts to meet future demands while
sustaining fire management’s overarching commitment to firefighter and public safety. This
strategic shift calls for a shared common vision and strengthened collaborative processes in future
endeavors to satisfy increased expectations for the combined efforts of the agencies, the tribal,
state, and local partners, and the private sector.
Four themes – People, Process, Technology, and Physical Infrastructure – were used to
categorize the results of the stakeholder input. These themes, discussed in detail in the following
subsections, were used extensively to group information and to present overall findings. Table 1
highlights some of the key weaknesses and threats related to these four themes as identified in
the stakeholder interviews.
6
Table 1: Stakeholder-Identified Threats and Weaknesses
7
1.2.1. People
As the frequency, size, intensity, and complexity of wildland fire incidents increase, geospatial staff
need to be organized, directed, and trained effectively to be prepared to meet the demands placed
upon them. As one of the most important aspects of any geospatial solution, the human component
is at once the most dedicated, dynamic, and fragile.
Organization
While the wildland fire geospatial community is enormously creative and self-motivated, individual
personnel within the community continue to seek guidance on, and organization options for,
geospatial activities at all levels of support and within all geographies (e.g., Ranger Districts, Forest
Supervisor Offices, Regional Offices, National Offices). As geospatial support missions look more
toward collaborative solutions and less to standalone systems, focus needs to remain on a national,
interagency-wide, co-located geospatial team. This focus would promote wildland fire–based
coordination activities at an enterprise level in an effort to minimize duplication and make better use
of limited resources and funding.
Direction
The stakeholders interviewed cited specific requirements for the interagency geospatial community
to develop a management and implementation approach to assist in building strategic capabilities.
Those capabilities would in turn serve to support future efforts and to establish ownership and
acceptance of change in support of those efforts. Specifically, the community is unanimously looking
for guidance and support related to data development, access storage, and dissemination.
Staffing
Concerns were voiced with the limited and dispersed staffing for geospatial roles at the NIFC and
other facilities in support of wildland fire management. While individuals in these facilities work quite
well together, they report to many various home-agency units. Stakeholders voiced their desire to
expand and consolidate geospatial staff at NIFC and at other facilities supporting wildland fire
programs. A recurring observation was that many members of the support staff are ―willing
participants‖ in activities relevant to their missions rather than simply staff directed to support
specific geospatial activities. In discussions on staffing at incident sites, it was revealed that
currently only a single credentialed position, the GIS Specialist (GISS), is used on incidents.
Requirements were identified to expand specialized positions to accommodate work streams in
image analysis, data management, and other such activities.
Training
Geospatial training opportunities are abundant and cover almost every imaginable topic related to
geospatial technologies. Most of these courses are software-focused and geared to general
solutions for specific business domains. To address the dynamic aspect of wildland fire missions,
training options need to incorporate applications in software, wildfire response, incident
management, critical decision-making, leadership, and project management. Currently, only one
NWCG geospatial training course, GIS Specialist for Incident Management (GISS) NWCG Course
S-341, is offered for incident response staff and minimal coordination exists among other NWCG
geospatial training programs. Training for the geospatial staff is key to building and maintaining the
skills required for the unique aspects of wildland fire.
8
1.2.2. Process
To date, an overall interagency geospatial approach has not been available to the wildland fire
community to address the creation of, maintenance of, and access to geospatial data and related
services. While each agency supports its specific mission requirements with geospatial policies, the
policy documents do not adequately serve to support the activities of the interagency wildland fire
community. The demanding aspects of the interagency wildland fire mission require that attention
be directed specifically to ―harmonizing‖ these policies and standards into a consistent and holistic
operating strategy.
Policies and Procedures

The interagency wildland fire community requires formal procedures for geospatial data
development, management, and discovery to ensure that key information is available when and
where required. The development of standards for core procedures would quickly enhance overall
abilities and boost productivity across the user community, where minimal interagency guidance
currently exists in support of gathering data to support wildland fire programs.
Currently, the only significant interagency documents in use were developed in 2004 by the GTG
under the NWCG. The GIS Standard Operating Procedures (GSTOP) and GISS Position Task
Book/training products are used across the stakeholder community and were referenced often in the
stakeholder interviews as the prevailing reference materials for the community. These materials
should serve as examples for development of future guidance materials for the wildland fire
community.
New materials might address gaps between national policies and standards and interagency and
local and incident operations. Efforts are required to determine the specific mission requirements for
national data sets and to explore the current efforts pertaining to these data needs and the gaps
between what is provided and what is needed. In addition, interviewees voiced the need for internal
forums within the GTG to address future concerns and issues and a system for review and
comment on opportunities with emerging technologies.
Standards
Many of the geospatial programs and applications across the community have identified minimal
standards specifically focused at their missions or projects. To minimize duplication of efforts,
stakeholder noted that these documents should be published in a common location to enable the
standards to be formally adopted by the community as standards. These materials would build upon
the home agency documents that relate to the agencies broader responsibilities, while placing
significantly greater attention on the needs of the wildland fire community.
Similar scenarios exist for wildland fire geospatial staff in support of their roles and projects. Many
individuals develop and maintain procedures, job aids, and SOP-type documents for their personal
and/or team use. These informal materials may overlap with those developed by others performing
similar tasks. Formalizing these documents and any other ad hoc standards or other materials
would contribute to development of consistent geospatial support, which in turn would improve
information sharing and streamline data access.
9
Common Operating Data (COD)

The interviews revealed that stakeholders were interacting with many interagency programs with a
high potential of duplicating efforts in data collection, storage, and maintenance (see Figure 2).
Currently, geospatial data across the community is most often managed by individuals in support of
specific projects as opposed to being used with broader solutions in support of an enterprise-wide
effort. These practices have led to a data-sharing environment largely dependent on personal
relationships (i.e., an informal social network), thereby creating an environment in which users ―don’t
know what they don’t know.‖ The current delays in accessing critical geospatial data provide an
obstacle to effectiveGeospatial
support ofTechnology
interagencyProducts
customers.
of the Wildland Fire Community
30
Stakeholder Engagement
25
20
15
10
5
0
Application Program
Figure 2: Duplicate Program Support of the Wildland Fire Community
The compilation of a core set of COD focused at meeting the requirements of the entire interagency
geospatial wildland fire community would contribute greatly to minimizing largely duplicated efforts.
A simple assessment of the requirements posed by each formal system, followed by a review and
comment period for key users, could be used to define the baseline requirements and provide the
basis for the creation of the core dataset. The next step would be to make the data available to the
entire community from a centralized and shared data-management environment. Over the long-
term, a forum or group would be required to lead efforts to ensure that new data requirements are
fulfilled and that authoritative data is available to vetted stakeholders and the public as required.
Reduction of Duplication and Improved Efficiencies

The overall goal of the Process theme is to formalize procedures to reduce duplicative activities and
create a more efficient geospatial data environment. Figure 2 above demonstrates the overlapping
support that stakeholders provide to several interagency applications. Due to the significant storage
and processing requirements of imagery data, the development of an improved strategy for
managing responsibility for storing, distributing, and maintaining the community’s imagery data is
recommended. Under some circumstances, simply purchasing imagery data with a collaborative
licensing agreement might serve to make this information available to the entire NWCG community.
In addition, efforts to reduce repetitive data analysis and the creation of products and services will
enhance the positive impact of these goals and lead to a more effective and functional community.
10
Application Integration
Much of the COD required by geospatial applications can be made available through web services
or other means. In addition, a formal process needs to be developed for sharing system
requirements, analytical methodologies, and computing space to maximize the overall efficiency of
the geospatial community. In some cases, independent geospatial components are being utilized,
and no process exists to integrate them into a centralized solution.
The interagency wildland fire community’s geospatial investments, assets, and services are in need
of cohesive oversight and direction. In formalizing new strategies, the NWCG agencies can work in
concert with the DOI Enterprise Architecture and the USFS Information Strategic Framework.
Both efforts are coordinated within the Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA) with the goal of
making best use of available funds to achieve strategic goals and objectives through interagency
efforts. These documents will assist in defining an approach to program stewardship to help the
community identify, manage, and ultimately refine geospatial policy and standards.
1.2.3. Technology
The term ―technology‖ is used here to define the technological concepts and abilities of systems and
software supporting the wildland fire community. These systems are intended to provide access to
the information and data required by the interagency geospatial stakeholder community.
Network-Related Concerns
The stakeholders who were interviewed identified numerous network security restrictions that limit
ability to maximize their capabilities and efficiencies when providing geospatial support to
customers. While the interviewees understand the security concerns behind the restrictions, they
nevertheless voiced concerns with respect to the impact of these policies across their community.
Limitations on the installation of approved software, the inability to install printers, and basic network
restrictions are manageable in an office environment with on-site staff to support the users. The
situation is much different with mobilized human resources and urgent operations.
To address the many issues cited in the interviews, the community needs to review the policies of
the NWCG partner agencies further to define and formalize unique requirements. All stakeholders
agreed that many of the current data-sharing solutions were intended only to be temporary (i.e.,
ftp.nifc.gov) but have become patches that are relied upon to solve data-sharing problems. Many
examples of multi-agency data sharing solutions exist within other areas of the federal government,
such as with NASA’s Earth Observing System (EOS) Data and Information System (EOSDIS),
which serves hundreds of thousands of users with more than 4 petabytes of earth observations from
satellites, ground stations, and analytical outputs. This system and other systems have addressed
solutions for the sharing of large volumes of raster and vector data with a diverse and dispersed
user community.
Data Availability and Management

This strategic framework effort revolves around the availability of geospatial data for the wildland fire
community. Current technology shortfalls are leading to limited access and duplicative data
collection, creation, and maintenance. Table 1 of this document highlights that stakeholders
identified data availability as a concern in every area for multiple reasons. The technology short-falls
lead directly to added expense, delays in information access, and conflicting information, as well as
duplicative efforts. To remedy the situation, the community needs to determine the core-data
11
requirements for existing models and applications and then begin to develop the appropriate data
warehouse. The warehouse must accommodate the rapid utilization of large imagery sources,
access to existing unique data sources, and sharing of COD, and it must ensure accessibility across
the community. Accessibility should be available through multiple relevant formats to meet the
requirements of a diverse user base.
Incident Support
Success in data sharing on incidents is the direct result of the individuals assigned to the incident
sites and the desire of their mission partners to share information. This ―sub-community‖ is effective
at accomplishing their mission within worst-case technology scenarios in which what can go wrong
often does go wrong. In such as setting, quick, ad hoc solutions are able to keep the technology
operating while maintaining a basic level of functionality. Ideally, the organizations need to collect
lessons learned from this area and build upon that information to formalize deployable solutions to
ensure a constant level of support, to include access to COD.
While the people who provide support to the wildland fire community are able to deal with the
dynamics of information-sharing across multiple agencies in support of multiple missions, it is
increasingly apparent that the technology is not. For the community to be able to access the
information it needs fully, a system must be available to them that is not limited by the current user
constraints. All parties need to be able to access the same data from a central location and have
access to the core information their roles and responsibilities require.
1.2.4. Physical Infrastructure

The physical infrastructure supporting this community provides both numerous information storage
and retrieval benefits and a number of limitations intended to protect the systems from accidental or
intentional disruption. The interagency structure of the NIFC and the larger NWCG communities
creates difficulties in interactions among team members working in various disciplines.
In examining the extensive requirements the geospatial community has for data sharing, many
areas for improvement have been found, some that could have significant positive outcomes.
Providing the stakeholders with a single source of COD and making that data fully available at all
levels of support would fulfill the greatest demand of the stakeholder community. Access to COD
would minimize duplication of efforts and expenditures and ensure that every part of the community
will be using the same data for modeling, ad hoc analysis, and map-based visualization.
Network
The NIFC campus in Boise operates on two different parent networks (USDA and DOI) with
significant issues in existence regarding effective information sharing. Conflicts among email
systems, external-media data sharing, file transfer protocol (FTP) access, and administrative
computer rights (and the inability to share data directly between systems) limit the ability to access
information and support redundant information maintenance. At the same time, these issues delay
the provision of services to the wildland fire community. In the present situation, the use of
collaborative geospatial tools across the mission space is hindered, if not prohibited altogether. The
NIFC and NWCG communities would benefit greatly through the resolution of any, if not all, of these
issues. The exploration of solutions based on Cloud Computing and/or the accepted use of blind
Internet Protocol (IP)-type technologies could provide needed opportunities for defining an effective
and efficient information-sharing environment.
12
Centralized Data Storage and Access

As noted above, the interagency geospatial community should pursue a core set of COD to meet
the core requirements of the stakeholder community. A key component to achieving this goal is
centralized data storage and dissemination. At this time, centralized fire-centric data is not available
through any single location. The geospatial data required for the various applications and programs
is generally shared through email, FTP, and portable media as a sole option.
During incident support, these mechanisms provide temporary solutions and prevent incident-
specific data generated on site from being available to outside parties. In addition, these solutions
can prevent data from being archived after incident operations close, making the data unavailable
during future events. As the physical infrastructure evolves, the antiquated FTP services are being
maintained as a long-term-temporary mechanism for information-sharing, consuming time and
resources that might be available for more useful solutions. In looking to newer technologies,
individual partner entities are developing duplicative, single-purpose web services solely for
disseminating their geospatial data. While this is a step in the right direction for data dissemination,
it should be a formalized and consolidated effort. As a final note, opportunities exist with current
federal partners to assist in housing a centralized geospatial data solution that is not subject to
current system constraints. These options could lead to decreased costs and increased data
availability.
Classified Geospatial Information

Classified information has the potential to be beneficial in many situations and even invaluable in
some. Presently, few opportunities exist for the wildland fire geospatial community to access
classified information sources, because use of those sources requires specific types of facilities and
staff with security clearances. While many of the stakeholders said that ―secure‖ information was of
minimal use to them (see Figure 3), it is possible that many of them are not aware of the (classified
and unclassified) information that is actually available. This topic deserves additional research to
determine the specific information requirements of the community
Use of Classified and to develop a plan for how to
Information
best fill those requirements with the proper facilities.
50
Relevance
40
30
Engagement
Stakeholder
20 Not Important
10 Somewhat
0 Important
Very Important
Essential
Level of US Government Classification

Figure 3: Use of Classified Information
13
1.3. Challenges to Implementation

To meet the goal of providing more effective execution of each agency’s fire management
program for geospatial technology, a more cohesive interagency organization will need to address
IT, workforce management, and budget policies and procedures, and other challenges. Current
mission strategies will need to support realignment of current capabilities, build out of additional
skills in the workforce across functions and within the incident management teams, modernization
of capital assets, and development of new and innovative approaches to meet mission requirements.
The following subsections highlight some of the implementation challenges that will need to be
better understood and mitigated as the geospatial strategic framework (presented later in this
document in Figure 9) is developed.
1.3.1. NWCG Infrastructure

The interagency wildland fire community’s history of rapid and decisive wildfire response have
demonstrated its role in incident management. As a result, the nation is looking to the emergency
management community—and NWCG in particular—to maintain effective and efficient emergency
response services while implementing new and innovative geospatial technologies. Nevertheless,
the NWCG strategic planning infrastructure (e.g., a cohesive mission, vision, goals, objectives,
and performance measures) are not yet fully understood throughout the interagency wildland fire
community.
1.3.2. Workforce Management

The interagency wildland fire community faces serious challenges in maintaining its workforce.
According to a recent Government Accountability Office (GAO) report, within the next five years,
approximately 70 percent of the interagency wildland fire workforce will be eligible for retirement. Of
that 70 percent, more than 4,300 individuals are qualified for 54 positions that are most critical to
firefighting because they involve essential fire command (e.g., incident commanders) and support
activities (e.g., logistics section chiefs.) Currently, very few positions are directly aligned to support
geospatial technology needs within the interagency wildland fire community. The job descriptions for
those positions typically involve responsibilities and alignment other than those related to geospatial
duties. As a result, if the NWCG hopes to achieve its strategic goals for geospatial applications,
a focus on growing the number of positions with the right type of geospatial expertise will be
essential. In addition, training the workforce to develop geospatial technology capabilities also
will be critical. Interagency wildland fire leadership must, therefore, remain committed to
recruiting, training, and retaining a top-notch workforce and developing staff with the talent, skills,
competencies, and dedication necessary to meet the demands of emerging geospatial
technology.
1.3.3. Limited Resources

The interagency wildland fire community faces a problem common to government organizations in
general—limited resources. Resource constraints force the interagency wildland fire community to
make the most of the resources it already has at its disposal. The interagency organization must
make a clear and persuasive business case for additional funding and for allocating resources to
address its highest priorities in the GIS program. A detailed and comprehensive business case that
14
describes specific functions that overlap among the various geospatial technology applications
already in existence will be critical to the success of the geospatial strategic framework.
1.3.4. Technology
The interagency wildland fire community must guard against pitfalls that may result from
fragmented IT efforts, including duplication of core capabilities, overlapping application systems,
increased cyber security risk, and inefficient use of talent and experience. To avoid these
problems, the interagency wildland fire community must orchestrate its IT efforts and assets as
direct linkages to its geospatial technology applications. Moreover, to make the most of the
capabilities that IT can provide, the interagency wildland fire community must commit to using its
enterprise architecture to guide the re-engineering of interagency wildland fire business
processes and IT solutions. Re-engineering calls for using technology as an agent of change and
could include consolidation of like functions, elimination of duplication, improvement of work flows, and
interagency-wide information sharing. In short, the interagency wildland fire community must apply
information systems and geospatial technologies in a better and smarter way (e.g., in a seamless,
net-centric environment).
1.3.5. Change Management

To meet the challenges ahead, the interagency wildland fire community must be willing to change
and grow. Change can be difficult, and growth will require new approaches and ways of doing
business that must be embraced at every level of the interagency wildland fire community. At the
same time, growth and change must not be allowed to interfere with the interagency wildland fire
community’s ability to carry out its mission on a daily basis. The interagency wildland fire
community, with support from NWCG, has performed its mission successfully for many years
and enjoys a high level of public confidence in its emergency incident response capabilities.
Overcoming a natural resistance to change and the tendency to rest on the laurels of past
success may pose the greatest implementation challenge of all.
1.4. Scope of NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework

This document is focused on defining an integrated geospatial strategic framework for the
interagency wildland fire community. This was accomplished under the guidance of the NWCG
interagency geospatial core team comprised of key members of the GTG. To arrive at a
recommended model, our approach entailed the following tasks:
1. Assessing wildland fire data needs

2. Conducting a stakeholder analysis
3. Analyzing agency policies and guidance
4. Developing a strategic framework.
Associated implementation elements and action items are embedded in the NWCG Geospatial
Technology Strategic Framework and are intended to be used in an iterative fashion as the
community gains additional fluency with the model.
The stakeholder community expects that, on a regular basis, the NWCG Geospatial Technology
Strategic Framework will require maintenance and modification to ensure that action elements
and responsibilities remain current and relevant.
15
1.4.1. Needs Assessment

A Wildland Fire Data Needs Assessment was accomplished through review of essential reference
documents, interviews with key stakeholders (see Figure 4), and conversations with GTG team
members and executive sponsors. Most of the stakeholders represented state and regional offices
of federal agencies that constitute the interagency wildland fire community. Respondents
represented the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) (USFS); DOI (BLM, NPS, FWS, and BIA);
USFS Research; and other entities such as the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA), National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), academia, and the general public.
Wildland Fire Interagency Community
NWCG / NIFC
Level of Support
Region / State
Field Operations
Other
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Stakeholder Engagement
Figure 4: Stakeholder Participation
The Wildland Fire Data Needs Assessment identified the frequency and type of stakeholder
interaction that is in alignment with current NWCG business areas; identified how this interaction
leads to alignment of key geospatial data requirements; supported a summary analysis of the
interagency stakeholders’ alignment with current NWCG business areas; validated recommended
business areas to support the interagency geospatial community; and provided a focus for both
near- and long-term organizational objectives. Table 2 lists the current NWCG business areas.
It is important to emphasize that the elements highlighted in Table 2 represent business areas,
not organizational elements. Furthermore, these elements reflect those areas in which interviewed
stakeholders said they work, regardless of whether or not geospatial technology is applied or not.
Figure 5 depicts the alignment (by the number of job functions for each stakeholder organization)
to each of the current NWCG wildland fire business areas.
16
Table 2: NWCG Wildland Fire Business Areas
Figure 5: Alignment of Key Stakeholder Job Functions to Wildland Business Areas
While respondents from the BLM and USDA reported minimal activity in Business Area 2,
Business Operations, and Business Area 4, Vegetation Management, for those two agencies, the
responses suggest a more equal distribution of activity among the agencies for the other business
areas. The key stakeholders who were interviewed had difficulty in aligning their job functions with
the wildland fire geospatial community. Respondents generally expressed that the current NWCG
17
business areas do not accurately capture the typical job activities of a wildland fire geospatial
community key stakeholder. As a result, through considerable discussion, a revised set of
business areas was identified (see Table 3) to serve as a platform for the strategic framework
elements that are highlighted in this document. These revised business areas are intended to
help inform both the outcome (i.e., vision, goals, and objectives) and output (i.e., actions and
initiatives) of the strategic framework. Moreover, these business areas will in turn drive focus
areas for capability development, ownership building, and program stewardship (aspects of the
strategic framework which are presented and explained in more detail below).
Table 3: Recommended Revised Geospatial Fire Business Areas
NWCG GEOSPATIAL
FIRE BUSINESS DEFINITION
AREAS
STRATEGY Identification and development of geospatial technology and data
strategy to articulate the mission, vision, goals and objectives and
measurements of the interagency wildland fire geospatial community
DESIGN Implementation of the geospatial technology and data governance
design to enhance the interagency community’s capability development
and use of geospatial technology
TESTING Managerial testing to help with prioritization, capability design and

development
CHANGE MANAGEMENT Identification and development of change management plans and

stakeholders to participate in the design and deployment of change
initiatives
COMMUNICATIONS Detailed communication planning and monitoring for each stakeholder
group, provide additional communication vehicles customized to
stakeholder needs
TRAINING Managerial training to help with prioritization, capability,
communication, and change management skills (customized by
organizational role)
BUDGET Organizational mechanisms that the internal control structure
contributes to i) effective and efficient operations (i.e. data strategy), ii)
reliable financial reporting, and iii) compliance with applicable laws and
regulations
PROGRAM MANAGEMENT Framework of strategic planning for processes and procedures used to
initiate, plan, execute, control and closeout internal operations projects
1.4.2. Stakeholder Analysis

A Stakeholder Analysis provided a means with which to determine key issues within the
interagency wildland fire community’s environment, especially those affecting the community’s
ability to set a strategy, execute its mission, and achieve results. The analysis was conducted via
survey by the NWCG Program Office. Follow-up interviews were conducted to solicit additional
details from key stakeholders and to discuss the future vision for geospatial technology activities
in support of the interagency wildland fire community. The stakeholder analysis categorizes the
responses into categories according to strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (i.e.,
SWOT analysis). Stakeholder feedback was broken down by best practices within the
dimensions of change (i.e., people, processes, technology, and infrastructure). This
18
categorization is essential for the community to tie the stakeholder analysis results to the
proposed strategic framework.
The stakeholder analysis survey included the following key information:
Section 1, Participant Profile: Level, Products, Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs),

Concept of Operation (CONOPS), Job Aids, and Past Situation Reports
Section 2, Mission Responsibilities: NWCG Business Areas, Definitions, and Key
Geospatial Data Requirements
Section 3: Information Requirements: Geospatial Products (samples), Imagery Sources,
Critical Information by Security Levels, Required Data Sources, Exchange Stakeholders,
Information Sharing Mechanisms, Agency Resources, and Fire Management Program
Collaboration
Section 4: Reporting Requirements: Geospatial Product Requests, CONOPS / SOPs,
Geospatial Products Produced, and Investment Strategy.
Upon completion of the interviews with 40 key stakeholders and conversations with core team
members and executive sponsors, more than 250 documents of various types were collected into
a central repository and reviewed to gain a better understanding of the current issues and
challenges facing the interagency wildland fire geospatial community.
1.4.3. Agency Policy and Guidance Analysis

An Agency Policy and Guidance Analysis on geospatial data and information highlights similarities
and differences while focusing on the dimensions of change (people, process, technology, and
infrastructure). Because policy and guidance vary considerably from agency to agency (see
Figure 6 for a depiction of federal guidance), a gap analysis was conducted to focus on common
requirements. Although an overarching Federal Geospatial Data Committee (FGDC) is in place
(which has incorporated policy and developed broad direction and guidance for a geospatial
framework that includes a focus on enterprise architecture), the interagency wildland fire
community has yet to embrace and/or implement an enterprise architecture. The DOI Enterprise
Architecture process and the USFS Information Strategic Framework are both aligned with the
FEA goal of making the best use of available funds to achieve strategic goals and objectives
from interagency efforts. As part of the DOI Enterprise Architecture, the DOI’s Geospatial Blueprint
effort was coordinated with the FGDC and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Geospatial
Line of Business (GeoLoB). This coordination was conducted in an attempt to prevent duplication
of work and to ensure a clear division of labor across other federal agencies through an improved
approach, coordinated enterprise planning, and an investment strategy.
19
Figure 6: Federal Government Policy and Guidance
1.4.4. Strategic Framework Development

The development of the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework (see Figure 7) was
performed with an end result in mind—i.e., to support the mission, vision, goals, and objectives
(MVGO) of the interagency geospatial community. The group also determined that the framework
must leverage the geospatial business areas discussed above. Equal attention was also paid to
needs related to geospatial capability development, communication & change management
activities, and program stewardship. As a result, the strategic framework, which is consistent with
best practice, provides an integrated basis for support of the interagency community’s
capabilities, acceptance of the underlying program, and definition of the day-to-day stewardship of
geospatial activities Moreover, the framework is built upon the wildland fire community’s natural
lifecycle of (1) preparedness, (2) response, and (3) stabilization, as indicated in Figure 7.
20
Figure 7: Recommended Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework
1.5. Approach to Development of the NWCG Geospatial Technology

Strategic Framework and the Framework Organization
Over the past year, the NWGG Geospatial Core Group considered a number of framework
alternatives ranging from pre-existing Federal Government models (e.g., from the Pentagon,
Department of Homeland Security, Office of Personnel Management, Internal Revenue Service,
U.S. Air Force Safety Center, and other agencies), commercial sector approaches, and a
geospatial-specific model. Based on stakeholder analysis and best-practice considerations, the
group decided upon a hybrid approach that (1) is consistent with the intent of geospatial best
practices; (2) provides a strategic focus on capability development, change management &
communications, and program stewardship, and (3) represents the unique wildland fire life cycle
most appropriately. The resulting model provides an optimal vehicle for decision-making, defines
methods of interaction and related rules, supports creation of mission objectives and capabilities,
enables collaboration, establishes expectations and develops ownership, grants decision
rights and responsibilities, and verifies performance for effective program stewardship.
The strategic framework provides an integrated approach for developing the new geospatial
capabilities across the interagency community through three work streams and across five life-
cycle phases. At the intersections of these work streams and phases, the model describes those
items the community needs to address among the key dimensions of change (i.e., people,
21
process, technology, and infrastructure) and how associated work can enhance capabilities
represented each work stream across the entire framework life cycle.
1.5.1. Work Streams

The work streams are the core drivers of the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework.
They comprise three separate sets of activities as listed below. Each work stream includes related
elements that, when performed in an integrated fashion, will help the interagency wildland fire
geospatial community to achieve its goals more effectively and efficiently. The work streams
include:
Capability Development – Defines, builds, and deploys future geospatial technology

capabilities to achieve the wildland fire interagency geospatial community vision
Ownership Building – Secures executive sponsorship, management participation, and
stakeholder involvement and commitment to drive necessary change throughout the
interagency wildland fire community
Program Stewardship – Provides overall program management that drives, integrates, and
coordinates geospatial activities.
1.5.2. Phases Aligned with the Life-Cycle Time Periods

The Strategic Framework is built around five phases (Envision, Design, Test, Implement, and
Evaluate) that are aligned with the wildland fire community’s three life cycle periods—
Preparedness, Response, and Stabilization. For each of these five phases, stakeholders make
decisions and perform critical activities.
Preparedness: This is the period during which the program vision and key value propositions for
the future of integrated geospatial technologies are established. Further definition and planning
are integrated into the preparedness period for the interagency wildland fire geospatial
community. This period is represented by three framework phases:
Envision – Initiates the program and engages key interagency stakeholders, establishes the
enterprise-level future state vision for the wildland fire interagency geospatial program, and
initiates the overall program management plan for achieving the vision.
Design – Develops a concept of operations for future geospatial technology capabilities, a
detailed requirements specification, and a top-level solution architecture; provides an
interagency community change-management plan that promotes interagency stakeholder
ownership; and provides a framework that identifies and sequences projects for the wildland fire
geospatial community.
Test – Builds and reviews the geospatial technology components; gauges the value of new
capabilities, assesses the organization’s readiness for change, and prepares deployment of the
new geospatial capabilities.
Response: In this period, the actions that agencies take during incident response also include
key activities related to the strategic framework of the program. This is the time period during
which implementation of geospatial technologies takes place. Further implementation is
integrated into the response period for the interagency wildland fire geospatial community.
22
Implement – Deploys new geospatial technology capabilities and deploys detailed strategic
framework design (including a number of constituent elements).
Stabilization: Finally, post-fire decision-making during which the outcomes of the earlier phases
are examined, the program is evaluated, and necessary changes are assessed or re-assessed.
Evaluate – Monitors and evaluates implementation activities and interagency geospatial

community performance and identifies and implements improvements to the strategic
framework and geospatial capabilities.
Implementation of this proposed model for the interagency wildland fire community is intended to
ensure that information that is collected and used by the community is non-duplicative, stored in
common formats, and accessible by multiple stakeholders to satisfy mission needs. The
framework is based on a strategic shift in delivery of geospatial data and services. The
implementation of this strategic framework will also provide a foundation for sustainable
improvement in delivery of geospatial services and products.
Note: The status of each implementation element in the framework is indicated in the
“Implementation Activities” tables that appear in the following sections. The meaning of each
status icon in the tables is shown in Figure 8.
Figure 8: Implementation Status Icon Key
Note: The following sections of this document are divided according to the five key framework
phases (Envision, Design, Test, Implement, and Evaluate). Within each section are numbered
subheads that track to the element numbers within the strategic framework.
The complete strategic framework is shown in Figure 9 on the following two pages.
23
24
Figure 9: NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework
25
2. Detailed Description of the NWCG Geospatial Technology

Strategic Framework Elements
As highlighted in Figures 7 and 9 above, the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic
Framework integrates key activities and responsibilities through a model built upon three key
work streams (i.e., capability development, ownership building, and program stewardship) that
intersect with five key phases (i.e., envision, design, test, implement, and evaluate). The
strategic framework provides a more holistic view (of the ingredients for community success)
than do traditional models that focus solely on the elements contained in the program
stewardship work stream.
In the following sections, we provide phase-by-phase descriptions of the numbered process

elements and stakeholders requirements across all three work streams. As indicated earlier,
an initial look at the status of the framework implementation is provided and recommended
next steps toward implementation are detailed. Because the strategic framework is designed
to be built and implemented over a period of time, by definition, the earlier model elements are
more complete or are more fully described than the later ones. The implementation plans in
this document reflect the required elements to be completed for each phase, work stream, and
specific numbered element.
2.1. Phase 1: Envision

The interagency wildland fire
community works with its partners to
envision, plan for, and prepare for
opportunities to reduce loss of life and
property at the optimal time – i.e., before
incident response is required. The
purpose of the Envision phase
(illustrated at right by key work-stream
items) is to leverage that work effort to
assess and to better understand
interagency wildland fire geospatial
community strategies, value
propositions, and performance and
obstacles to the community’s
effectiveness. In this phase, the
strategic framework is developed and
positioned for evaluation and to guide
creation of the capabilities and
communication strategies required to
achieve the vision of the geospatial community’s future state.
Capability Development is the first work stream of focus in the Envision phase (and in the other
phases of the strategic framework). Capability Development requires knowledge of, and discussion
on, complex technology and related topics. In this respect, a ―hypothesis-driven‖ approach (such
as described in the Element C.1.1 subsection below) helps to define and prioritize the analysis to
26
avoid the collection of data that may not be related to the required capabilities of the wildland fire
geospatial community. Capability Development also provides a constant reminder that community
mission, vision, goals, and objectives can best be achieved through continuous improvement in the
capabilities available (whether those be people, process, technology, or physical infrastructure related).
The Envision Phase, however, is about more than just Capability Development; rather, the
groundwork for planned change via the Ownership Building work stream also needs to be
established. Ownership Building activities encompass communications and training that inform
and enable individuals to operate effectively in the new geospatial environment. An essential
element, therefore, of this phase is identifying and engaging key stakeholders. If performed in the right
way, Ownership Building institutionalizes the improvements brought about through capability
development and structured/managed through Program Stewardship.
More specifically to Program Stewardship, the Envision Phase focuses on traditional program
management activities, team structure, decision-making roles and responsibilities, and resource-
allocation decision-making. For instance, the senior leadership team may determine that the
interagency decision-making process is ineffective and that additional information-sharing and
collaboration are needed for decision-making (and/or roles and responsibilities need to be clarified).
Early in the Program Stewardship work stream, in the Envision phase, we begin to establish the
processes, structures, resources, and tools to initiate and execute the overall strategic framework.
The Program Stewardship activities in the Envision phase also lay the groundwork for later connection
points with the Capability Development work stream.
2.1.1. Element C.1.1: Envision Strategic Context of GIS Program
Capability Development Element C.1.1

This element develops a vision of the interagency wildland fire geospatial community’s purpose and
methods and the context within which it strives to achieve its goals and objectives. This element
defines the scope and boundaries of the strategic framework. That definition is based on an
assessment of the community’s mission and strategies, customer value proposition, performance
attributes, and capabilities required to achieve its objectives. The element also involves an
assessment of strategic context & analysis (across the four dimensions of change) of what might be
hindering the interagency wildland fire geospatial community from achieving business objectives.
Element C.1.1 Best Practice Considerations

The strategic framework must build from an understanding of the purpose and context of the
organizational environment – in this case, the interagency wildland fire geospatial community.
Defining a community, however, solely by existing organizational structures (e.g., agency,
department, or division) offers an incomplete picture which can result in either less than optimal
analysis or a significant increase in downstream project scope. As such, the core group determined
early on that scope should not be constrained by the organizational boundaries of any one
community member; rather, it should encompass all relevant business activities and processes
(many of which cross organizational boundaries). The scope of analysis included all areas of the
community in which significant amounts of operational data must be obtained and/or shared.
In understanding strategic context, a hypothesis-driven approach offered significant advantages:
27
Reduce or refine number of potential strategic outcomes on which the community might focus
Identify relevant indicators and operational issues pertinent to achieving strategic outcomes, and
Facilitate more willing ownership and management buy-in
Finally, Element C.1.1 involved a considerable amount of interaction among senior leaders of the
interagency wildland fire community. Protocols for engaging stakeholders in data-collection efforts
and consensus-building meetings are outlined in the Change Management Plan (see Element O.2.1
under the Design phase). Moreover, as discussed below, element C1.1 is initiated in parallel with
the initiation of program management (see Element P.1.1 later under the Envision phase).
Element C.1.1 Key Activities and Findings

To improve understanding of strategic context, the core group completed a number of activities.
First, it engaged in information-gathering exercises, including (1) a wildland fire community data-
needs assessment, (2) stakeholder analysis, and (3) an agency policy and guidance analysis.
Across these, the group found that certain strategic aspirations already exist with respect to defining
an interagency geospatial framework. These suggest a geospatial approach that:
Embraces mission space to collaborate and coordinate in support of necessary outcomes

Understands that the federal government is aggressively encouraging the coordination of and
collaboration of geospatial platforms across the civil agency environment
Supports organizational objectives to apply geospatial technology to diverse missions
Understands that the NWCG is well-positioned to lead this cooperative geospatial strategic effort
Recognizes NWCG is moving into unexplored territory, resulting in changes in processes
Needs a strategic framework to define and execute mission-driven activities
Requires a communication and change-management capability that captures strategic action
planning and drives strategy to an operational model
Second, the core group created hypotheses to guide actions and deliberations. In particular,
members noted that geospatial technologies are critical components of decision-support activities
related to wildland fire planning and management. These technologies require interagency
geospatial datasets to support the individual business areas. Nevertheless, the interagency
wildland fire community faces a number of issues and challenges in maximizing the application of
these technologies. Therefore, the core team, to focus its activity, established an initial statement of
intent to capture the purpose (and value) of the geospatial strategic framework:
“To reduce inefficiency and redundancy for enhanced use of geospatial technology…”
Third, it also completed a Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats (SWOT) analysis to
refine the context for a strategic framework (see Table 4). The SWOT provided a number of
actionable items that can be revisited as the strategic framework is refined.
Fourth, the core team defined the wildland fire geospatial community’s mission, strategy, value
proposition, and performance targets via two facilitated strategic planning sessions. The resulting
content appears on the first page of this document. The core team also began to consider the
impact of the community’s initial goals across all four dimensions of change—people, processes,
28
technology, and physical infrastructure. For example, a shift to a customer-centric model might require
realigning the organizational structure, redesigning certain processes, integrating technologies that
provide access to customer information, and/or implementing other customer-focused innovative
technologies. Alternatively, an expansion or a new product offering may trigger the need for a
change in physical infrastructure to accommodate geospatial expertise within a centralized location
for more effective and streamlined operations.
Finally, the team reviewed mission-related strategic plans and agency/bureau reports available in
one central electronic file, stored at NIFC, and listed in Appendix G (Summary of Authorities).
Table 4: Interagency Wildland Fire Geospatial Community SWOT Analysis Highlights

Strengths Weaknesses
• Consensus on needs to hire GIS specialist • Defined program budget not available to support
• Growing use of GIS Standard Operating dedicated geospatial staff or contract support for
Procedures (GSTOP) & GISS Position Task Book emerging geospatial technologies
• Web services are providing opportunities for data • No standard training outside field-based GIS
dissemination technician (GIST)
• RSAC (and other facilities) have the ability to • Many ad-hoc CONOPS/SOPs
support major imagery acquisition, analysis, and • Numerous requests (not all fulfilled) to support wildland
data dissemination operations fire IT programs (e.g., FPUs for FPA)
• Potential to create a secure location for handling • Centralized, shared data inventory to serve as a
classified information and/or the potential to central repository is not available
create a memorandum of understanding (MOU) • Geospatial data stored/shared on external media (i.e.
with other federal agencies for handling classified USB Drives, DVDs, CDs) making control difficult
information • Accessing and sharing data nationwide is difficult
• Lack of physical infrastructure to handle classified
material during incident response
Opportunities Threats
• Developing and providing integrated training in • Day-to-day NICC support is more ephemeral (e.g.,
geospatial technology at national, regional, and volunteer-based) than implemented in
local levels required/planned GIS program
• Increase communication and coordination on • Need to increase communication skills (and staff) to
R&D at regional and local levels meet needs for sharing information processes and
• Create a centralized/shared data repository technology
• Interagency coordination and process • R&D requires multi-year process for implementation
established to create data and application • Investment Review Board as part of the future budget is
system (at field, state, region, and national level) established at the federal level but not at the regional,
• A wildland fire group that reviews emerging state, or local levels
geospatial technologies and applications • Stakeholders typically require considerable guidance
• Employ multi-faceted approach to sponsoring and support on data access and storage
and investing in geospatial technology • Individuals are not permitted to have admin rights on
• NIFC.FTP.gov site can serve as temporary data their agency computers when supporting incidents
storage (as a stop-gap measure) • Redundant data developed for various programs
• Use RSAC capability for imagery collection, • Data standards for geospatial data vary (in terms of
analysis, and output quality, coverage, content) at the state and region
• Paper products continue to be required by level, creating discrepancies at the boundaries (areas
customers; tools must be available in support of responsibility)
• Use corporate data warehouse (i.e., GEOMAC) • Duplicate requests are made for map products and
for community to reduce redundancy vector data for the various wildland fire IT applications
• Leverage USGS, NASA, and DHS servers to • Lack of a centralized office in interagency environment
29
Strengths Weaknesses
solve interagency fire community needs for geospatial technology people and resources
Element C.1.1 Gap Analysis

Gaining a full understanding of strategic context is an iterative process; nevertheless, a significant
amount of progress has been made with respect to this element: The core team:
Defined content related to mission, vision, goals, and objectives
Identified interagency wildland fire community business areas and linked those areas to
proposed other, more applicable business areas and major strategies and goals
Initiated a strategic conversation for the community’s leadership by identifying time,
resource, regulatory, budget, and other constraints and potential issues
Categorized SWOT components and aligned them with four dimensions of change
Highlighted similarities & gaps based on policy/guidance documents (see Table 5).
Table 5: Stakeholder Policy and Guidance Review Results

Common Capability Analysis
Gap Analysis and Shortfalls
(Similarities)
• Agency policy and direction recognizes the value • Policy and /or direction for geospatial data,
of geospatial data information for land and management, standards, infrastructure, and
resource management and does not preclude processes are not consistently identified across
the opportunity to share information. agency manuals and directives.
• The need for geospatial data standards and • Stage of development and implementation of strategic
management processes has been identified direction for geospatial data varies across agencies.
within the USFS and the DOI • Although OMB direction for geospatial information and
• Strategic direction that supports standards and management through the FGDC is recognized by all
internal and external sharing of geospatial data agencies, it has not been fully developed and
and information has been drafted and/or implemented in the wildland fire community.
developed by many agencies. • Although the NWFEA has been developed, it has not
• Agencies recognize the Departmental Federal been empowered and/or embraced by the entire
Geospatial Data Committee (FGDC) as interagency wildland fire community.
promoting direction on the coordinated • Agency geospatial data and information policy and
development, use, sharing, and dissemination of direction for wildland fire programs are not addressed
geospatial data on a national basis. at the agency CIO level.
• Agencies are beginning to place higher priority • Direction on development and management of
on development and sharing of geospatial data. geospatial data and information is ―stovepiped‖ within
• The DOI Enterprise Geographic Information each agency that it leads to interoperability among the
Management (EGIM) Team and U.S. Forest agencies.
Service Enterprise Geodatabase Standards • Policy on development and management of computer
provide direction for strategic framework of applications is limited, resulting in applications that
geospatial data and, for DOI agencies, they are agency or project specific.
provide linkages with the National Wildland Fire • Infrastructure to support geospatial information
Enterprise Architecture (NWFEA) and development and sharing, although recognized as
modernization blueprint. important, is not well defined and/or developed
Element C.1.1 Implementation Plan

Table 6 provides a synopsis of completed and prospective actions per this framework element.
30
Table 6: Element C.1.1 Implementation Activities
Geospatial Strategic Framework Implementation Activities
Current Status of Roles and

Elements Geospatial Core Team Activities
Implementation Responsibilities
Strategic framework
Review mission, strategic, and elements
performance plans and various 4
agency / bureau reports (on Coordinate NWCG
eShare site) wildland fire business
C.1.1.1 Gain a high-
Identify wildland fire business areas
level understanding of
areas 2
the wildland fire Geospatial PM
Link to major strategies and
geospatial Strategic alignment and Team,
goals
community’s mission, 4 NWCG Branch
strategy, value Identify key success factors in Coordinator
propositions, and delivering the wildland fire Key success factors
performance targets interagency geospatial identified
community value proposition 2
Identify initial time, resource,
regulatory, and budget Identify timeline,
constraints and key issues resources, and constraints
2
Review business performance Literature review (eShare
reports, analyses, and site)
conclusions 4
Identify and meet with Stakeholder analysis
sponsorship coalition, business 4
unit managers, and agency
staff to identify key drivers and
C.1.1.2 Prepare priorities for the wildland fire
Diagnostic geospatial community’s future
Assessment Report state capabilities. Assess
that describes current People, Processes, Executive
SWOT Analysis and Technology, and Infrastructure Sponsor,
includes a statement dimension preventing the Geospatial PM
of the problem that wildland fire geospatial and Team
motivates the community from operating more SWOT analysis
interagency effectively 4
geospatial Summarize the wildland fire
community’s need geospatial community’s Create a platform
strategic environment, including statement
strengths, weaknesses, 4
opportunities, and threats
Draft a problem statement of
the factors that support and
leverage the strategic
framework
31
2.1.2. Element C.1.2: Baseline of Current GIS Capabilities

This element assesses current GIS capabilities of federal, state, territorial, tribal, local, and other
partners to plan and prepare for wildland fire incident response. While building on strategic context
developed in C.1.1, this element focused on a more detailed understanding of key organizations
and their respective capabilities for supporting the interagency wildland fire geospatial community.

As noted in element C.1.1, the strategic framework must reflect an understanding of capabilities and
related gaps. A detailed baseline captures core business processes, high-level organizational
structure, system capabilities, facilities and workplace environment, and performance levels (from
the SWOT analysis). Activities must be coordinated across key dimensions (people, process,
technology, and infrastructure) to avoid redundant efforts and to identify interdependencies.

Interviews were completed with 40 key stakeholders to gather information about geospatial activities
in the wildland fire community. An outgrowth was a summary of key wildland fire business areas
(see Figure 10). Note that the numbers in Figure 10 represent areas in which respondents reported
they worked, irrespective of geospatial application use. The responses were based on areas of job
focus, which varied with respect to geospatial level of effort. These categories prospectively serve
as focus areas for capability development and program stewardship in the strategic framework.
Figure 10: Key Wildland Fire Business Areas
32
The stakeholder analysis also produced a baseline of activities by geospatial professionals

supporting operations at the field, local, state, regional, and national levels. Within respective
areas of expertise, these individuals acquire, manage, interpret, display, analyze, or use
geospatial data focusing on geographic, temporal, and spatial context of information themes.
These activities engage geospatial professionals in data production and consumption. Figure 11
categorizes stakeholders and partner agencies as producers and/or consumers by relative
percentage of total (100 percent) data-related activities. The following descriptors were applied:
Producer: Produces geospatial data through various products and/or services

Consumer: Uses geospatial data created through various products and/or services.
Existing
Geospatial
WILDLAND FIRE
Technology
STAKEHOLDER PRODUCER CONSUMER
Relationship
GROUP
with Lead
Agency?
USDA Forest
Service 45% 55%
Yes
DOI BLM 44% 56%

Yes
DOI NPS 35% 65%

Yes
DOI BIA Yes 20% 80%
DOI FW&S Yes 29% 71%
DOI OWFC N/A 60% 40%
USGS No separate 80% 20%

Fire Division
Figure 11: Geospatial Data Producer and Consumer Categorization
Use of this approach demonstrates stakeholder activity in both producer and consumer capacities
with some variation across agencies. The producer/consumer analysis also provided a look into
the available resources with which to coordinate a more cohesive geospatial approach and
supports creation of goals for interagency wildland fire community agencies. The USFS and BLM
rated the same with respect to geospatial production and consumption. Yet, the NPS, FWS, and
BIA results were similar to one another, this time with focus on consumption. This could point to
the need for additional resources in manpower and project funds for these organizations. While
the OWFC provides geospatial data through the LANDFIRE system, it also consumes a large
33
amount of geospatial info from the geospatial community via data requests. USGS produces a
large amount of geospatial output that the community is not leveraging to the maximum extent.

A comprehensive understanding of the current capabilities has been developed in collaboration
with interagency community staff, managers, and, as appropriate, stakeholders. A more detailed
baseline analysis might entail current staffing levels and any available workforce plans or
capability assessments, current policies (including interagency security and privacy policies),
refined descriptions of processes, and technical environment and commitments documentation.
Two facilitated brainstorming sessions and 40 key stakeholder interviews were conducted to
outline as many issues as feasible. One recurring theme was the lack of key business processes.
Going forward, interagency wildland fire community agencies will need to work together to
improve and consolidate business processes with USGS and OWFC to leverage current
capabilities and reduce redundant activities. The core team also highlighted a need to develop an
interagency mechanism that focuses on performance drivers to ensure efficient data collection.


Facilitated
Brainstorming
Identify key business processes Session
Identify major drivers of 4
performance
Stakeholder Geospatial PM and
Develop data collection Analysis
C.1.2.1 Document Core Team
mechanism that crosses 4
business processes and NWCG PM, NWCG
dimensions and focuses on
work flows Branch Coordinator
performance drivers
Data Mechanism
Identify trust relationships and 1
interactions with external
organizations and systems
Relationships
2
C.1.2.2. Evaluate and Technical Evaluation

Document current technical 1 NWCG Geospatial PM
document affected tech
environment and Team
environment
C.1.2.3 Identify relevant NWCG Strategic

Conduct best practice research Framework Geospatial Core Team
private industry and
and benchmarking analysis 4 and the Private Sector
third-party best practices
34
Circulate baseline document for Stakeholder

C.1.2.4 Develop Current
review and feedback from the Analysis
State Capability Baseline Geospatial PM
wildland fire geospatial community 1
document
key stakeholders
2.1.3. Element C.1.3: Envision Future GIS Program Capabilities

This element develops a common understanding of interagency wildland fire geospatial community
enterprise-level capabilities and alignment of those capabilities to mission, vision, and goals. These
activities define current capabilities across People, Process, Technology, and Infrastructure.

An interagency community seeking a strategic framework will most likely already have a general
expectation of its future program needs. As a result, this element might serve simply as a
validation mechanism of the appropriateness of that vision in light of stakeholder expectations,
community context, and operational reality. On the other hand, this element might be required to
develop a new future state vision altogether. In any event, the geospatial community must
identify MVGO related specifically to the geospatial strategic framework. This content is informed
by the (1) summary SWOT analysis and (2) hypotheses being presented and key questions being
asked by the stakeholders to which the strategic vision must respond. Moreover, this content
must align with planning, objectives, and outcome measurements, as indicated in Figure 12.
Validate Organization Purpose and Function

MISSION “Why the organization exists”
Identify Future State and Implications

VISION “Where the organization is going”
Define and Prioritize Broad Direction

GOALS “How you know you are there”
Develop Specific Targets & Activities

OBJECTIVES First Level of “How” to Achieve Goals and Vision
Assign Responsibility, Specify Steps,

ACTION ITEMS Allocate Time, and Develop Metrics
Execute and Monitor the Plan

MEASUREMENTS
Figure 12: Traditional MVGO Hierarchy
In facilitating a future state vision, it is essential to work closely with senior leadership and draw
information from key community stakeholders to build commitment and ownership of responsibility
for achieving the future state vision. As such, this element requires application of stakeholder
35
engagement, communications, and change management methods and is guided by the Change
Management Plan (see Element O.2.1) and elements in the Program Stewardship work stream.
This collaboration that centers around MVGO as geospatial requirements are developed is perhaps
the most important element in successful change management for the overall strategic framework.
Stakeholders (including employees) often actually agree on the future state vision of success.
Stakeholders, however, often hold widely differing views on how to achieve that vision. For
example, customers, employees, political appointee administrators, and the Congress might agree
on the need for a very high level of customer satisfaction (or public safety) but might disagree
vehemently over whether that vision requires reorganization, or substantially different worker skills,
or contracting out to augment staff during periods of peak demand.

The core group developed consensus on a high-level future state vision. Based on two facilitated
strategic planning sessions, the group also began to identify additional MVGO elements for the
NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework. For instance, as noted above, the group
decided that reasonable directional statements should include the:
Mission – Provide geospatial leadership and coordination to facilitate the business of the
interagency wildland fire community.
Vision – Provide seamless, integrated, and adaptive geospatial technologies across the
landscape.
We will use a template to align objectives, initiatives, and potential
The core group also achieved consensus on goals, alignment of initiatives, and performance
performance
measures. Figure measures to initial
13 highlights the stated goals
MVGO content that might now be vetted more broadly in
the community.
Representative Alignment Template
Mission / Vision Statements Alignment of Initiatives Sample Performance Measures

Goal
Goals •Increase awareness of changes for -Reinforce communication
Develop and implement the governance, manage the changes, and mechanisms with the field
programmatic infrastructure maximize acceptance within the -Reinforce change management
necessary to meet the geospatial program structure mechanisms with key stakeholders
•Design and mature interagency
needs of the wildland fire program management capabilities
community. -Create NWCG data standards
Coordinate and standardize •Implement consistent policies and procedures (i.e. GSTOP)
and procedures among all agencies -Promote agency adoption of
Interagency wildland fire data by
for an integrated interagency approach interagency data standards and
instituting and maintaining for geospatial technology operating procedures
policies and procedures.
•Centralized Access (Reduce -Adopt standard process for
Create an enterprise architecture duplicate efforts for increased integrating future applications
for a wildland fire geospatial efficiency of data management) -Create GIS web portal
database which allows simple •Support utilization of multiple -Central data gateway
centralized access and supports applications -Central data dictionary
multiple application utilization. -Participate / host leading key
•Improve level of awareness of
Foster a proactive and adaptive conferences
emerging and innovative geospatial
approach to emerging and -Training and education for stakeholders
technologies and techniques
innovative geospatial -Create GIS web portal
•Develop stature in the emerging -Development of data and software
technologies and techniques.
geospatial technology community -Processes for sharing data and software
Figure 13: Notional Geospatial Governance MVGO Content
36

The sessions have given the core team a head start on defining MVGO. The specificity of the
mission, vision, and goals, however, is currently much greater than that of objectives, initiatives, and
measures. As a result, the core team should re-engage to provide greater detail.

Table 8: Element C.1.3. Implementation Activities

Understand wildland fire Organizational
geospatial community ability to Assessment (see
motivate people and provide Attachment)
environment for people to
achieve organizational goals 4
Understand capabilities of
current workforce (numbers of
staff, mix of skills, mix of
seniority, geographic
C.1.2.1 Baseline distribution, productivity levels) Geospatial PM and
Stakeholder Analysis
current people Understand community ability to 4 Team, NWCG
dimension elements evolve its workforce (e.g., attract Branch Coordinator
employees/members, retain
staff, to train/develop and
change job skills/assignments,
define and modify career paths,
develop leaders, etc.) Change Management
Review organizational structure, Plan – Prepare for
and capability for achieving the change phase
wildland fire geospatial 2
community’s strategic goals
Summarize potential options Change Management
Conduct facilitated discussions Plan
and stakeholder engagement 2
activities as needed to build
C.1.2.2. Develop consensus for future state vision MVGO Content
consensus around a Define mission, vision, goals, 2
high-level future objectives, and strategies Executive Sponsor,
state vision, working Ensure that vision reflects the Geospatial PM and
closely with the organization capture of Core Team, NWCG
organization’s appropriate opportunities, Branch Coordinator
leadership and key avoidance of risks/threats, and Facilitated Strategic
stakeholders (iterate success in meeting needs and Planning Sessions
as required) expectations of future customers 4
Ensure goals, objectives and
strategies are sufficient
Begin building ownership to the
future vision
37
Begin incorporating efforts into

the organization’s strategic
planning process
Identify key People, Process,
Technology and Physical
Infrastructure that will be needed
to support the future state vision PPTI Analysis
Identify current capabilities and 4
processes that must continue,
but for which current
performance or cost levels fall
short of objectives
Facilitate collaborative teams to
identify and test potential Facilitated Strategic
capability requirements using Planning Sessions
C.1.2.3. Identify and
hypothesis-driven approach, 4
develop consensus
with specific leaders established
around capabilities
as decision-maker(s) Geospatial PM and
and high-level
Identify high-level financial Team, NWCG
capabilities needed
capabilities that will be needed Change Management Branch Coordinator
to support the future
to support the future-state vision Plan – Prepare for
state vision and
(not specific amounts of Change
strategies (iterate as
resources required, but instead 2
required)
the types, sources, and
authorities that may be needed,
along with very rough order of
magnitude estimates if feasible)
Identify interdependencies or
overlaps with other
organizations for new
capabilities identified Stakeholder Analysis
Conduct stakeholder 4
engagement activities with key
stakeholders to reach
consensus
2.1.4. Element O.1.1: Envision Stakeholder Engagement
Ownership Building Element O.1.1

Stakeholder Engagement is critical in the Envision phase because it involves engaging stakeholders
early and often through change management principles to develop momentum toward a desired end
state. The focus of Ownership Building during this phase, overall, is to:
Establish a collaborative partnership across the interagency wildland fire community
Discuss the commitment necessary to support the multi-year governance effort
Establish a sense of urgency and convey this urgency as appropriate.
Element O.1.1 Best Practice Considerations

The Stakeholder Engagement element identifies key leaders, highlights main issues, assigns
responsibility for engaging the sponsorship coalition, and prioritizes resulting actions to ensure
that all stakeholders are engaged at an appropriate level. This element expands (i.e., throughout
38
the interagency wildland fire community and beyond) as the strategic framework effort evolves
and additional stakeholder segments are identified.
The stakeholder analysis described earlier in this document is critical to helping identify target
audiences. Stakeholders, in this case, are defined as anyone who will be affected by the strategic
framework and may include middle managers, line and support staff, and even governing bodies,
such as OMB or Congress. It is essential to think broadly when identifying stakeholders, because
these individuals will ultimately drive whether the change (in this case, governance) is successful.
The stakeholder analysis also profoundly influences the ability of an organization to implement an
optimal solution and helps the governance team to pinpoint which stakeholders need increased
attention or more detailed training. The results of this analysis will change over time as the core
team responds to stakeholder input and continues to earn trust of the broader community.
In brief, focus areas required to support the Stakeholder Engagement element include:
Identify leaders who support the strategic framework to communicate the case for change
Identify key decision-makers for security and privacy implementation and compliance
Review organization charts to determine internal stakeholders and customers.
Element O.1.1 Key Activities and Findings

The geospatial core team representatives were identified for this work related to the geospatial
strategic framework to establish a partnership for the interagency geospatial wildland fire
community. The core team in turn identified a broader set of sponsorship coalition members to
solidify commitment, establish a sense of urgency, and convey the importance of a geospatial
strategic framework across the wildland fire community.
With respect to the stakeholder analysis, the core team conducted a comprehensive analysis of
stakeholders in production, maintenance, and use of geospatial data and products that support
wildland fire management. The 40 stakeholders that were identified are highlighted in Figure 14.
39
Figure 14: Key Wildland Fire Management Stakeholders
The team also reviewed data from interviews, conducted two facilitated strategic planning
sessions, and highlighted related key findings. The group also began to identify geospatial
initiatives and align them with notional objectives for the interagency wildland fire geospatial
community by asking a set of specific questions in the key stakeholder interviews (see Figure 15).
Interagency Geospatial Governance Subject Matter Expert Survey (excerpt)

 Mission Responsibilities
1. Which of the following business areas do you primarily support? Select all that apply. Categories included leadership,
business ops, fire program management, vegetation management, & wildland fire management.
2. Please briefly define the business area(s) you support and the objectives.
3. How do your business areas use geospatial technologies/data to support pre-incident planning/coordination? And, during?
 Information Requirements
1. Please provide examples of geospatial products used in your role(s).
2. Which types of Imagery resources do you use? Check all that apply, please specify. Detail provided in survey.
3. How important is it for you to access critical information under each of the following security levels? Detail provided in survey.
4. From which sources do you obtain info & data required to support your responsibilities? Detail provided in survey.
5. With whom do you collaborate to define your geospatial data requirements and/or sources?
6. How is critical geospatial information shared during pre-incident activities in support of your role(s)?
7. How are you leveraging geospatial data from the Fire Management Program?
8. How are you leveraging geospatial data from the Agency Resource Program?
 Reporting Requirements
1. Please list examples of the type of geospatial requests you are typically asked to fulfill.
2. Do you have a concept of operations or standard operating procedures identifying how to meet those requests?
3. What products do you create that contain geospatial information (i.e., coordinates, acreage calculations, etc.)? Please provide
copies. Candidates included WFDSS, FPA, ROSS, LANDFIRE, EMDS/HFPAS, ICS 209, Fuels Mapping, Fire Effects Mapping,
and Other.
4. What is your team’s investment strategy to support emerging geospatial technology across your business areas?
Figure 15: Geospatial Survey Questions
Element O.1.1 Gap Analysis

In the survey, the team asked about stakeholders with whom collaboration and coordination take
place. Respondents highlighted the sources of information (both internal and external) shown in
Figure 16 as being relevant to the wildland fire community. To evolve the Stakeholder
40
Engagement Strategy and Communication Plan over subsequent phases of this work, the core
group will expand the stakeholder universe accordingly.
Sources of Information
External Sources = Non-NWCG Members Internal Sources = NWCG Member Agencies
40
30
20
10
0
Other(s)
Resource Management
Universities
In-house library/archive
Local Government
National Agency
Public Internet
Informal social network
State Government
NGO’s
Sector database provider
Commercial / Private
(i.e. Google)
Programs
Figure 16: Key Stakeholder Sources of Information
The content of the Stakeholder Engagement Strategy needs to be refined over time for the
interagency wildland fire community. The Stakeholder Engagement Strategy uses the results of
the Stakeholder Analysis to describe the level of involvement in the strategic framework and what
information or training each segment might require. Key aspects in building out this strategy are
outlined in the following subsections related to this element. An important issue to consider is
identification of decision-makers for security and privacy implementation and compliance,
especially because the interagency wildland fire community is lacking an integrated enterprise
architecture. Special attention needs be given to identification of mid-level management
―champions‖ to refine the process for obtaining feedback from the geospatial community
stakeholders on effectiveness of stakeholder engagement. Careful thought should be given to the
development and implementation of training and templates (discussed later in this document),
especially to track and resolve issues as they arise. Finally, another key activity needed in this
community is facilitated peer support through activities and forums to share lessons learned.
Element O.1.1 Implementation Plan

Table 9: Element O.1.1 Implementation Activities

Identify key leaders who support Change Management Executive Sponsor,
governance to communicate Plan
O.1.1.1. Develop Geospatial PM and
case for change Prepare for change
stakeholder analysis Core Team, NWCG
Identify key decision makers for 4 Branch Coordinator
security and privacy issues
41
Review organization charts to

determine stakeholders and Stakeholder Analysis
customers 4
Identify key stakeholders
Activities required in development of
Stakeholder Engagement Strategy are:
Identify and prioritize change
targets
Identify relationship managers
Work with NWCG project teams
to identify key activities that
require active stakeholder
support and management
Plan activities and events that Stakeholder
involve key geospatial Engagement Strategy
O.1.1.2. Develop and
community stakeholders – Managing Change Geospatial PM and
implement
Gather data from geospatial Phase Core Team
stakeholder
stakeholders through interviews, 1
engagement strategy
focus groups, or surveys
Develop process for obtaining
feedback from NWCG geospatial
community stakeholder
Develop and implement training
and templates for relationship
managers to track issues
Facilitate peer support by
planning activities and forums to
share lessons learned and best
practices
2.1.5. Element O.1.2: Envision GIS Community Change Profile

This element begins in earnest the preparation for change with respect to the wildland fire
geospatial strategic framework. Here, the community’s current change profile is analyzed with
focus on readiness. Gaps between current and future states suggest potential risks and help to
highlight the degree to which tools, such as communications and training, will need to be applied
during later phases.

A Change Readiness Assessment is used to gauge how prepared an organization (or in this case,
organizations) is to develop and deploy new capabilities to support mission, vision, and goals.
This high-level assessment considers many factors, including the experience of the current
leadership in leading strategic framework efforts, cross-organizational history and success with
enterprise-wide change initiatives, capability gaps, and overall culture in the wildland fire
community. In survey format, the Change Readiness Assessment evaluates the extent to which
stakeholders understand and are able and willing to make a change by ascertaining the extent to
which the stakeholders agree or disagree with certain statements.
The primary components of a best-practice change-readiness profile include the following:
42
A description of the change management approach, focusing on the understanding, ability, and
willingness of stakeholders to make a transition
A summary of the results of the Change Readiness Assessment
Assessment and Community Change Profile.

The core team conducted a change readiness assessment (see Figure 17) for the wildland fire
community. Results of the assessment provide content for the Organizational Change Profile and
can be used later to help develop a formal change management plan. The NIFC Geospatial
Technology Strategic Framework effort was assessed at Level 2, which according to best practices
is where approximately 46 percent of other respondent organizations fall (see Figure 18).

Going forward, the community should strive for a score of at least 2.5 out of 5 for each element to
maximize risk mitigation. This Change Readiness Assessment should be conducted periodically
(e.g., once every six months for a multi-year effort, such as this one) to monitor the evolution of
understanding and acceptance of the new environment and capabilities.
Figure 17: Sample Change Readiness Assessment
43
Change management competency is evident Continuous

Highest
Organizational in all levels of the organization and is part of process
Level 5 Competency the organization’s intellectual property and improvement in
profitability and
responsiveness
competitive edge place
Organizational Organization-wide standards and methods

Selection of
Level 4 Standards
are broadly deployed for managing and
common approach
leading change
Multiple Comprehensive approach for managing Examples of best

Level 3 Projects change is being applied in multiple projects practices evident
Isolated Many different

Some elements of change management are
Level 2 Projects being applied in isolated projects
tactics used
inconsistently
Highest rate of
Adhoc or People-dependent
project failure,
Level 1 Absent
Little or no change management applied without any formal
turnover and
practices or plans
productivity loss
Figure
Prosci 18: Change
Change ProfileMaturity
Management Scales Model

Table 10: Element O.1.2 Implementation Plan

Review customer and
employee satisfaction survey
results Change Management
Plan Executive Sponsor,
O.1.2.1. Design Review reports from previous
Prepare for change Geospatial PM and Core
Initial Change change efforts
4 Team, NWCG Branch
Readiness Develop interview guide
Coordinator
Assessment Develop change management
workshop materials, interview
schedules, surveys, etc.
Develop report template
44
Plan and schedule change

management training sessions
Facilitate interviews, focus
groups, and surveys with
leadership to gather thoughts
O.1.1.2. Conduct
on critical success factors Change Management
Change Readiness
Develop Organizational Plan Geospatial PM and Core
Assessment and
Change Profile and archive Prepare for change Team
develop
the profile 4
Organizational
Change Profile Share Organizational Change
Profile and change
management
recommendations with senior
leadership and core team
members
2.1.6. Element P.1.1: Envision (Initiate Program Management)
Program Stewardship Element P.1.1

This element initiates the initial governance structure and related processes. It solidifies the
overarching strategy for the Envision phase, develops detailed work plans, identifies ―quick-hit‖
opportunities, and establishes project teams. This element drives project teams to complete and
manage program activities, and ensures that owners have resources needed to complete activities.
Element P.1.1 Best Practice Considerations

This element focuses on the need to develop an overarching management approach for the
initiative. Moreover, it helps to identify core team leads, develop work plans and management
plans, specify ―quick-hit‖ opportunities, and establish a project management plan. In addition, this
element drives the core team to manage and complete program activities. Regular
communications, meetings, reviews, audits, performance reports, and a disciplined change
control process are used to monitor team progress against the work and management plans.
Element P.1.1 Key Activities and Findings

A sample annual program schedule, aligned with the strategic framework, is attached as
Appendix F of this document. The schedule was created and utilized during the past year. The
team met with NWCG leadership to discuss the strategic framework and with the NWCG Branch
Coordinator to discuss the NWCG GTG Charter and Organizational Intent (see Appendices A and
B). To complete the content, the team indentified the strategic alignment to provide MVGO-
related action items and prospective performance measures for the program. Discussion of high-
level scope and schedule and budgetary considerations took place with the core team. Members
of the sponsorship coalition were engaged in many of the discussions for approval. Roles and
responsibilities were established for review.
Element P.1.1 Gap Analysis

Change and project management training are under way for the management approach that forms
the basis of this strategic framework. Risk management processes and tools were developed as
part of the strategic framework. Although the core team has been established, a significant need
exists in the organization for additional project teams. Importantly, these teams will need to
45
develop project-level work plans that describe the detailed objectives, scope, approach,
resources, schedule, and work products.
As a next element in the strategic framework, the core team should meet with the Executive
Sponsor(s) to determine the optimal approach to staffing teams with the best people in the least
possible amount of time. It is critical for the core team to provide internal communications for
implementation and external communications for external stakeholders. In addition, the team will
need to develop a system for document control and tools to manage the program (e.g., the team’s
eShare site and related records management). To continue with implementation of interagency-
wide geospatial capabilities, management processes will need to be established, the training
needs of the project team will need to be estimated, training materials will need to be prepared,
training provided and assessed, and finally, approval will need to be obtained from the Executive
Sponsor on work plans and project team composition. Most important, the core team will need to
continue with implementation of the overarching program schedule (in Appendix F) and continue
to support communications and change management through regularly scheduled meetings.
Table 11: Element P.1.1 Implementation Plan

Discuss strategic framework Executive Sponsor,
P.1.1.1. Meet with Discuss how the strategic NWCG Strategic Geospatial PM and
leadership to discuss framework should be tailored Framework Team
the strategic Explain Program 4 NWCG PM, NWCG
framework Management’s role in driving Branch Coordinator
the strategic framework
Select core team members NWCG Strategic
P.1.1.2 Establish and
Coordinate and develop charter Framework, NWCG
document
and org intent documents GTG Charter and Executive Sponsor,
governance structure
Determine composition and Organizational Intent Geospatial PM, NWCG
with corresponding
staffing of geospatial team(s) Documents Branch Coordinator and
roles, responsibilities
Provide governance model 4 Geospatial Core Team
training
NWCG Strategic
P.1.1.3. Establish Framework, NWCG
Establish regular meeting
regular and ad hoc GTG Charter and
locations and schedules
geospatial core team Organizational Intent Geospatial PM
Communicate frequency of and
meeting locations Documents
topics for meetings
and schedules 4
46
2.1.7. Element P.1.2: Initiate GIS Community Risk Strategy

This element establishes the initial approach and processes for risk management of the interagency
wildland fire geospatial community. It develops an overarching strategy for the Envision phase
related to risk management with key linkages to the overall program management element in this
phase. Key activities include identifying, mitigating, and managing risk, scope, schedule, and cost to
ensure that the strategic framework remains on track.

The strategic framework and program management processes are established during the
Envision phase and are used in conjunction to implement Capability Development and Ownership
Building work products (see previously defined in sections above). The purposes of this specific
element are threefold: (1) to help prioritize improvement actions, (2) to identify risks and mitigation
approaches, and (3) to develop an overall risk strategy. Additionally, this is an element in which
Change Readiness Assessment results are analyzed in accordance with leadership (providing
guidance) and project management (adding structure to the technical side of the change). Change
management supports the ―people aspect‖ of the change. See Figure 19.
Figure 19: Risk Strategy Elements

As a result of the Change Readiness Assessment, the risk assessment chart in Figure 20
provides additional information of value – in this case, the team found that the wildland fire
geospatial community is characterized by ―medium risk‖ as it relates to successful implementation
of change.
47
Figure 20: Risk Assessment Chart

Maintaining an equal or better risk assessment profile will require attention within the community.
Risk mitigation often goes unnoticed and unrecorded because damages have been avoided. This
situation makes it difficult to demonstrate the cost effectiveness of risk mitigation and to promote its
benefits. The core group will spend additional time identifying risks associated with wildland fire
activities and geospatial framework improvements.
Element P.1.2 Implementation Plan

Table 12: Element P.1.2 Implementation Activities

Review employee survey
results Risk Management
Review reports from previous Plan Geospatial PM and Core
P.1.2.1. Design Initial
organizational risk mitigation 1 Team, NWCG Branch
Risk Readiness
efforts Coordinator
Assessment
Develop interview guide
Develop report template if using
a team of analysts
48
Facilitate interviews, focus

groups, and surveys with
leadership to gather preliminary
thoughts on critical success
P.1.2.2. Conduct Risk
factors for risk mitigation tactics Risk Management
Readiness
Develop Risk Mitigation special Plan Geospatial PM and Core
Assessment and
tactics and archive to use as a 1 Team
Develop
baseline for comparison with
Organizational Risk
later Risk Mitigation Plan
Profile
Share Organizational Risk
Profile and special mitigation
tactics with senior leadership
and core team members
.
2.1.8. Element P.1.3: Initiate Geospatial Budget Plan

This element supports analysis of the high-level economic costs and benefits of geospatial strategic
framework improvement opportunities. The analysis influences the enterprise Future State Vision,
the selection of alternatives, the sequence of activities specified in the Program Management Plan,
and the decision on whether to move ahead with various project initiatives.

This element requires a review of related budget plans and current agency multi-year budget
plans, especially related to the geospatial strategic framework. If such documents do not yet
exist, this element serves to raise awareness of the need to create them as soon as feasible.
Moreover, current organization security and privacy budget priorities should be considered along
with the OMB Exhibit 300 Capital Planning process or other acquisition guidelines.

During the stakeholder analysis, the core team learned of the geospatial investment strategies, or
lack thereof, of the geospatial community organizations. Moreover, the team found that
investment strategies to support emerging geospatial technology across business areas do not
appear to be coordinated or collaborated upon in the interagency wildland fire community. At the
same time, the potential exists for the interagency geospatial community to implement a more
formal interagency budget process in which funds are brought together in coordinated fashion.
The following activities could help the interagency geospatial community in coordinating budget
planning: (1) programmatic funding for a budgetary baseline, (2) targeted information and project
asset investments, (3) field-sponsored reimbursable funding for projects that meet business
requirements, (4) pooled interagency funding to support specific technology applications, and (5)
grant funding proposals.

A cohesive and formalized interagency budget to fund geospatial technologies does not exist.
Going forward, such a budget would be a vital component of a successful NWCG geospatial
program. A comprehensive ROI analysis of streamlining geospatial requests, products, and
49
activities is a critical near-term activity for the wildland fire geospatial community. Such an
analysis might demonstrate the relationships among the rate of proficiency, utilization, and speed
of adoption for implementing a cohesive geospatial program for the interagency wildland fire
community. The longer that it takes the wildland fire community to implement a strategic
framework to manage the various activities taking place, the more it will cost the agencies in their
rate of utilization and proficient use of geospatial technologies. Figure 21 depicts representative
economic costs and benefits (i.e., the ROI) of potential improvement opportunities.
Figure 21: Notional Return on Investment Curve
It is important to note that Figure 21 is a notional graphic and does not contain specific financial
information about the interagency wildland fire community. However, the principles likely apply to
increased proficiency and utilization of geospatial technologies as the speed of adoption and
enhanced use of geospatial technologies increase.

50

Geospatial Core Current Status of
Elements Roles and Responsibilities
Team Activities Implementation
Review major areas
affected by improvement
options
Develop understanding of
current interagency
P.1.3.1 Develop an structure, organizational
Executive Sponsor,
understanding of the mission statements, and
Budget Strategy Geospatial PM and Team
return on investment of existing business processes
1 NWCG PM, NWCG Branch
strategic framework Collaborate with decision- Coordinator
activities makers and stakeholders to
ensure that economic
analysis work products
developed during the
Envision phase are properly
structured
Meet with the core team
and key stakeholders to
gain an understanding of
each improvement option
as it relates to people,
P.1.3.2 Review the processes, technology, and
Budget Strategy Executive Sponsor,
financial options for physical infrastructure
1 Geospatial PM, NWCG
improvement Document each
Geospatial Core Team
improvement alternative to
the extent needed for a
high-level (Rough Order of
Magnitude [ROM]) analysis
of costs and benefits
Document each
improvement alternative to
P.1.3.3 Develop a ROM the extent needed for a
estimate of initial high-level ROM analysis of
investment cost and costs and benefits
ongoing sustainment Develop a ROM estimate of
costs associated with initial investment costs and Budget Strategy Geospatial PM, NWCG
each improvement ongoing sustainment costs 0 Geospatial Core Team
option (including the associated with each
option of maintaining improvement option
the “status quo”) (including the option of
maintaining the ―status
quo‖)
51
2.2. Phase 2: Design

Preparedness involves more than simply envisioning the future, it must also reflect the design of
capability development approaches, ownership building strategies, and program stewardship
approaches. In essence then, the purpose of the Design phase is to help make the elements
identified in the Envision Phase more operational.
With respect to Capability Development, this phase continues certain activities begun in the
Envision phase to enhance understanding of existing business processes, enterprise-wide
interagency structure, technology capabilities, and facilities. The interagency community should
also commit to a concept of operations
(CONOPS) for the geospatial strategic
framework and a Conceptual Solution
Architecture that provides a
description of how the interagency
wildland fire community will operate
with the new and/or improved
geospatial technology capabilities.
The resulting system design aligns the

technical components with first-level
component requirements and aligns
the architecture views (e.g.,
application, network, and data) with
the future state system. It also
describes, for the first time, the
system architecture, major
subsystems, database, processing
models, user input, system output, and
component interfaces. The Design
Technical Requirements and Design
Geospatial Conceptual Architecture elements support this requirement for technology efforts.
During the Design phase, Ownership Building expands stakeholder involvement activities beyond
the core group. Moreover, change management, communications, and training aspirations
become plans with specific activities and accountabilities. The Ownership Building and Capability
Development processes should work in a coordinated fashion so that training modules and delivery
mechanisms coincide with the capability deployment schedule. Those who participate in creating
the new designs either directly or by making their staff available (e.g., mid-level managers) are
targeted for additional buy-in. Finally, project teams begin to socialize the designs and related
impacts with key stakeholders. These latter objectives directly support the Capability Development
process area in that they validate new designs and increase understanding and, hopefully, buy-in
for a smoother transition to the new environment during later phases of the framework.
In Program Stewardship, the team will initiate, plan, and implement project work streams to
develop the requirements in the other two work streams. It also develops detailed implementation
plans that prioritize development and deployment of key capabilities. Throughout the design
52
activities, trade-offs are made across the four dimensions of change (people, process,
technology, and physical infrastructure) to provide needed capabilities in support of the
community’s goals and objectives. The budget planning activity is another key component in
managing the trade-offs, because that activity involves evaluation of economic implications of the
various design alternatives.
Finally, the performance management system design is introduced to incorporate accountability

via the measures that ensure that the community can gauge progress against its objectives. To
ensure that the measures can be used effectively, potential implementation issues are
considered during design activities.
2.2.1. Element C.2.1: Identify GIS Technical Requirements (Hardware,

Software, and Data)

This element defines detailed requirements for the system components that support the Future
State geospatial program capabilities. The requirements define the boundaries for systems based
on a description of how such systems will be used to support future-state business requirements.
The requirements often are defined in terms of functionality, usability, reliability, performance,
scalability, interoperability, security, maintainability, and standards. The requirements specification
also describes non-functional requirements, design constraints, and other factors necessary to
provide a complete and comprehensive description of the required technology solutions.

Establishing and maintaining consensus with the requisite (in this case, NWCG) program
management leadership and other wildland fire geospatial community stakeholders is critical for
the success of this element, because the requirements will inform all future technology-related
activities, including review of commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS) components and development of
the conceptual solution architecture, technical design, and testing activities. This consensus is
also critical to development of ownership for future technology purchases and enablement.
The technology requirements will naturally evolve over the duration of the project as deficiencies,
shortcomings, and inaccuracies in requirements specifications are discovered. As a result,
establishing a requirements baseline and managing it diligently are essential. A Requirements
Traceability Matrix, developed during this element, assists in the management of the
requirements by recording the relationship of the requirements through the design, development,
testing, and release of system components.

The team found that the geospatial wildland fire community struggles to share geospatial data
and, by extension, related technology applications at all levels of support. Stakeholders
generally are content to use a host of work-around solutions for data sharing (and have been
dealing with this issue for many years). Initially, the stakeholder analysis suggested that, as
software and storage technologies continue to increase in capability and decrease in cost, the
community is awaiting corporate-type solutions to provide central access for data they require.
53
The stakeholder interviews also highlighted that the community lacks authoritative data sources,
does not benefit from data security through a single logon, is not able to benefit from centralized
access from any location, and remains reliant on specific software applications.
Moreover, the stakeholder community is involved with a multiple output products and formats.
Specifically, when asked to ‖Please list the types of geospatial requests you are typically asked
to fulfill,‖ the respondents noted a number of products, with map products and vector data noted
with the greatest frequency (see Figure 22). These products likely require a geospatial data
management system to provide the capacity to support large data volumes in multiple formats,
serve data to users at all levels, and ensure that users, applications, and models have timely
access to the best data available.
30
25 Map Products
20
Data - Raster
15
10 Data - Vector
5
0 Data - KML/KMZ
Ad hoc Modeling
s
ng
on
s
Z
r
r
ct
cto
ol
ste
KM
eli
cti
du
To
Ve
Ra
od
L/
ire
ro
eb
KM
M
-
-
P
Web Tools
/D
W
ta
ta
ap
oc
ing
Da
Da
-
M
ta
ain
Da
Ad
Training/Direction
Tr
Figure 22: Geospatial Output Products
Interestingly, only half of the geospatial-related requests are met by more than 20 different
operating plans and 40 various IT applications in the wildland fire community. A comprehensive
SOP is needed to address requests (and, by extension, technical requirements) in order of
priority. Based on our analysis, this prioritization might include (1) map products, (2) vector data,
(3) raster data, and (4) KLM/KMZ data. A SOP for ad hoc modeling, web tools, and training must
also be established for the interagency community.

Data resides at the core of the NWCG Geospatial Strategic Framework requirements. The
community having access to a fully collaborative geospatial data environment is imperative.
NWCG partners require a comprehensive selection of mission-critical and authoritative data
available to them both on- and off-site, regardless of home agency or other affiliation. The user
community has identified requirements for an interoperable system outside of firewall
restrictions. The solution must serve the entire interagency community with mission-focused
COD. Users with roles and responsibilities supporting the wildland fire mission require access
via data services and web-based solutions to facilitate the use of desktop applications, enterprise
tools, and the various modeling applications utilized by the community.
To provide required access to key information, the underlying technical requirements must be
fully scalable to support all aspects of wildland fire operations. While permanent off-site facilities
54
are easily integrated, field operations having limited connectivity and urgent demands must be
accounted for in the final designs and implementation. The system must also have core security
requirements placed upon it by each of the NWCG partner agencies and must be redundant to
ensure access across the nation under all circumstances.
Finally, key staffing roles must be filled to ensure successful identification, implementation, and
maintenance of core technology requirements. For a prospective interagency solution to support
the geospatial data requirements of the community, resources will likely be required from the
collective community to support the following key staff positions:
Geospatial Program Administrator – This position should be a full-time assignment. This

individual will be responsible for providing access to the interagency wildland fire community’s
geospatial data and system, cataloging data, and managing the data sets specific to wildland
fire.
Wildland Fire Data Stewards – Each partner agency might provide this function on a part-time
basis. Individuals in this position would represent their respective agencies on geospatial data
requirements related to wildland fire missions.
2.2.2. Element C.2.1 Implementation Plan


Document requirements
Document usability requirements Facilitated strategic
Document reliability requirements planning sessions
Document maintainability 1
requirements
Document interoperability
requirements
Document security, assurance and
C.2.1.1 Define 1 Geospatial PM and
privacy requirements
technical Core Team, NWCG
requirements Document interconnection Branch Coordinator
requirements
Develop security scenarios for user
and system access management
Facilitated
Develop security management
brainstorming session
structure that defines security event 1
collection and reporting
Document design constraints
Document application standards
55
Rank importance of requirements in

supporting the future state, typically
done jointly with representatives of
organization to ensure quality and
ownership
C.2.1.2. Prioritize
Rank importance of Facilitated
requirements to Geospatial PM and
requirement/function within technical brainstorming session
support alternative Core Team, NWCG
architecture 1
analysis and release Branch Coordinator
Rank impact of requirement on
planning
project risk (e.g., performance,
availability, technical)
Analyze potential impact of not
attaining lower ranked, less
important, requirements
Construct prototypes to validate and
refine requirements Facilitated
C.2.1.3. Obtain Geospatial PM and
Create System Requirements brainstorming session
consensus on Core Team, NWCG
Specification 1
requirements Branch Coordinator
Engage key stakeholders to reach
consensus on requirements
Identify tool to capture and track
requirements (e.g., MS Excel, Facilitated Geospatial PM and
Rational Requisite Pro) brainstorming session Core Team, NWCG
Document relationship of 1 Branch Coordinator
requirements to business processes
Create RTM structure to capture
C.2.1.4. Create
future design, development, testing,
Requirements
and release information
Traceability Matrix
(RTM) Create Requirements Traceability
Matrix document
Create separate Security
Requirements Traceability Matrix
document and Privacy Requirements
Traceability Matrix document (if
applicable)
2.2.3. Element C.2.2: Design GIS Capabilities (Hardware, Software, and Data)

This element builds on previous ones to validate the specific technology capabilities required
for the interagency wildland fire geospatial community. It also supports consensus-building
related to future state systems design.

This element enhances the identification of technical requirements created per Element C.2.1
activities. The various designs (e.g., business unit, human capital, capability, technical
component, and detailed facility program) are integrated using linkages to the community’s value
proposition and mission. This design framework integrates the capabilities and serves to
manage trade-offs among the dimensions of change (people, process, technology, and
infrastructure) to deliver a workable technology design.
56
Core project team composition is critical to this stage of framework development. The team
should include credible and respected staff from within the organization to help create and
validate capability designs. As emphasized in the Ownership Building section, ownership and
sponsorship broaden during the Design phase, and the project teams are responsible for helping
to facilitate those aspects of strategic framework evolution. Project leadership should also select
a technical approach for the Design and Develop phases based on the type of development-
effort custom software, COTS integration, system engineering, schedule requirements,
complexity of the solution, and client preferences. Important in all of this is familiarity with the
key wildland fire technology applications already in existence.

During the interviews, stakeholders discussed a number of concerns related to accessing
necessary geospatial data required to perform work. Common themes revolved around (1) data
availability, (2) conflicting data sources, (3) multiple efforts required to collect and store similar
data, and (4) the lack of specific leadership to resolve issues. The community has become
accustomed to developing personal partnerships to fulfill its information needs. Formal
capability design is not readily apparent at this time.
With respect to technology, participants also identified the NIFC FTP site as the only dependable
location for sharing geospatial data. While many applications use common data themes, they
are not sharing data across any infrastructure or making data available for any other purposes.
This situation results more from the lack of data-sharing policy and/or restrictions between
agency systems than any human effort to prevent the sharing of geospatial data.

The promotion of information-sharing appears to be key to meeting the overarching requirements
of the interagency wildland fire community. Stakeholders must articulate the benefits of
information-sharing through daily conversation and formal presentations in support of geospatial
data requirements. Through a focus on the ―need to share‖ and the use of Common Operating
Data, the NWCG partners will empower the community by providing it with access to the
information it currently owns but has difficulty accessing. Moreover, this empowerment will
allow the community to identify key gaps in capability design and respond to those gaps as
appropriate.
Through the development of an interagency Information Sharing Council (ISC), the NWCG
partner agencies could better support their combined data-access efforts. An ISC will provide a
forum to identify key information requirements, determine authoritative internal and external
sources, and facilitate data access for the community. In addition, the ISC could be leveraged to
assist in the assessment of duplicative data requirements and sources within current systems
and applications. As an NWCG support entity, the ISC would focus on information and data for
the enterprise, and not specifically on geospatial data.
The technology solution for ISC efforts might reside in the Spatial Data Sharing Environment
(SDSE). The SDSE would provide a data warehouse setting for information compiled through
the ISC. Such a system must provide a holistic data-sharing environment for the community and
accommodate inclusion of partners (federal, state, tribal, local, and industry). Under this
arrangement, the NWCG would work with the ISC and agency chief technology officers (CTOs)
57
and chief information officers (CIOs) to develop a solution with required security measures under
a common framework that would become the SDSE.


Analyze issue and hypothesis with
core team, draft stakeholder analysis Facilitated strategic
criteria, and identify issues based on planning sessions
a high-level understanding of the 4
wildland fire geospatial community’s
current strategy, current capabilities,
and the potential future opportunities
C.2.2.1 Develop and Determine stakeholder analysis and 4
evaluate potential data requirements for validating Executive sponsor,
options for future issues that are identified Geospatial PM and
state vision of Collect and analyze stakeholder data Core Team, NWCG
geospatial to validate issues Facilitated Branch Coordinator
technology Identify potential hypotheses for brainstorming session
capability future customers, stakeholders, 4
organizational roles, and potential
successful outcomes
Conduct a data-feedback session Conduct Sponsorship
with senior leadership to reach Coalition Member
consensus on the identified Briefings
hypotheses, and begin developing a 2
commitment to change
C.2.2.2. Identify
advantages of Discuss community stakeholders’ Stakeholder Analysis Geospatial Core
potential future state and customers’ needs 4 Team
vision
C.2.2.3. Evaluate Listen to customers’ and

implementability of stakeholders’ concerns, e.g., about Stakeholder Analysis Executive sponsor,
potential future state continued availability and 4 Geospatial PM and
visions – convenience of services, higher Core Team, NWCG
58
considering key costs, potentially burdensome Branch Coordinator

challenges and requirements and procedures
constraints that may Assess sophistication of the
inhibit change interagency community’s
management processes (i.e.,
whether it can successfully manage
change and whether it can Change Management
successfully manage in the future Plan – Prepare for
state while using the new operating Change
model it adopts 4
Discuss availability of funding
(budget), human capital, and
knowledge/intellectual capital
resources needed to achieve the
future-state vision of the wildland fire
geospatial community
Review government policies, Stakeholder Analysis,
regulations, and Executive Branch See Task #3
expectations that may inhibit the 4
organization from pursuing its vision
or implementing its strategies (e.g.,
those issued by OPM or OMB or
established by partner agencies)
Assess attitudes and skepticism
associated with the interagency
community’s prior experience with Risk Mitigation Plan –
similar change programs Prepare for Change
Develop the ability to communicate, 1
train, and involve staff in strategies
to promote change acceptance
Identify enterprise risks to people,
process, technology, and
infrastructure
Identify differences among the
Stakeholder Analysis,
people, process, technology, and
C.2.2.4. Conduct gap Task #3
physical infrastructure capabilities
analysis between 4
needed to support the future state
current capabilities vision and the current capability
and the capabilities levels Geospatial PM and
needed to support
Core Team, NWCG
the future state Identify challenges and constraints
Branch Coordinator
vision and strategies that may inhibit change
– and recommend Initiate strategic framework and Change Management
ways to close the change management planning to Plan – Prepare for
gap make the changes while avoiding or Change
overcoming challenges, constraints, 4
and obstacles
59
2.2.4. Element C.2.3: Design GIS Conceptual Solution Architecture

This element develops the conceptual architecture for the functional and technical requirements of
the organization’s Future State Conceptual Solution Architecture. The architecture specifies the
overall structure, its logical components, and the relationships between components. Business
processes are mapped to preexisting components (e.g., COTS, GOTS, web services, software
components) or custom components and are informed by product and market analysis. The
evaluation of preexisting components supports business case development (see element P.2.2).

The Conceptual Solution Architecture activities should be coordinated with the NWCG
Information Technology Committee to ensure that the Core Team understands the current
standards of the interagency enterprise architecture and procedures to request updates to the
standards and models. The models developed for strategic framework projects that involve
change may replace current models for the affected area.

Through the stakeholder analysis, a number of various types of CONOPS and SOPs in the
wildland fire community were found (see Table 16).
Table 16: Wildland Fire Community Example CONOPS and SOPs

EXAMPLES OF CONOPS / SOPs
MAC Support Handbook

LANDFIRE Program – Planning
Photogrammetric worksheet for our photogrammetric products
Regional SDE plan that is located on the following web page at:
http://fsweb.r3.fs.fed.us/eng/gis/sde_info.html
Data dictionary and instruction documents
IFTDSS is the closest
GSTOP
Procedures for the Alaska suppression GIS. Documented procedures can be found at:
http://afshome/administration/awfcg.php.
National BLM and AWFCG Standards for data
Proprietary IBM info to tell the programmer how to use (white paper)
Incident Management System – situation unit leader, working directly for plans
Fire Dispatch Unit works with NIFC (District FMOs upload info NFPORS)
EMDS/HFPAS SME Report (x2)
GIS Standard Operating Procedures for Incidents (x2)
GIST training curriculum – and operations guide
NPS Regional Template (Nancy_Shock@nps.gov)
FWS Geospatial Strategic Plan (x2)
BIA Line Officer – the Regional Director will then make the formal decision about what
information they need by hard copy letter
Changes from incident to incident
ROGIS
60
It was also determined that the National Wildland Fire Enterprise Architecture (NWFEA) Blueprint
is not widely accepted, or implemented as a design, in the interagency community’s enterprise
architecture system. In NWFEA Blueprint, the Wildland Fire Enterprise attempts to navigate
government and tribal organizational boundaries in performing common activities. As depicted in
Figure 23, the Wildland Fire Enterprise comprises (1) government and tribal wildland fire programs,
(2) interagency wildland fire management committees;, and (3) the U.S. Fire Administration.
Figure 23: National Wildland Fire Enterprise

The SDSE discussed in Section C.2.2 must facilitate access at multiple levels to support the
requirements of the entire community enterprise. With NWCG as a facilitator, information access
should be as open and expedient as possible. With on-site users across many various
disciplines, the data required to support the products, models, and applications for the larger
community must be readily available. For the off-site users at both fixed and field locations, data
access might be facilitated through direct logon or through Virtual Private Network (VPN)-type
solutions.
Many options exist for hosting an interagency data warehouse, with the two primary alternatives
being (1) an enterprise data center or (2) a cloud computing environment. The data center
option requires a host location (NIFC or another location), server hardware, software, and the
staff required to facilitate its use. To accommodate redundancy, duplicate resources must be
acquired and made operational at a secondary site in another geography. In situations where
some or all of these resources exist, the data center option can be a cost-effective solution with
minimal start-up expense and cost-sharing for long-term operations and maintenance. The
current options with cloud computing can facilitate both data access and redundancy in a neutral
computing environment. Space in the cloud is leased or rented based on access and storage
volumes. Connectivity can be made through most any Internet connection point. Ultimately, the
NWCG partners must determine which solution has the greatest benefit to the stakeholder
community.
In developing any corporate-type system conceptual architecture, standards are required for
naming conventions, data types, and overall system organization. Many data standards
currently exist across the IT, geospatial, and emergency management communities. The ISC in
collaboration with the partner agency CTO/GIOs can work to determine the best solutions for the
61
wildland fire community. It is assumed that the majority of software requirements have already
been met through enterprise licensing agreements carried by the partner agencies. It is likely,
however, that stakeholders could have specific software requirements not permitted by these
licenses. These issues can be addressed through the ISC as they relate to information access.
Provided that the SDSE solution maintains a ―software agnostic‖ stance, all applications should
have access to the data warehouse across the interagency enterprise.


Identify core architectural models and
standards to be leveraged (e.g., service- Facilitated strategic
based architectural model, Business planning sessions
1
Process Management [BPM])
C.2.3.1 Partition the Determine impact of current project on
overall solution into organization’s enterprise architecture Stakeholder Analysis
manageable units Identify applicable hardware, software, 1
Geospatial PM and
(e.g., configuration and architectural design standards
Core Team,
items) to organize Identify areas related to the scope of the
Facilitated NWCG Branch
the analysis process current project
brainstorming Coordinator
and associated Identify boundaries and integration points
analysis efforts and session
Coordinate with NWCG enterprise 1
teams architecture group to understand
communication channels and model
Conduct Sponsorship
update procedures
Coalition Member
Identify existing reusable component Briefings
(e.g., web services) available to 1
enterprise
Identify Business architecture (e.g.,
business processes, use case models,
object models)
C.2.3.2 Analyze Build Data architecture
problem domain and Stakeholder Analysis Geospatial Core
Build Applications architecture
develop models 1 Team
Build Technical infrastructure architecture
Enhance Security and privacy
architecture
Review Preliminary Risk Assessment to
include inherent enterprise risks
C.2.3.3 Determine Conduct product and market research to Document Review
whether preexisting identify vendors 1 Geospatial PM and
components satisfy Develop prioritized list of high-level (or Core Team,
business and detailed as appropriate) technology NWCG Branch
technical requirements Coordinator
1
requirements and Develop product evaluation comparison
prepare Product matrix and selection criteria, reflecting
62
Evaluation Report technical, architectural, and

product/services capabilities
Develop request for information (RFI) and
distribute to vendors
Conduct vendor and product analysis,
including evaluation of RFI responses
and product demonstrations; validate
vendor references; conduct further
market analysis; obtain product pricing;
and conduct fit analysis
Evaluate products using evaluation matrix
and identify alternatives
Perform required analysis to ensure the
architecture’s fit with business
requirements, technical requirements,
performance/scalability requirements,
service levels, and security/resilience
requirements
Review Conceptual Solution Architecture
with NWCG enterprise architecture group Document Review
Coordinate Conceptual Solution 1
Architecture with Develop Business Case
sub process
Refine architecture based on economic
evaluation of alternatives and review
feedback
Revise System Requirements
Specification, Requirements Traceability
Matrix, as required
C.2.3.4. Identify data
Identify authoritative data sources and
conversion and Geospatial PM and
data quality characteristics
migration Document Review Core Team,
Identify historical data retention
requirements, and 1 NWCG Branch
requirements
administration and Coordinator
operations support
needs
2.2.5. Element C.2.4: Design GIS Performance Management System

This element designs a performance measurement approach that is aligned with enterprise vision
and strategies. The measures establish accountability and enable the interagency wildland fire
community to test and monitor performance. The broader performance management system
consists of processes, people, organization structures, metrics, and technology used to measure,
monitor, and drive organizational performance.

Performance management serves as a core piece of any strategic framework. As noted in
Figure 24, performance management helps to answer the question, what should be measured to
ensure that the change initiatives are appropriately implemented and results are achieved?
63
Figure 24: Performance and Change Management

As noted in previous sections of this document, the core team has participated in two MVGO
sessions. The content related to these sessions is still being identified, especially that related to
specific objectives and performance measures.

The Core Team will work closely with senior leadership and the managers of the affected
functional areas to develop more refined performance measures. Reaching agreement on what
to measure, the performance targets to set, and the process for managing performance can be
difficult. Managers and employees need to gain confidence that the changes being implemented
through the project will actually enable performance targets to be met.


Elements Geospatial Core Team Activities Current Status of Roles and
Review results of planning and NWCG Strategic Geospatial PM,
performance measures documented in Framework - Strategic Core Team, NWCG
C.3.1.1. Refine and Planning Core Elements Branch
Current State Capability Baseline
initiate performance 4
Baseline and integrate government-wide Coordinator,
measures
performance and security standards Sponsorship
(e.g., FGDC, OMB mandates) into Coalition and
64
performance measures Executive Sponsor

Identify gaps between current and future
state performance capabilities across Program Management
the four dimensions of change Plan
Determine appropriate action plans to 2
close gaps
C.3.1.2 Obtain Circulate performance measures for

consensus on primary review
Performance Conduct engagement activities with NWCG Strategic
Management System stakeholders Framework
Design Conduct other stakeholder activities as 3
necessary
2.2.6. Element O.2.1: Design GIS Change Management Plan

This element develops an overarching plan for managing the interagency challenges associated
with change. The primary objective here is to achieve the highest level of user adoption of the new
NWCG Geospatial Strategic Framework as possible. This objective is achieved through
management of the change process to ensure that it results in an integrated solution, supports
stakeholder expectations, and prepares users with the proper knowledge, skills, and abilities to
achieve their performance targets. The Organizational Change Management Plan should identify
the potential risks associated with stakeholder buy-in and provide a structured risk-management
plan. This approach will help to ensure that the transformation becomes institutionalized and that
day-to-day operations continue with minimal interruption.
Element O.2.1 Best Practice Consideration

Change management encompasses the process, tools, and techniques to manage the ―people
side‖ of change in achieving required business outcomes. Change management involves
understanding how an individual progresses through the stages of change (awareness, desire,
knowledge, ability, and reinforcement mechanisms) and the organizational tools available to
support that transition (e.g., communication, sponsorship, coaching, training). To accelerate the
process of institutionalizing capability improvements, a series of ―change agents‖ need to be
identified from within an organization to help communicate the vision and teach new behaviors to
colleagues through actions and attitudes. Change agents work in various capacities to influence
both peers and subordinates to adopt the improved capabilities and behaviors.
Figure 25: Change Management Plan
65
The strategy for integrating various products into a cohesive training and communication approach
should be provided in the Organizational Change Management Plan; therefore, it is imperative that
organizations develop this plan early in strategic framework development (see Figure 25) and in
light of the change adoption curve that has been demonstrated by a number of organizations (see
Figure 26). Change Adoption Curve
Internalization
Ownership Adoption
Willingness
Positive Perception
Acceptance
Understanding
Preparation
Awareness
Contact
Key
Lack of Confusion Negative Change Aborted
Challenges
awareness Perception After Initial
Utilization
Figure 26: Change Adoption Curve

The team estimated the degree of change necessary within the NWCG in terms of skills, attitudes,
and behaviors. This estimate is formed by comparing the organizational diagnostic and baseline
assessments (conducted by the project teams under Capability Development) with the Future State
Vision. The team reviewed organizational assessments (see Appendix D), the Future State Vision,
the SWOT analysis, and policy gap analysis from Capability Development activities. The team
conducted a Stakeholder Analysis that profiled general skills and attitudes of each stakeholder
segment. The analysis suggested that a high level of support currently exists for a geospatial
strategic framework to support the interagency wildland fire community. After completing various
change management assessments, we found that the core team’s assessment of the change
adoption curve (see Figure 26 above) is somewhere between the ―acceptance‖ and ―ownership‖
levels. This finding is promising and suggests that the interagency wildland fire community could
have a reasonable shot at adopting the geospatial strategic framework. Results of the change
assessments were compiled into a single plan to scope the extent of change involved with the
geospatial strategic framework.

By referring to the Stakeholder Analysis to target centers of influence for geospatial technology,
we can prioritize target audiences and estimate the degree and types of training each segment
will require (see Element O.2.3). Successful implementation of change management activities
will depend upon training to develop the staff’s skill sets. Organizational Change Management
events (especially training and communications) must be aligned with overall geospatial program
management in the strategic framework; however, further definition and communication of roles
and responsibilities for managing change in the interagency wildland fire geospatial community
will be required. Development and delivery of change management training to the sponsorship
coalition and the core team are key issues for the core team to address going forward.
66
A clear definition of success will need to be revisited and refined during build out of the strategic
framework. Continual evaluation of the performance and implementation of change-
management reinforcement mechanisms is a key component of the program’s future success.
Establishing a peer network to facilitate ongoing feedback and sharing of lessons learned and
best practices is vital to maintain positive change in future periods. Implementation of criteria for
the executive sponsor (and sponsorship coalition) and change targets is another key issue in
looking toward the future of the program.


Geospatial Core Current Status of Roles and
Elements
Team Activities Implementation Responsibilities
Organizational
At a high level, estimate Diagnostic – See
degree of change necessary Appendix D
in terms of skills, attitudes, 4
and behaviors. This estimate
is formed by comparing Stakeholder
O.2.1.1. Define the
Analysis Executive Sponsor,
scope of the organizational diagnostic and
2 NWCG Branch
change for the baseline assessments
Coordinator,
wildland fire Review organizational Strategic Plan
Geospatial PM and
geospatial assessments, Future State Elements –
Core Team
community Vision, and gap analysis Performance
(enterprise-wide) Conduct a Stakeholder Measurements
Analysis for stakeholder 4
segments
Change
Estimate degree and types Management Plan
of training required 2
Refer to Stakeholder Stakeholder
Analysis to target centers of Analysis Geospatial PM and
influence for geospatial 2 Core Team
technology NWCG Strategic
Align Organizational Change Framework
Management events 4
(especially training and
O.2.1.2. Develop
communications) to
Organizational
geospatial program
Change
management Change
Management Plan
Define and communicate Management Plan
roles and responsibilities for 2
managing change
Define success
Evaluate performance
continually – implement
reinforcement mechanisms
67
Establish roles and

responsibilities for the
executive sponsor (and
sponsorship coalition)
Develop criteria for the
O.2.1.3 Identify and executive sponsor Change
train members of Develop and deliver change Management Plan
the organizational management training to 2
change network sponsorship coalition and
core team
Establish peer network
mechanisms
Establish feedback
mechanisms
Establish roles and
responsibilities
Identify processes that will
impact service providers
(e.g. RSAC, USGS) and
partner agencies
Meet with service providers
and partner agencies to
describe need for change
Invite service providers and Executive Sponsor,
partners to participate in Change Sponsorship Coalition
O.2.1.4 Invite Management Plan
new capabilities NWCG Branch
stakeholders to the 2
Compile input and issues Coordinator,
table
and disseminate Geospatial PM and
Make service provider and Core Team
partner agency leadership
aware of the strategic
framework and potential
changes to service
agreements, shared
systems, etc.
Meet with NWCG project
teams and program office to
incorporate change
2.2.7. Element O.2.2: Design GIS Communications Plan

A communication plan is a vital tool for establishing realistic and consistent expectations for
stakeholders about the NWCG Geospatial Strategic Framework. This element addresses the
creation of a communication plan for internal and external stakeholders and all levels of the
interagency wildland fire community. Communications that pertain only to programmatic issues or
the integration of project teams are addressed in the Program Management work stream. The
Communications Plan hinges on the underlying goal of Ownership Building and strives to provide
information for affected parties to understand the change and their role in implementing it.
68

A Communication Plan developed in this phase should (1) refine the identification and prioritization
of target stakeholder audiences and their specific concerns (based on the stakeholder analysis
conducted for the Stakeholder Engagement Plan in Element O.2.1 above); (2) define overarching
and targeted key messages for each key stakeholder segment; (3) identify appropriate
communication tools and tactics; (4) refine the identification of communications delivery channels;
(4) plan a detailed schedule for delivering communications based on the overall Program
Management Plan and Framework; and (5) define mechanisms and channels to receive ongoing
stakeholder inputs. In addition, the plan should define roles and responsibilities for the plan’s
implementation and resource requirements. The Communication Plan must account for two-way
communications with stakeholders and project teams by providing a ―feedback loop‖ to enable
stakeholders to respond to strategic framework modifications. The plan should also align with the
organization’s internal communications function, where appropriate. This plan should be iterative
and reviewed and updated at the beginning of each phase.

A baseline report was not produced for the interagency wildland fire geospatial community due to
the lack of coordination with the communications infrastructure that currently exists between the
wildland fire community and the main organizations’ communications offices. A first important
element then will be to identify roles and existing communication tools and processes. For
example, the information in Figure 27 might provide the requisite communications tools for the
community.
Figure 27: Sample Communications Products
69

While we defined communication goals, the analysis and prioritization of stakeholder groups to
refine their specific needs, concerns, and values remain incomplete. This information is vital to the
communications planning aspect of the strategic framework. After a communications baseline is
established, identifying appropriate channels for communications is essential. Definition of
appropriate tools, tactics, and events to serve as the means of message delivery and definition of
communication phases and high-level themes to be communicated must be performed. Moreover,
development of a detailed schedule for delivering communications based on the program schedule,
stakeholder needs and concerns, defined roles and responsibilities, resource requirements, budget
estimate (if needed), and budget sources for implementing the Communications Plan needs to
occur.
In line with the change management approach, feedback loops and strategies to obtain
stakeholders’ input on communications effectiveness will be important. Again, a process for
coordinating communications with the ongoing activities of the agency communications office will
be a key issue to be addressed. In addition, the core team must work closely with other NWCG
teams with communications affiliations in planning the process for developing, gaining approval,
and delivering communications messages and products. Finally, education of core team
members and key stakeholders on communications planning and their role in developing and
delivering communications is another key issue to be addressed.


Meet with main agency NWCG Branch
communications offices and Communication Coordinator, Executive
other key stakeholders to Plan Sponsor, Geospatial
O.2.2.1. Baseline identify roles and existing 1 PM, Core Team
current communications tools and
communications processes (e.g.,
products and newsletters, web sites,
processes quarterly meetings)
Develop and post baseline
report on the team’s eShare
site
Define communications Communication NWCG PM, Branch
goals and objectives Plan Coordinator,
Analyze and prioritize 1 Geospatial PM, Core
O.2.2.2. Develop Team (Or Change
stakeholder audiences and
Communications Plan Management Team)
refine specific needs
and communicate
Review Communications
responsibilities
Baseline to identify
appropriate channels
Define overarching, key
70
change messages linked to

the vision/strategy
Define appropriate tools,
tactics, and events to serve
as message-delivery media
Define communication
phases and key themes
Develop detailed
communication schedule for
delivering communications
Define roles and
responsibilities, resource
requirements, budget estimate
(if needed), and budget
sources for implementing
Communications Plan
Plan for stakeholder
feedback loops and
strategies to obtain input on
communications
effectiveness
Plan for a process for
coordinating
communications with the
ongoing activities of the
agency communications
office
Plan for a process for
developing, gaining
approval, and delivering
communications messages
and products while working
closely with other NWCG
teams
Educate core team
members and key
stakeholders on the
Communications Plan and
their role in developing and
delivering communications
Meet with NWCG project
teams and NWCG program
office to incorporate the
Communications Plan into
implementation strategies
and plans
71
2.2.8. Element O.2.3: Design High-Level Training Plan

The primary purpose of the High-Level Training Plan is to ensure that all stakeholders that are
affected by the NWCG Geospatial Strategic Framework have the knowledge, skills, and abilities
needed to utilize the improved capabilities and meet performance targets. The High-Level Training
Plan is informed by a Front-End Training Analysis, and it provides input into the overall NWCG
Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework. It should align with project plans and support all
solution testing and implementation.

The High-Level Training Plan is built upon consecutive tasks: data collection, data analysis, and
development of a data analysis report and recommendations. Each element of the plan includes
specific activities that ultimately serve to assess (1) the current training situation (content,
environment, and organizational culture); (2) the audiences that require training and the current
knowledge, skill levels, technical aptitude, and attitudes of each target group; and (3) the
performance goals and objectives (job tasks, skill sets, and position descriptions).

Data collection, data analysis, and development of a data analysis report and recommendations
have not yet occurred in the interagency wildland fire geospatial community. Feedback from key
geospatial stakeholders indicated that very limited training is available to the community. The key
stakeholders are challenged by the requirement to implement the limited training that is available.
We found from a high-level baseline analysis that three geospatial technology training courses
currently are used in the interagency wildland fire community for various purposes:
1. S341, GIS Specialist Course for Incident Commanders (sponsored by the GTG)
2. S443, Infrared Interpreter Class (sponsored by RSAC)
3. S495, GIS Fire Analysis (hosted by the Missoula U.S. Forest Service Research Center)
We also found that a substantial need exists for change management and communication training
as indicated previously in results from the organizational assessments. We recommend an
integrated approach to an overall training program going forward.

Conducting a Front-End Training Analysis is a critical first element in the development of the High-
Level Training Plan for the interagency wildland fire geospatial community. To ensure that
stakeholders affected by the strategic framework have requisite knowledge, skills, and abilities, the
Front-End Training Analysis would help to determine:
Who needs to be trained

What skills need to be demonstrated
The needed depth and breadth of content
The degree of performance that is required
The resources that are required to redesign, develop, and deliver the training.
72
As a first element in collecting data, identification of the technology capabilities and infrastructure to
support alternative delivery methods for training (web-based training and performance support
tools) will be importance. Moreover, additional value will be gained by collecting data through a
review of any existing curricula that might be relevant to the geospatial strategic framework training
objectives and by interviewing a sample of interagency employees who will require new
knowledge, skills, or attitudes to gain various perspectives on the geospatial capability training.
Position descriptions and resident skills of each general stakeholder group (stakeholder segments
may need to be divided further or in a different way for training analysis purposes) should also be
reviewed for the training analysis. Finally, development of a Data Analysis Report and
recommendations on conducting a cost analysis on a large scale to fully enhance the geospatial
training program and ensure that it is integrated into the strategic framework will be essential.
Elements O.2.1 through O.2.3 will entail identifying a general training structure (centralized versus
decentralized), gaining an understanding of the roles and responsibilities of the existing geospatial
capability training functions, and assessing any existing training plans among the various agencies
to determine their impact on a cohesive interagency geospatial training plan. For example, a
complete gap analysis of the current geospatial training courses needs to take place to design a
comprehensive training program. In addition, resources and capabilities should be identified
through an assessment of training delivery methods and facilities (in all geographic areas) to
leverage (or use) the training resources and capabilities already existing among the interagency
wildland fire community.


Review existing curricula
Interview cross-cut sample of
interagency employees who will
require new knowledge or skills
or attitudes to gain different
perspectives on the training
Review position descriptions and
resident skills of each group
O.2.3.1. Conduct Conduct an assessment to Geospatial PM and Core
identify technological capabilities Training Plan
front-end training 1 Team, NWCG Branch
analysis and infrastructure to support Coordinator
alternative delivery methods
Develop a Data Analysis Report
and Recommendations to
conduct a Cost Analysis—in
large-scale initiatives, this
analysis coupled with the Media
Feasibility Assessment is
required to develop realistic,
cost-effective training and
73
learning strategies
Identify general training structure
(centralized or not)
Understand roles and
responsibilities
O.2.3.2. Baseline Assess existing training plans Training Plan Geospatial Core Team
existing training Assess training delivery methods 1
and facilities
Assess strategies for previous
geospatial training
Document baseline findings
Describe high-level approach to
O.2.3.3. Develop training design, development, Geospatial PM and Core
training plan and delivery Training Plan Team, NWCG Branch
Develop high-level timeline that 1 Coordinator
aligns with geospatial training
implementation timelines
2.2.9. Element P.2.2: Design GIS Risk Management Plan

This element defines the approach to risk management by establishing the initial strategic
framework and processes for risk management of the interagency wildland fire geospatial
community. It develops the plan begun in the Define phase related to risk management with key
linkages to the overall program management element in this phase. Controlling actions include
identifying, mitigating, and managing risk, scope, schedule, and cost issues to ensure that the
overall governance effort remains on track.

This element develops the risk-management strategy work product that describes an initial high-
level approach and sequence of activities required to mitigate risks in the deployment of the new
geospatial technology capabilities to the enterprise. The approach is defined by reviewing the
organization’s current/desired capabilities and time/resource constraints by conducting extensive
discussion sessions with senior leadership. The sequencing of activities is based on
prioritization of the opportunities to achieve the enterprise-wide Future State Vision developed in
the Capability Development work stream. Successful risk mitigation steps will produce savings
for the interagency wildland fire community over the long term.
The high-level approach establishes the focus of the risk management plan (e.g., core financial
systems followed by mission delivery systems, organizational structure followed by process and
technology, a specific business area—case processing—followed by another business area).
The high-level approach and sequence of activities are based on analysis of the business value
to the interagency wildland fire community, lifecycle timing, organizational transformation
readiness, funding, resources, associated risks, and interdependencies and how each capability
might affect the four dimensions of change.
The risk management plan provides the interagency wildland fire community with a view of the
degree of complexity and level of effort required to implement the strategic framework. Early
initiation of risk management planning is essential for the government due to the long lead times
74
required to obtain budgets and staffing resources. The risk management plan is further refined
throughout the duration of the framework development as the definitions and design of future-
state capabilities mature. Effective risk management will require improved planning and decision-
making support systems and the realignment of incident management teams with situation
management organizations. Continued progress toward achieving fire-adapted human
communities will require more than simply redrawing protection boundaries and mobilization
compacts.
Risk management strategies should support the NWCG geospatial project teams and
communities that are organizing to take action, striving to be self-sufficient, and above all,
becoming more comfortable with (and knowledgeable of) prescribed and wildland fires and the use
of geospatial technologies going forward. This will be further enabled by the new generation of
public information and education strategies made possible by Internet communications and social
networking that require cultural change as well as rethinking of information access and exchange
technologies.

The interagency wildland fire community’s overarching commitment to safety and risk management
is highlighted in the 2009 QFR with content recognized as being important by the community’s
leadership. The community’s overarching commitment to safety and risk management addresses
such areas as Suppression Strategy with Asymmetric Fire, Reshaping Emergency within Fire
Leadership, Reaffirming the Fire Strategic Framework, and Re-imagining Wildfire in a Web.

Alignment of the risk management strategy with the overarching NWCG core strategy elements
and capabilities will be important. The current NWCG organizational structure, NWCG
organizational mission statements, and organizational intent statements do not lend themselves to
a cohesive and clearly understood risk-management environment. Consequently, the risk level of
successful change management implementation is high. The current roles of NWCG executive
leadership and program officers need to be clearly identified and understood. NWCG might
consider, for instance, creating a change management program office. Because current strategic
framework processes and procedures are not clearly understood, implementation of these plans
have higher-level risks than they would otherwise. In addition, no enterprise architecture and
policies currently exist, a situation that adds to the overall level of risk for successful
implementation of geospatial technologies in the interagency wildland fire community.


P.2.1.1 Identify Review Future State Vision and Geospatial PM and
alternative current capabilities to define Risk Management Plan Core Team, NWCG
approaches for options 1 Branch Coordinator
75
improving the Identify program, security, and

enterprise privacy risks across the change
dimensions and develop risk
profiles for each option
Determine timing and
interdependencies of each
improvement option
Determine how each of the
following areas of the organization
will be affected:
NWCG Geospatial Business
Areas
Integrated Geospatial
Processes
Human Resources Strategy
Prioritize improvement options
P.2.1.2. Sequence based on enterprise risk priorities
the enterprise Review the Change Readiness Risk Management Plan Geospatial Core
improvement Assessment 1 Team
options Identify key activities requiring a
long lead time so that adequate
time can be allocated
P.2.1.3. Identify risk Select an aspect of the system or a
areas, recommend functionality to be prototyped
prototypes and Design the scope of the prototype
Geospatial PM and
approaches to to demonstrate key issues and
Risk Management Plan Core Team, NWCG
mitigate risk, and risks
1 Branch Coordinator
prepare Develop a prototype to
Architecture Risk demonstrate visual, functional,
Assessment and/or technical aspects of the
system to be developed
2.2.10. Element P.2.3: Design Geospatial Budget Framework

This element supports analysis of the high-level economic costs and benefits of potential
improvement opportunities for the interagency wildland fire community for geospatial technology.
The analysis influences the enterprise Future State Vision selection of alternatives, the sequence
of activities specified in the Program Management Plan, and the ultimate decision on whether to
move ahead with project initiatives.

The development of a rough order of magnitude (ROM) estimate of initial investment costs and
ongoing sustainment costs associated with each improvement option (including the option of
maintaining the ―status quo‖) will depend on identification of data needed to support cost-estimating
requirements and coordination with clients and project staff to ensure its availability. Risk and
uncertainty analysis should be incorporated as appropriate into the improvement-option cost
estimates as they are developed.
76

Stakeholders who were interviewed reported that there are limited cost strategies focused on
emerging geospatial technology to support the wildland fire community. Among those interviewed,
nearly 45 percent reported not having a budget to support geospatial technology in their operation.
See other relevant data in Figure 28.
Emerging GIS Cost Strategies
25
20
15
Engagement
Stakeholder
10
5
0
Strategy - Dedicated Strategy - Project No Strategy
Staff Funds
Type
Figure 28: Emerging GIS Cost Strategies

A key issue moving forward will be development of (from a budget analysis perspective) an
understanding of the issues each member agency faces, the environment in which the agency
operates, and the outcomes valued by a cohesive interagency wildland fire geospatial community.
Reviewing the major areas that will be affected by the improvement options and how the individual
agency budget relates to the current agency structure, organizational mission statements, and
existing business processes and supporting elements will also be important. Also, it is imperative
to complete an analysis of an interagency wildland fire geospatial community investment strategy
that aligns with the mission, vision, goals, and objective set forth in this document. In this phase,
collaboration with decision-makers and stakeholders to ensure that economic analysis work
products developed during the Envision phase are properly structured and focused is also
important.

77

Current Status of
Elements Geospatial Core Team Activities Roles and Responsibilities
Implementation
Review major NWCG business
areas that will be affected
Develop understanding of the
current interagency wildland fire
P.2.2.1. Develop an
geospatial community structure
understanding of
(enterprise-wide), cohesive Budget Strategy Geospatial PM and Core
the issues the
mission statements, and Team, NWCG Branch
NWCG Geospatial
existing business processes 1 Coordinator
community faces
and the desired Collaborate with sponsorship
outcomes coalition and stakeholders to
ensure that budget analysis
work products developed during
the Envision phase are properly
structured and focused
Meet with Geospatial program
staff and core team members to
gain an understanding of each
P.2.2.2. Review the improvement option as it relates
to people, processes, Budget Strategy
cost of Geospatial Core Team
improvement technology, and physical
infrastructure 1
options
Document each improvement
alternative to the extent needed
for a high-level ROM analysis of
costs and benefits
2.2.11. Element P.2.1: Design Geospatial Program Management Plan

The purpose of this element is to continue to develop program management activities started in
P.1.1. It can be presented either prior to or after P.2.2 (Design Risk Management Plan) and P.2.3
(Design Budget Framework). In this element, we create specific project charters, plans, and other
similar accountability mechanisms.

Sequencing of the program management activities is based on prioritization of the improvement
opportunities used to achieve the Vision and on the business case needs for ROI. Early initiation
of strategic framework planning is essential because of the long lead times required to obtain
budgets and staffing resources. The Program Management Plan is further refined throughout the
duration of the program as definition and design of the future state capabilities mature.

The stakeholder analysis did not uncover a comprehensive program management plan for the
interagency wildland fire geospatial community (or any of its members). As noted earlier, nearly 46
percent of respondents do not even have a CONOPS or set of operational SOPs. Of note is that
78
among the 54 percent currently utilizing a CONOPS/ or SOP for their individual programs, more
than 20 different types of CONOPS or SOP are currently in use.

The analysis revealed that the interagency wildland fire community is in need of an overarching
program management plan to be able to pull together the various unofficial management
approaches used within the community. While use of a program management methodology is not
common, stakeholders desire leadership and communication for following an integrated program
management plan (see Figure 29 for an example of such a plan).
Figure 29: Sample Program Management Plan
A comprehensive program management plan may require skill sets with certified project
management planning (PMP) capabilities. At a high level, the task plan that is noted above will
provide guidance and direction to begin the program, and the detailed schedule in Appendix F
provides the additional program management details. The next element for implementation will
entail a work breakdown structure with specific assignments for the core team. Approval by the
Executive Sponsor will be important to obtain. An additional element to follow the approved work
breakdown structure of a comprehensive project schedule will be to select and implement project
tracking tools to facilitate monitoring and control of the strategic framework implementation. The
Define phase Project Team Charters (which will most likely remain the same between phases) will
need to updated or revalidated.

79

P.2.1.1. Design Review and refine strategic NWCG Strategic Geospatial PM, Core
Program framework, processes, hierarchy Framework Team, NWCG
Management Plan Update Executive Sponsor and 4 Branch Coordinator,
Sponsorship Coalition and Core Sponsorship
Change Management
Team composition to reflect Coalition and
Plan
changes in key stakeholders 4 Executive Sponsor
Update Program Management
Plan from Envision phase to
reflect new requirements and Program Management
obtain Executive Sponsor Plan
approval as required 2
Develop Define phase Program
Management Plan
Select and implement project
tracking tools to facilitate the
strategic framework
implementation monitoring and
control Project Management
Develop the Define phase Tools
Project Team Charters (most 1
likely will remain the same
between phases, however,
changes may occur)
80
2.3. Phase 3: Test

The specific planning, training, and operational requirements associated with preparing to respond to
wildland fire (coupled with fire-
suppression safety needs to stop
catastrophic loss of life, property
damage, and interruption of
government services) make inclusion
of a Test phase in this geospatial
strategic framework imperative.
Per the Capability Development work

stream, the Test phase initiates the
design of each key dimension based
on the system requirements and
Conceptual Solution Architecture
developed in the Envision phase.
Moreover, testing takes place in the
context of the key dimensions of change
(i.e., people, process, technology, and
physical infrastructure). Finally, a
performance management system,
which ensures alignment of strategy to
operations, is developed on the basis
of High-level designs previously discussed.
At the same time, elements in Ownership Building expand and deepen the community’s
involvement in the strategic framework process, and project teams begin to socialize the designs
and related impacts with key stakeholders. This latter objective directly supports the Capability
Development work stream in that it validates new designs and increases stakeholders’ buy-in for a
smoother transition to the new environment during the Implement phase. Moreover, in this
phase, the Ownership Building and Capability Development processes must work together in
coordinated fashion so that the community can test training modules and delivery tools to
coincide with the capability deployment schedule. Communications during this phase should provide
more detailed information than the previous phase. More mid-level managers should be involved
in sending out messages to their respective personnel members.
During the Test phase, Program Stewardship activities include implementation of the project work
streams to develop and finalize future state designs for each dimension of change: people,
process, technology, and physical infrastructure. Project teams develop detailed implementation plans
that prioritize development and deployment of key capabilities. Finally, program management
and budget plans are evolved and specifically tested with larger stakeholder groups.
81
2.3.1. Element C.3.1: Test Geospatial System Components

The purpose of this element is to ensure that the system components meet the requirements. The
test approach is determined based on functional and technical factors. The Test Plan outlines the
testing approach that may include several testing stages (e.g., integration, system, regression,
performance, and user acceptance). The various testing stages may focus on different sets of
requirements (e.g., functional, integration, performance, and security).

A dedicated test team usually performs the integration, system, regression, and performance tests;
end users (optionally supported by the test team) usually perform the user acceptance test.
Nevertheless, the general elements for the different test stages are similar. The tests are
performed based on a specific Test Plan, and test results are documented. Any discrepancies
arising from the tests are recorded. Change management requests are created for defects and
areas during the reinforcement phase where changes are needed. Approved change requests are
addressed and then retested via this element. The measure of success for the testing process is
that the system produces the output described by the requirements, or change requests reported
are allocated to a later release.

The topic of the stakeholder interviews most often raised with respect to this element was the
inability to share geospatial data across the community. Individuals identified that they had low
expectations for a solution and were accustomed to sharing information through inadequate
means. All recognized the numerous problems created by the situation including duplicative data
collection, repetitive data storage, excessive costs, and the inability to operate with common data.
As a result, testing of newly defined system components has been so far premature.

To support a shift to an active information sharing culture, data availability, quality, system
performance, and overall user acceptance must be tested and evaluated. Users across the
enterprise, from field operations to executive leadership, must proceed through the elements
required to verify access to the SDSE. It is imperative that the geospatial data can be reached
with minimal issues regardless of the entry point. This testing phase would provide users with
the opportunity to validate the data served through the system and provide feedback. With a
focus on authoritative data, data quality must be assessed to ensure the ―best available data‖
has been compiled and exposed to the community.
The overall experience with any technology solution can be affected by poor system
performance. Expectations established in the design phase must be validated in testing.
Performance should be assessed at every point of access and compiled for comprehensive
analysis. End users should be made aware of the importance of access across the enterprise
and provide a narrative of their experiences. These themes ultimately roll up to an assessment of
the overall user experience and the level of acceptance across the NWCG stakeholder
community. As the system is scoped and developed, expectations should be compiled for later
reference. The User Acceptance aspect of testing must be accurately collected and socialized
82
across the community. Any issues or concerns should be addressed promptly to maintain
ownership with the interagency core team.


C.3.1.1 Prepare for Review test approach, levels NWCG Strategic Geospatial PM, Core
test (e.g., integration, performance, Framework Team, NWCG
regression, system, and user 1 Branch Coordinator
acceptance), and controls
Review test scenarios, scripts,
test data, and test plans
Prepare test environment
Integrate system components
Prepare build for test
Coordinate with training NWCG Strategic Geospatial PM, Core
activities to develop system Framework Team, NWCG
C3.1.2 Determine test training material 0 Branch Coordinator
readiness Coordinate with security and
business continuity
organizations as required
Conduct test readiness review
Train test participants NWCG Strategic Geospatial PM, Core
Execute and monitor test Framework Team, NWCG
C.3.1.3.Conduct test Identify defects, vulnerabilities, 0 Branch Coordinator
security risks and areas where
changes are needed
Create change requests
NWCG Strategic Geospatial PM, Core
Prepare Test Results
C.3.1.4. Assess and Framework Team, NWCG
Revise Preliminary Information 0 Branch Coordinator
document test results
Assurance Case
Refine Requirements
Traceability Matrix (RTM)
2.3.2. Element O.3.1: Expand Geospatial Ownership Building

This element begins the expansion of the Ownership Building activities beyond the Envision and
Design phases. As the strategic framework progresses through the next two phases, Ownership
Building will filter to a wider base of stakeholders. Managers should take a more active role in
demonstrating commitment to the strategic framework and in ensuring that their direct reports are
aware and involved. During the Test phase, any external vendors and partner agencies that share
the business processes or systems being redesigned or impacted should be added to the strategic
framework activities.
83

To accelerate the process of institutionalizing capability improvements, a series of ―change
agents‖ are typically utilized from within the organization as a sponsorship coalition to help
communicate the vision and teach new behaviors to subordinates and peers through their
actions and attitudes. Change agents work in various capacities to influence both peers and
subordinates to adopt the improved capabilities and behaviors.

The NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework is currently in the process of moving
from preparing for change into managing the change of creating a Geospatial program for the
wildland fire community. In order to do so, however, any external vendors and partner agencies
that share the business processes or systems being affected should be included in the change
management planning activities. They are currently not, and so in moving forward, the NWCG
Geospatial Core Team will need to validate their requirements for enhancing the community’s
geospatial technology capability as well.

It will be important for the core team to validate the design change management plan in this
element, and to gain consensus among all interagency stakeholders for the next element of
implementation. As noted in O.2.1, there currently is a high level of acceptance that has
developed into the origins of interagency ownership of the NWCG Geospatial Technology
Strategic Framework. Nevertheless, the ownership activities will need to continue such as
inviting the sponsorship coalition members who work in the high-impact, high-resistance areas to
continue communication about geospatial technology activities. The NWCG Geospatial Core
Team will need to target as many stakeholder groups as possible, including external vendors and
partner agencies. Validation sessions through briefing the sponsorship coalition and
stakeholders on a regular basis will be essential for the core team to continue as well.

84

Work with core team to prepare Geospatial PM, Core
materials for design validation Change Team, NWCG Branch
Invite change agents who work in Management Plan Coordinator
high-impact, high-resistance groups, 2
including groups that are known to
be innovative (centers of influence)
O.3.1.1. Solicit input from Target as many stakeholder
the sponsorship coalition groups as necessary
on Capability Designs Plan and conduct validation
sessions with sponsorship
coalition members
Compile all sponsorship coalition
input
Follow up with sponsorship
coalition on results
Review impacted areas of
O.3.1.2 Validate capability mutual interest and reiterate the
requirements with service need for change
providers and partner Review and validate
agencies requirements for impacted areas;
revise as appropriate
2.3.3. Element O.3.2: Test Geospatial Communication Plan

This element continues the expansion of the Communication activities beyond the Envision and
Design phases. As the strategic framework progresses through the next two phases, Ownership
Building will filter to a wider base of stakeholders. Managers should take a more active role in
demonstrating commitment to the strategic framework and in ensuring that their direct reports are
aware and involved.

Although project teams fulfill their communications responsibilities through functional contacts
within the organization, program level communication activities focus on engaging the entire
organization. The goal in this phase is to test the promotion of widespread awareness about the
need for change and the goals of the strategic framework.

As a result of the stakeholder analysis and the NWCG Geospatial Core Team strategic planning
sessions, we found the following goals and objectives for communications to be in alignment with
the community’s overarching mission, vision, goals, and objectives (see Table 27).
85
Table 27: Communications Goal and Objectives

Communications Goal Communications Objectives
Provide the wildland fire interagency Promote the need for change and the benefits of an integrated
community stakeholders with a powerful geospatial strategic framework
vision of strategic framework for geospatial Inform stakeholders and prepare them for using the geospatial
technologies, and to make the process strategic framework
transparent and accessible for Make the strategic framework process transparent to the wildland
stakeholders. fire interagency community
Provide opportunities for two-way communications whenever
possible
Keep external stakeholders informed about the wildland fire
interagency geospatial community
Communicate success about the wildland fire interagency
geospatial community

Since the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework communication plan is currently in
the Design phase O.2.2, the testing of a widespread communication approach is premature.
Nevertheless, we found a significant need for communication processes to be established. The
stakeholders need to know to whom they should reach out to coordinate about geospatial
activities at the NIFC, and requested clarity for future participation. The stakeholders’ input
needs to continue to be collected and analyzed as feedback for the interagency wildland fire
geospatial community, and key messages should be adapted for delivery in response to the
feedback.
Regular communications, forums and outlets for this type of communication feedback needs to
be tested and re-established after evaluation in order to enhance communication improvements
during wildland fire operations, as well as during periods of stabilization. The NWCG geospatial
team will need to develop and deliver products or events that assist the Design phase activities,
and continue to build ownership in the interagency wildland fire community of their geospatial
activities. They must involve stakeholder groups in targeted message delivery as outlined in the
Design phase, and test those methods in this phase. Included in these methods of delivery and
forums, should be incentives and awards, especially during large-scale interagency sessions. In
the long-term future, they must maintain close coordination with various project teams to modify
the communication plans as a result of changes in the future program design and schedule.


O.3.2.1. Develop and Collect and analyze feedback Communication
deliver Adapt messages and delivery Management Plan Geospatial PM, Core
communications Develop and deliver products 2 Team, NWCG Branch
initiatives, programs, or events that assist Design Coordinator
and products phase activities and continue
86
to build ownership
Involve stakeholder groups in
targeted message delivery
Include incentives and awards
in communications events
Maintain close coordination
with project teams to modify
plan
2.3.4. Element O.3.3: Test Geospatial Training Development

In this element, training professionals develop high-level plans for designing training that will be
rolled out to stakeholders in the wildland fire geospatial community.

Development of training typically derives from the results of a high-level training program in order
to initiate development of the curriculum. Then, this phase provides capability training for all
testing efforts (e.g., user acceptance/testing, pilot user, and pilot training the trainer) that
eventually support final capability deployment. The Training Plan created in the Design Phase
should serve as a guide for developing and conducting more detailed training plans under
element O.4.3.

Training as it relates to geospatial community needs is largely ad hoc and not coordinated
across agencies. Upon completing a geospatial training needs analysis for the interagency
wildland fire geospatial community, those identified as key training resources will likely need to
use the three geospatial training programs to develop a comprehensive training program as one
does not currently exist to leverage the curriculum from the current baseline analysis of existing
training programs:
1. S341, GIS Specialist Course for Incident Commanders (sponsored by the GTG)
2. S443, Infrared interpreter class (sponsored by RSAC)
3. S495, GIS Fire Analysis (hosted by the Missoula U.S. Forest Service Research Center)

One overarching and comprehensive geospatial technology training program to support the
interagency wildland fire community is needed, but this hypothesis will need to be confirmed by the
High-level training analysis in the Design phase. By evaluating the existing training tools for
suitability using the information in the front end training analysis, the NWCG Geospatial Core Team
will need to address the suitability of re-using the current training curriculum. If the analysis
determines that computer-based training (CBT), web-based, or performance support tools will be a
part of the training delivery system, it will be important to include IT systems personnel in the
planning process to ensure that the organization has the network resources to host and implement
the selected training tools. As necessary, it will be important to modify or update training tools (or
obtain new training tools) to meet the strategic framework training needs. Development of training
design documents for each key stakeholder segment identified should be implemented, according
to the Front End Training Plan Analysis.
87


Elements Geospatial Core Current Status of Roles and Responsibilities
Team Activities Implementation
Evaluate existing training
tools for suitability using the
information
If CBT, web-based, or
performance support tools
will be a part of the training
delivery system, it will be
important to include IT
systems personnel in the
planning process to ensure
that the organization has Training Plan
O.3.3 Design Geospatial PM, Core Team,
the network resources to 2
training NWCG Branch Coordinator
host and implement the
selected training tools
As necessary, modify or
update training tools (or
obtain new training tools) to
meet the strategic
framework training needs
Develop training design
documents for each key
stakeholder segment
identified in Training Plan
2.3.5. Element P.3.2: Test Geospatial Budget Plan
Program Management Element P.3.2

This element refines and revises the business case developed in the Design phase using more
current, detailed, and accurate data and provides the basis for inputs into an interagency budget
plan for geospatial technology. The Budget Plan must adhere to the appropriate circulars,
directives, instructions, handbooks, and guidelines (e.g., from the Office of Management and
Budget) in justifying and documenting the budget inputs for the geospatial program. The outcome
of this activity is an input to the interagency Budget Plan that responds to all information
requirements relating to the recommended strategic framework alternative and that will secure the
funding necessary to enter the Implement phase.

As in the Design phase, the development of the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic
Framework Budget Plan input requires senior management to validate the cost and benefits
estimate, associated funding implications, and commit to the specific performance targets.
Accurate review and validation of an updated Budget Plan in this element require a depth of
88
involvement that is new to many of the stakeholders. Nevertheless, it is critical that they agree to
assumptions underlying the latest Budget Plan, estimating approaches reflected in it, the funding
requirements it reveals, and implications of predictions of organizational performance obtained.
Element P.3.2. Key Activities and Findings
In this element, it is particularly important for the NWCG Geospatial Core Team to work closely
with senior leadership and key stakeholders to ensure that they are committed to the cost and
benefit estimates, the funding requirements, and the performance targets established. To date,
only the information gathered during the stakeholder analysis provides insight into the
interagency wildland fire geospatial community’s financial resources for a baseline analysis of an
interagency budget approach. However, the US Department of Interior’s Geospatial Services
Model (July 2007) recommended the following funding strategy alternatives for establishing a
geospatial Authoritative Data Source (ADS) in Table 30:
Table 30: DOI Geospatial Model Funding Alternatives

Funding Strategy for Alternatives for Establishing a Geospatial ADS
Shared Working Capital Fund (WCF( for geospatial services and data assets)
Assessment of bureaus and systems based on use
New investment (Share Exhibit 300 with FY 10 funding request)
Fee for Service (for example, subscription)
Fees for use (incremental to any existing cost recovery fees)
Incremental investment (under existing investments to provide for ADS services)
Assessment of redundant and inefficient data source and services for reallocation
The EGIM core team is in the process of establishing the financial benefits of its service model.
In so doing, the team calculated the potential value for DOI to adopt the enterprise management
of key geospatial data assets and services based on several other public institution business
case studies. Additionally, the Washington State Department of Transportation has
demonstrated through a rigorous investment analysis the financial benefits of sharing a dataset
improved the initial return on investment (ROI) by a factor of 11 through cost avoidance and
savings. This demonstrates the value of acquiring and building geospatial data in a shared and
coordinated business model. Also, the State of Oregon has developed a business case as
depicted in Figure 30.
89
Figure 30: Sample Geospatial Business Case
Oregon has demonstrated that it can improve the efficiencies of business processes at all levels of
government and functional areas by providing geospatial data assets through enterprise services
and improved access. It is projected that its $173 million investment will yield a $1.1 billion return
over 10 years of revenue enhancement, cost avoidance and savings, operations and efficiency.
These findings present other public institutions in which the NWCG Geospatial Core Team can
benchmark (or compare) an interagency geospatial investment strategy in the future.

To mitigate funding risks and concerns associated with sustaining an enterprise service delivery
approach, we recommend that a funding model be established to account for incremental costs
associated with achieving and maintaining certification and service delivery levels for candidate
ADS service providers. In order to do so, the core team will need to review all procedures
supporting initial development of the business case and revise predictions for the status quo and
preferred alternatives, as appropriate. Financial measures will need to be calculated using
budget allocations and return on investment computed for the preferred alternative to ensure it
still provides the best net value to the interagency wildland fire community.
The NWCG Geospatial Core Team will need to review the stakeholder feedback of the individual
investment strategies that currently exist and work with the stakeholder community to create an
interagency shared working capital fund. The NWCG core team will need to describe the basis
for selection and inclusion of the proposed types of geospatial technology alternative in the
agency’s annual Budget Plan, and describe how the geospatial technology alternative supports
the community’s (NWCG) Overall Management Plan; and, if it is an IT initiative, how it relates to
other elements of the community’s (NWCG) IT Investment Portfolio.
The NWCG Geospatial Core Team will diligently review the budget strategy and explore different
options for inclusion in its investment portfolio. Further definition will need to take place in
following phases as to how the NWCG geospatial program will control and manage investments,
90
and how it will evaluate investments based on planned performance versus actual
accomplishments.


Review procedures supporting
initial development of business Budget Plan
and revise predictions
Calculate financial measures 1
P.3.1.1. Refine and using budget allocations and
revise the design compute return on investment Geospatial PM, Core
phase business case Ensure preferred alternative still Team, NWCG
provides best net value to the e Branch Coordinator
community
Conduct NWCG core team and
stakeholder review of revised
Business Case and secure
acceptance
Describe basis for selection
and inclusion of subject Budget Plan
geospatial technology
alternative in Budget Plan 1
Describe how geospatial
P.3.1.2. Development technology alternative supports
of inputs to the Overall Management Plan; and,
Geospatial PM, Core
interagency Budget if it is an IT initiative, how it
Team, NWCG
Plan relates to other elements of the
Branch Coordinator
NWCG IT Investment Portfolio
Describe how NWCG
geospatial program will review
this strategic framework
initiative and select it for
inclusion in its investment
portfolio
2.3.6. Element P.3.1: Test Geospatial Program Management Plan

This element refines the strategic framework with corresponding roles, responsibilities, and
integrated decision hierarchies for the NWCG Geospatial Core Team, Executive Sponsor,
Sponsorship Coalition and Project Teams. In addition, it also develops the overarching strategy for
the Implement phase, identifies the Project Team Leads, refines work plans and management
plans, and establishes the project teams.
91

Regular communication, meetings, reviews, audits, performance reports, and the change control
process are used to monitor progress against the work and management plans in this element.
Management actions by the NWCG Geospatial Core Team include identifying, mitigating, and
managing risk, scope, schedule, and cost to ensure the overall strategic framework remains on
track.

This element leads and drives the NWCG Geospatial Core Team to complete phase activities
and manage program activities, and it ensures that the project teams have resources needed to
complete the activities. The Core Team has not yet tested the program management plan.

Again, testing a comprehensive program management plan may require skill sets with certified
project management planning (PMP) capabilities. At a high level, the task plan that is noted in
the Design Phase will provide guidance and direction to continue activities for the geospatial
program, and the detailed schedule in Appendix F will provide as a reference for implementation.
This element will entail a detailed work break down structure with specific assignments for the
core team. Approval by the Executive Sponsor will be important to obtain. An additional
element to follow the approved work break down structure of a comprehensive project schedule
will be to select and implement project tracking tools to facilitate the strategic framework
implementation monitoring and control. The Define phase Project Team Charters might need to
updated or revalidated.


Roles and
Current Status of
Elements Geospatial Core Team Activities Responsibil
Implementation
ities
Test Design phase Program Management Geospatial
Plan Program PM, Core
P.3.2.1. Test design Management Plan
phase Program Refine Design phase Program Plan Team,
Develop Design phase Project Team 1 NWCG
Management Plan
Charters Branch
Establish project teams for Design phase Coordinator
92
2.4. Phase 4: Implement

This Phase is associated
with the wildland fire
community’s response
activities. In particular,
as the nation faces risks
associated with changing
weather patterns, violent
storms, sudden wildfires
and fires, and the
consequences of natural
disasters, the demand for
all hazards emergency
management response is
ever increasing. The
Implement phase
launches and
institutionalizes the
community’s new
geospatial capabilities and
service offerings,
potentially via multiple
initiatives (and, as a result,
improves response
capabilities). Stakeholders
of the interagency wildland fire community should work to implement new or enhanced capabilities
throughout operations and ensure proper alignment with business requirements. Post-
deployment activities focus on monitoring and assessing the effectiveness of the community’s
performance to ensure that strategic framework goals and objectives are achieved and
improvement opportunities identified.
The implementation of the capability (or capabilities) is supported through additional Ownership
Building, in this case, targeted communications and training. On the basis of the results of the
Change Readiness Assessment conducted in the Develop phase, senior leadership’s involvement
should be emphasized to help overcome obstacles. Depending on approach defined in the
Design and Test phases, the implementation may occur in elements. This means the improvements
might be made gradually, although the released schedule for improved capabilities would be on slightly
accelerated timelines (i.e., quick wins or evolving technology spirals). The implementation process
should be formalized across the model to promote duplication of success, not mistakes. Over
time, this formalized implementation process should allow the organization to build on its
successes and create a culture that is more adaptable to change.
Per Ownership Building and Program Stewardship, the sphere of influence has been expanded to as
many stakeholders as possible to create awareness and understanding. In this final phase, the change
agents are being developed in record number and are preparing their peers for the
implementation. All communications and training performed in this phase should be geared toward
user adoption at the job or individual level.
93
2.4.1. Element C.4.1: Implement Detailed Geospatial Design/Build Solution

This element conducts and manages the deployment of the new capabilities developed and tested
in the Develop phase. New capabilities typically involve new organization structure, human
capital designs and performance management systems, processes, technical systems, and
facilities and locations components. Previous reviews and test activities ensure that these
components satisfy the requirements in support of the interagency wildland fire geospatial
community’s mission, strategies, and objectives.

The NWCG Geospatial Core Team composition is critical in this stage of the program and
should continue to include credible and respected staff from within the organization to help
create and validate geospatial capability designs / build solutions. As emphasized in the
Ownership Building section, ownership and sponsorship broaden during the Design phase; and
it is the responsibility of the NWCG Geospatial Core Team to help facilitate these aspects of
strategic framework. Project leadership should select a technical approach for the Design and
Develop phases based on the type of development effort (custom software, COTS integration,
system engineering), schedule requirements, complexity of the solution, and client preferences.

During the stakeholder analysis, we found that, at the USFS and DOI, geospatial information is
produced and maintained by many different bureaus and program areas primarily to serve
mission or program needs, respectively. As a result, the interagency wildland fire geospatial
information management is not well coordinated across bureaus and programs. Consumers of
geospatial information often find it difficult to locate reliable sources of geospatial information.
Once they discover such, it can be difficult to determine its accuracy and timeliness.

Two key recommendations come out of these findings. The first is to establish a series of
Authoritative Data Sources (ADS) for similar geospatial information that is highly valuable and
reusable across the wildland fire community. The second is for information access and delivery
services to be provided by the ADS. These services will provide maps for visualization, data for
manipulation, and data for exchange. This two-part strategy affords the interagency wildland fire
community the opportunity to focus on select and critical geospatial data assets and
incrementally manage the evolution of the assets and architecture.
Moreover, the optimization and standardization recommendations involve the identification and
establishment of two key elements. First, designate a set of reliable managed repositories of
similar geospatial information. Second, create a set of shareable services, a service-oriented
architecture (SOA) that uses ADS to provide maps, data, and data exchange capabilities for
multiple types of consumers. The ADS will be supported by the interagency wildland fire community
to ensure the data and service will be available to the consumer. These recommendations rely on the
interagency wildland fire community’s adoption of data and technology standards.

94

Current Status Roles and
Elements Geospatial Core Team Activities of Responsibilit
Implementation ies
Procure, install, and test COTS infrastructure Geospatial
Install and configure solution components in Program PM, Core
production environment Management Team, NWCG
Test and verify solution environment Plan Branch
Transition system to production support Coordinator
Verify security configuration controls are properly 0
Implemented
Review reorganization documentation
Implement new organization structure
Incorporate communications about new organization
structure into Communications Plan
Implement human capital designs
Implement new process strategic framework
activities
C.4.1.1
Implement Complete process of obtaining necessary legislative
designs and changes, and commence process of achieving
systems based enactment by Congress
on Deployment Finalize and obtain approval of changes to the
Plan policies and procedures
Enter policy and procedure changes into new
solution (for automated policies and procedures)
Refine policy and procedure changes in solution
Publish policies and procedures
Incorporate communications about policy and
procedure changes into Communications Plan
Implement performance management for business
processes
Refine process for managing performance
management
Implement performance management system
Monitor effectiveness and make improvements as
needed
Implement performance management system for
deployment activities
2.4.2. Element O.4.1: Implement Geospatial Change Management Plan

This element monitors the implementation across the organization and works to minimize and
address barriers to change.

At this stage, the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework will be managing the
change of creating a geospatial program for the wildland fire community in Figure 31.
95
Figure 31: Managing Change Status
In the best case scenario the entry point for change management is at the start of the
geospatial program during each iterative phase in order to interweave the change management
elements and activities with the project activities. In this way, the overall process becomes a
seamless integration of both processes. By breaking change down into discrete process
elements, change management practitioners can adapt their strategies and techniques based
on the unique attributes of that phase. The concept of change management implementation is
depicted by Figure 32 along the x-axis of time:
Figure 32: Temporal Concept of Change
The most common best practice from this model for change is that managers must avoid
treating change as a single meeting or announcement. The Executive Manager and NWCG
Geospatial Core Team must be active and visible in all phases of the change process. An
important practical application for implementation is that change management activities must be
tailored according to where you are in the change process. As a project moves from one phase
to the next, the change management activities will shift to meet the changing needs of the
interagency environment. A larger aspect is that change must be viewed both as an
organizational process and as an individual process (see Figure 33). The end goal for change
management is to achieve the objectives of the project in measureable terms.
96
Phases of a change project

Post -implementation Successful
Change
Implementation
Concept and Design
Business need
Awareness Desire Knowledge Ability Reinforcement
Required elements
Figure 33: of change
Elements for for
of Change employees
Employees

In the interagency wildland fire geospatial community, the end goal likely will be articulated in
specific outcomes related to efficiency, quality of service, or cost. The community is not overly
familiar with change management methodologies, or implementation as diagnosed in the
organizational assessments. Implementation of the Change Management Plan to support
detailed designs and overall deployment plan should be monitored for successful
implementation activities. As previously mentioned, the change management activities will shift
to meet the changing needs of the interagency environment, including individual needs. If the
core team is successful at implementing each element of this individual change management
plan, then personal change occurs and efficiency and cost cutting results.
The interagency geospatial core team can use this model to align and assess their change
management implementation activities against a set of reference points for personal change.
The sponsorship coalition members can work with managers and supervisors to use this model
as a coaching and monitoring tool with its stakeholders. The interagency geospatial core team
can use the model (depicted in Figure 34) to help manage its own and other key stakeholders’
change transition through the various levels of (A) awareness, (D) desire, (K) knowledge, (A)
ability, and (R) reinforcement.
97
Figure 34: Change Transition Model

The NWCG Geospatial Core Team will need to continue to manage impediments to adoption
(e.g., management allowing staff to attend training, technical barriers) and monitor feedback to
incorporate changes as needed. It will be important to continue to reward change leaders and
change agents as they emerge (those rewarded may not necessarily be the ones who were
identified and trained as official change agents/leaders). Reporting out to senior leadership at
regular intervals will be key to successful implementation during this element. Also, see
Appendix E.2 for sponsorship coalition check list. It will be a key element for the Executive
Sponsor to distribute this check list for initiation of implementation.


98
Develop Change Geospatial PM, Core

Management Deployment Change Management Team, NWCG Branch
Plan to support detailed Plan Coordinator
designs and overall 0
deployment plan
Monitor organizational
performance
Assess stakeholder
satisfaction levels
O.4.1.1. Develop and Manage impediments to
implement adoption (i.e., managers not
Organizational Change allowing staff to attend
Management training, technical barriers)
Deployment Plan Monitor feedback and
incorporate changes as
needed
Continue to reward change
leaders and change agents as
they emerge (those rewarded
may not necessarily be the
ones who were identified and
trained as official change
agents/leaders)
Report out to senior
leadership at regular intervals
O.4.1.2 Prepare Review roles and
project teams and responsibilities
change agents for Review project plans
implementation kickoff Define success
2.4.3. Element O.4.2: Implement Geospatial Communications Plan

During the Implement phase, communications should be intensely focused. Just as it was
important to communicate the Future State Vision in the previous four phases of the strategic
framework, it is critical to deliver messages that convey the interagency wildland fire geospatial
community’s successes in achieving the vision to all levels of the organization. The
communications can also disseminate lessons learned during the deployment period.

Effective communication needs to connect change management clearly to project objectives
and business results. Feedback gathered from those engaged in change management with
question-and-answer sessions is another element of effective communications in this element.
The communication messages should include actual success stories from around the
organization regarding seamless implementation outcomes and increased organizational
performance. For example, the success stories may convey improved stakeholder support,
reduction of duplicate geospatial requests for maps / data due to streamlined access, or
recognition from leadership. These success stories celebrate the benefits reaped from the new
strategic framework behaviors and the increased interagency achievements. Every
communication message can be viewed from the perspective of a sender and a receiver.
99
Sender = anyone sharing information about the change

Receiver = anyone receiving information about the change
In many cases, senders and receivers are not in a dialogue at the beginning of a change. In fact,
they may be talking right past one another. What a sender says and what a receiver hears can be
two very different things. Confirmation of accurate communication messages from the
communications plan being transmitted in various methods will be a key activity in this element in
Figure 35.
Business issues and need to change

Senders
Personal implications and risk

Receivers
Figure 35: Confirmation of Communications

Note again that we learned success stories to share in this community might include seamless
implementation outcomes and increased organizational performance. For example, the
success stories may convey improved stakeholder support, reduction of duplicate geospatial
requests for maps / data due to streamlined access, or recognition from leadership.

During this element, it will be important to develop and launch communications that target the
Individual level, which is not a traditional means for this community. For example, training
opportunities for the interagency wildland fire community. Positive outcomes will need to be
communicated with top-level endorsement from the Executive Sponsor. Enterprise-wide
messages will need to be designed and developed for post-implementation communications to
keep the interagency wildland fire community informed about ongoing geospatial technology
activities. Leverage success stories and personal testimonials throughout the interagency
wildland fire geospatial community and from many levels of enterprise-wide activities to
reenergize commitment and support for the strategic framework efforts. Assess communications
impact and continually make improvements throughout this element, while announcing success
will be key issues to address. During iterative phases, contribution to a Lessons Learned report
will be important as well.

100

Develop and launch
communications that target the
job/individual level
Communicate training
opportunities with top-level
O.4.2.1. Develop
endorsement
and implement
Design and develop post- Communication
Organizational Geospatial PM, Core
implementation communications Management Plan
Change Team, NWCG Branch
(organization level messages) 0
Management Coordinator
Deployment Plan Leverage success stories and
personal testimonials throughout
the organization and from many
levels to reenergize commitment
and support for the change
effort
Communicate success
Element O.4.3: Implement Geospatial Training

This element enables involved stakeholders to perform their jobs effectively in the new operating
environment. Training in this phase supports rollout and user sessions.

Implementation of training typically takes the results of the high-level training program in order to
deploy the training curriculum. In so doing, this element provides capability training for all strategic
framework efforts (e.g., geospatial technology capability development, user acceptance/testing,
pilot user, change management and communications) that eventually support final capability
deployment. The Training Plan should serve as a guide for developing and conducting capability
training and influence more detailed training plans under Capability Development element C.4.3.

Beyond the high-level training baseline analysis that was referenced in O.2.3 and O.3.3, no other
interagency geospatial training activities (via the Training Plan) have been implemented.

In this element, it will be important to incorporate pilot results and feedback into training content
delivery. After testing the instructor-led (classroom) materials or distributing CBT or web-based
materials in the previous phase, this element will reinforce, through distribution of the curriculum, a
comprehensive training program. Part of implementing the training program will be responsibility to
secure and prepare appropriate facilities (as required) as well as to identify and train instructors.
Coordinating training schedules with the USFS and DOI bureaus’ existing training entity (whether
training function is centralized or decentralized) will be a key part of this element. Finally, the
101
community with want to solicit student feedback in order to conduct assessment of training effectiveness
with managers to determine if/how job performance has improved. As a result, training will need to be
revised as needed on an iterative basis. Institutionalizing geospatial strategic framework training
requirements into existing infrastructure will be a key issue to address during this element.

Table 36: Element O.4.3 Implementation Plan

Incorporate pilot results and feedback Geospatial PM, Core
into training content and delivery; Training Plan and Team, NWCG Branch
review for quality Curriculum Coordinator
Print instructor-led (classroom) 0
O.4.3.1. Prepare for
training materials or distribute CBT or web-
based materials
Secure and prepare appropriate
facilities (as required)
Identify and train instructors (as
required)
Coordinate training schedules with Geospatial PM, Core
organization’s existing training entityTraining Plan and Team, Training SMEs
(whether training function is Curriculum
centralized or decentralized) 0
Conduct training and solicit student
response
O.4.3.2. Conduct and Conduct follow-up assessment of
assess training training effectiveness (training + 1
month) with managers to determine
how job performance has improved
(done when needs dictate)
Revise training as needed
Institutionalize training requirements
into existing training
Meet with organization’s existing Geospatial PM, Core
training entity to review requirementsTraining Plan and Team, Training SMEs
and resources Curriculum
Make recommendations going forward 0
O.4.3.3. Incorporate
to sustain quality capabilities in the
training requirements
training system
into organization’s
When applicable, provide training to
existing training
training managers on how to
effectively operate and monitor the
new training program
Perform follow-up evaluation
102
2.4.4. Element P.4.1: Implement Geospatial Risk Management Plan

This element enables all involved stakeholders to perform their jobs effectively in the new operating
environment. Risk management in this phase supports rollout and changes associated with the
new geospatial technology capabilities in the interagency wildland fire community.

An iterative build and test approach can help mitigate risk by demonstrating portions of the new system
components to ensure that requirements are satisfied and risks addressed. The system components
testing against the requirements identified during the Define phase help to mitigate risk. In addition, the
risk management plan will address the change management components of resistance planning.

Resistance to the approach to the NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework was
anticipated early in the development process. To build out the risk management approach,
planning for the aspects of risk management listed in Table 37 will be important.
Table 37: Risk Management Planning Approach

Risk Management Planning Approach
1) How will resistance be identified?
a) Employee feedback
b) Supervisor input
c) Project team issues
d) Compliance audits
2) Process for resistance management by level
a) Employees
b) Supervisors
c) Mid-level managers
d) Senior managers
3) Resistance management training by level
a) Targeted audiences for this training
b) Schedule for training (or method of integrating this material into existing
training for this audience)

Because the interagency wildland fire geospatial community currently does not perform any
significant risk-management planning at an interagency level, it will be important to compare the
Change Readiness Assessment and change management objectives with the interagency
wildland fire community’s prioritized improvement options to determine the optimal risk
sequence. After this task is completed and the Risk Management Approach is addressed,
103
implementation of risk management tactics can begin. To mitigate risks for capability
development, selection of the appropriate prototyping technologies and tools based on the needs
of the prototyping effort (e.g., to validate technologies or experiment with various functional
approaches) will be important. In addition, demonstrating the prototype to stakeholders to gain
further insight into requirements and needs will help to gain ―lessons learned‖ to apply to further
efforts. Finally, refining and improving enterprise architecture and requirements models based
on lessons learned will significantly help to reduce the risk associated with implementing the
NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework for the interagency wildland fire community.


Elements Geospatial Core Team Activities Current Status Roles and

of Responsibilities
Implementation
 Compare the Change Readiness Geospatial PM, Core
Assessment and change Risk Team, NWCG Branch
O.4.3.1 Implement the
management objectives with the Management Coordinator
enterprise improvement
interagency wildland fire Plan
options
geospatial community’s 0
prioritized improvement options
to determine the risk sequence
Select appropriate prototyping Geospatial PM, Core
technologies and tools based on Risk Team, NWCG Branch
the needs of the prototyping Management Coordinator
effort (e.g., validate Plan
technologies, experiment with 0
O.4.3.2 Implement various approaches)
prototypes and Demonstrate the prototype to
approaches to mitigate stakeholders to gain further
risk, and Architecture insight into requirements and
Risk Assessment needs
Gain ―lessons learned‖ to apply
to further efforts
Refine and improve architecture
and requirements models
Refine design and development
estimates based on prototyping
2.4.5. Element P.4.2: Implement Geospatial Program Management Plan

This element refines the strategic framework structure with corresponding roles, responsibilities,
and integrated decision hierarchies for the NWCG Geospatial Core Team, Executive Sponsors,
Sponsorship Coalition, and the Project Teams. In addition, it implements overarching strategy for
the phase, holds Project Team Leads accountable, and implements work and management plans.
104

This element leads and drives the project teams to complete phase activities and manage
program activities. It ensures that the project teams have the resources needed to complete the
activities successfully. The goal for implementation of program management is to achieve the
objectives of the strategic planning efforts in measureable terms. The end goal may be
articulated in specific outcomes related to efficiency, quality of service, or cost.

The program management plan is not being implemented, because the current status is at the
Design phase, P.2.1.

The stakeholder analysis revealed that there are currently limited resources in the interagency
wildland fire geospatial community for program management planning, or tracking. To lead and
drive the implementation of the program management plan, the Executive Sponsor and NWCG
Geospatial Core Team will need to provide the appropriate implementation resources. For
example, the NWCG Geospatial Core Team might develop an issue tracking and control
process, train employees on new processes and tools, begin phased implementation of the
geospatial technology capabilities solution, collect employee and manager feedback on an
ongoing basis, modify the solution design and transition plans based on ongoing feedback, track
and resolve issues during implementation, and prepare implementation progress report for the
Executive Sponsor and/or sponsorship coalition while continually measuring process and system
performance. In addition, the program management plan includes measuring business
outcomes and comparing those outcomes with the NWCG Geospatial Core Team’s objectives;
making adjustments to the implementation to achieve desire business results; preparing
executive-level presentations of process, system, and business results; and presenting the final
business results to the Executive Sponsor and/or sponsorship coalition as key issues to address.


Provide Implement phase Geospatial PM, Core
resources (performed by the Program Management Team, NWCG Branch
P.4.1.1 Implement the
Executive Sponsor and Plan Coordinator
Program Management 0
supported by the NWCG
Plan
Geospatial Core Team)
Lead and drive Implement
Program Management Plan
105
2.5. Phase 5: Evaluate

The Evaluate Phase relates to the wildland fire community’s focus on stabilization. The pressure
on the community for all-hazards emergency management response is ever increasing, while
at the same time the interagency
wildland fire community continues to
adjust to tighter budgets and other
economic realities. The Evaluate
phase analyzes the new
capabilities, related systems,
organization and process designs,
human capital components, and
workplace designs.
Capability Development activities

follow the approach selected during
the Design phase to ensure that
new capabilities are introduced in
a timely and quality-conscious
manner that minimizes risk and
overhead. Additionally, the
systems and designs are revised
based on feedback received
during the Test and Implement
phase validation activities.
The Evaluate phase also involves a large number of interactions between the Capability Development
and Ownership Building work streams. For example, representatives from project teams will work
with the change management team to develop training content and help roll out training to test
participants (see O.2.3). The Organizational Change Management Plan (see O.2.1) identifies
high-impact, high-resistance, and ―center of influence‖ in the community that should be targeted
as test participants. The test activities may identify modifications to the training content and, possibly,
delivery methods. The Evaluate phase requires reinforcement of extensive stakeholder
involvement to support the testing activities and to build ownership of the new capabilities
prior to deployment. During the Evaluate phase, the NWCG Core Team members who are
supporting Ownership Building work closely with Capability Development team members to prepare
for a successful iterative implementation of the improved and integrated capability for next year. Another
Change Readiness Assessment should be developed, and the results from the assessment should be
compared with the baseline assessment (see O.1.2.1, Design Initial Change Readiness
Assessment). The larger, enterprise-wide community should be surveyed for this assessment to
measure general awareness of the strategic framework and to estimate the potential for adoption
of the new geospatial technology capabilities. Program Stewardship’s role during the Evaluate
phase is to re-emphasize the strategic framework, program management, and project team
structures to develop and demonstrate the detailed designs produced for next year.
106
2.5.1. Element C.5.1: Evaluate and Monitor Geospatial Implementation

This element supports effectiveness of work in the new operating environment. Training in this
phase supports rollout and user sessions.

Monitoring and measurement enable the core team to tie together all pieces of the strategic
framework into an iterative feedback loop. As such, it is connected to a number of other
elements in the overall approach graphic.

Issues common to all stages of the execution were identified during the execution of this project.
But, without question, the most pressing needs within the geospatial wildland fire community
related to geospatial capability development include the following:
A centralized and shared geospatial data repository

An authoritative geospatial data source
Data security with a single logon and access control
Centralized access from any location
Independence from any specific software application or platform
A data management, storage, and retrieval system for output of product-related information
Filling of key staffing roles to include a spatial data administrator and wildland fire data
stewards
A culture that promotes sharing of information of all data types through the Information Sharing
Council
A set of shareable services
A set of data and technology standards to be used by the community based on a life-cycle
management approach.
The corrective actions to address these key findings and to implement the required solutions are
significant and challenging. Given the multiagency structure of the NIFC and the demanding
problem-solving that must be accomplished within a time-constrained environment, strong
leadership will be required to implement the documented solutions. NWCG leadership must
commit to implementing these solutions within a technically and financially feasible timeframe. A
list of implementation actions, the parties responsible for completing them, and a timeframe for
their must be an outcome of this engagement to successfully evaluate and monitor progress.
After leadership has chosen an implementation plan that addresses each of these key findings,
performance metrics can then be designed and tracked.

107

Geospatial Core Current Status of Roles and
Elements
Team Activities Implementation Responsibilities
Create a centralized, Geospatial PM,
shared geospatial data Performance Core Team, NWCG
repository Measurement Branch Coordinator
Define authoritative 1
geospatial data sources
Provide for data security
with a single logon and
access control
Provide for centralized
access from any
location
Build in independence
from any specific
software application or
platform
Develop a data
management, storage,
C.5.1.1. Evaluate and retrieval system for
implementation and output of product
measurement information
information that is Fill key staffing roles to
available include a spatial data
administrator and
wildland fire data
stewards
Create a culture that
promotes sharing of
information of all data
types through the
Information Sharing
Council
Create a set of
shareable services
Adopt a set of data and
technology standards
for use by the
community by utilizing a
life-cycle management
approach.
Create a centralized, Geospatial PM,
shared geospatial Performance Core Team, NWCG
repository Measurement Branch Coordinator
C.5.1.2. Prioritize and Define authoritative 1
schedule for data sources
implementation Provide for data security
access control
108
access from any

location
Build in independence
from any specific
software application or
platform
Develop a data
and retrieval system for
output of product
information
Fill key staffing roles to
include a spatial data
administrator and
wildland fire data
stewards
promotes sharing of
types through the
Information Sharing
Council
Create a set of
shareable services
technology standards to
be used by the
community by utilizing a
life-cycle management
approach.
Create a centralized,
shared geospatial data Performance Geospatial PM,
repository Measurement Core Team, NWCG
Define authoritative 1 Branch Coordinator
geospatial data sources
Provide for data security
access control
C.5.1.3. Garner access from any
resources and identify location
leadership to oversee Build in independence
the implementation of from any specific
these actions on a software application or
defined schedule. platform
Develop a data
and retrieval system
Fill key staffing roles to
include a spatial data
administrator and
wildland fire data
stewards
promotes sharing of
109

types through the
Information Sharing
Council
Create a set of
shareable services
standards for the
community to use using
a life-cycle
management approach.
2.5.2. Element C.5.2: Establish Continuous Improvement Process

This element links the improvement process to organizational processes that manage change
across the enterprise (e.g., annual planning cycle and system change control processes). The
organizational processes leverage the mechanisms defined in the performance management
system.

Documenting action plans, meeting associated project timelines, and analyzing survey results and
workplace and workforce statistical information are typical activities within this element (see Table
41).
Steps to Table 41:Continuous

Establish Continuous Improvement
Improvement Process
Process for the Steps
Evaluation
Phase
1) Identify target of corrective action
2) Findings from feedback and program audits, (GAO report, etc.)
3) Root cause of resistance
4) Change management analysis
5) Training intervention strategy
a) who:
b) what:
c) when:
6) Consequences intervention strategy
a) who:
b) what:
c) when:
7) Support or actions needed from stakeholders

Presently, no continuous improvement processes have been set up for the interagency wildland
fire geospatial community while the geospatial program is being created.
110

A performance-based incentive awards program will be elevated in terms of its importance as a
management tool, and it may include cash award opportunities. Typically, individual performance
plans are linked to individual agency performance plans (mission, vision, goals and objectives),
with employees focusing on the expected key results. Ideally, the performance evaluation plans will
entail specific goals and recommendations for activities related to the interagency geospatial
community.
Eventually, the interagency wildland fire geospatial community should ideally utilize the chart in
Figure 36 as a performance measurement matrix of effectiveness. The top-left quadrant
primarily focuses on the speed of adoption, utilization rate, and proficiency of the geospatial
strategic framework. The top-right quadrant primarily focuses on an assessment by immediate
supervisors as a part of the supervisors’ role in leading change. The bottom-left quadrant
primarily focuses on business performance as compared against the interagency wildland fire
geospatial community’s objectives. The bottom-right quadrant focuses on measuring the
individual performance in each job role.
NWCG Geospatial
Community Individual
Speed of adoption (ADKAR)

ADKAR
Utilization rate (ADKAR)
Process
Proficiency (ADKAR)
Assessment by immediate
Measured by group, function, supervisors as part of their role
location in leading change
(measurement using web-based (measurement using ADKAR

ADKAR assessments) instruments)
Business performance against

Individual performance for
objectives
each job role
Outcome
Financial performance
Performance against objectives
Quality of product
as defined in personal objectives
Quality of service
with immediate supervisor
Quality of work life
Speed of implementation
(schedule adherence)
Figure 36: Continuous Improvement Performance Measurement Matrix

111

Develop tracking tools Geospatial PM, Core
C.5.2.1. Establish a Performance Team, NWCG Branch
Report on key measures to
process to identify Measurements Coordinator
compare the benefits realized
and assess 1
with the planned benefits
improvement
opportunities Determine performance gaps
and changes to correct them
Evaluate Post-Deployment Geospatial PM, Core
Assessment Report and Performance Team, NWCG Branch
performance indicators to Measurements Coordinator
identify improvement 1
opportunities
Prioritize and sequence
C.5.2.2. Define improvement opportunities,
improvement including system maintenance,
opportunities enhancements, and upgrades
Coordinate review of
improvement opportunities
through appropriate
mechanisms (e.g., change
control process and business
planning cycle)
2.5.3. Element P.5.1: Assess Budget and Performance Targets

This element, based on the monitoring and evaluation of the implementation, determines whether
savings and benefits predicted for new capabilities are realized and whether performance targets
are met.

This element refines and revises the Business Case using the most current, detailed, and accurate
data. This activity is critical to ensure the proper identification and reflection of business
economics throughout the strategic framework and to manage executive expectations. The
outcome of this element is the business justification to receive funding approval for the iterative
Envision phase.

Because neither an interagency wildland fire geospatial community budget nor an investment
strategy is yet identified for the community, re-evaluation of the high-level business case has not
yet occurred. Key activities involved with this task include reviewing all procedures supporting
initial development of the business case and revising predictions for the status quo and preferred
alternatives as appropriate, calculating financial measures using discounted cash flow and
compute ROI measures for the preferred alternative, ensuring that the preferred alternative still
112
provides the best net value to the organization, conducting project team and stakeholder review of
revised business case, and securing acceptance.

Going forward, describing how program costs and alternatives will support the individual
agency’s investment strategies and the overarching interagency budget (or investment strategy),
and how an IT initiative relates to other elements of the interagency environment’s enterprise
architecture for IT strategy investment, will be important. Also of importance will be describing
how the interagency wildland fire geospatial community will review the various geospatial
strategic framework initiatives and select it for inclusion in its investment portfolio, how the
agency will control and manage the investment, and how the agency will evaluate the investment
based on planned performance versus actual accomplishments. Additionally, obtaining
consensus on the revised budget plan input for the geospatial strategic framework initiatives by
conducting a project team review of the revised budget and by conducting other stakeholder
engagement activities as needed will be greatly important. And, finally, comparing the
implementation evaluation results to the anticipated results is of key importance. After the
causes of deviation of actual results from anticipated results, a process to assess economic,
performance, and compliance targets can be developed.


Establish and apply a process Geospatial PM, Core
P.5.1.1. Compare the
to assess attainment of Budget Plan Team, NWCG Branch
implementation
economic, performance, and 0 Coordinator
evaluation results
compliance targets
with the anticipated
Determine causes for deviation
results
from anticipated results
2.5.4. Element P.5.2: Evaluate Geospatial Program Plan

This element evaluates the overall program plan as well as change management,
communications, and training resulting from strategic framework activities. Other activities include
archiving program documents, developing a work plan for continuous improvement, and closing
transformation program structures and offices.

Reinforcing change and program controls is the final element in the strategic framework. While
change management activities are important, they are not a substitute for results. Without the
113
achievement of the objectives of the change, the change management activities are without
purpose.

Documenting action plans, meeting associated project timelines, and analyzing survey results and
workplace and workforce statistical information are key activities used as a means of measuring the
Core Team’s success. This element includes activities to measure performance and to collect
feedback from key stakeholders. Root-cause analysis, corrective action plans, and change-
resistance management are used to resolve gaps and to ensure that the program management
and the change itself are both taking hold and producing the expected benefits for the
interagency wildland fire geospatial community.

Critical to this entire process is the ability to reinforce the change and strategic framework
program such that the results can be sustained. Personal and private recognition, along with
group celebrations within the organization, are part of this reinforcement process. As each
change takes hold and demonstrates success, the overall capability of the organization to
change in the future increases. Capturing this process would best be done through web-based
tools and instruments that are easy to apply in a variety of circumstances. For example, with
licensing options, this process can be integrated within the interagency wildland fire geospatial
community’s existing processes and can be published on the community’s internal networks
(e.g., eShare site). The individual core team members may also elect to customize the program
management process to match their internal agency requirements. To adequately support the
iterative deployment of program management to the Envision phase, utilization of the proper
tools to analyze the progress made to date is a key issue that will need to be addressed.


Establish and apply a process Geospatial PM, Core
to assess attainment of the Program Team, NWCG Branch
overall program management Management, Change Coordinator
plan Management, and
P.5.2.1. Compare the Communication Plans
Establish and apply a process
implementation 0
to assess attainment of the
evaluation results
change management plan
with the anticipated
Establish and apply a process
results
to assess attainment of the
communication plan
Determine causes for deviation
from anticipated results
114
2.6. Strategic Framework Development

2.6.1. Internal Review
In preparation for the planning process, the NWCG Geospatial Core Team retained a contractor
to gather input from employees, supervisors, and executives within every wildland fire
interagency geospatial program that was included in the stakeholder analysis. Input was
collected through individual interviews with subject-area experts, focus groups that included
offices and directorates across the interagency wildland fire community, and biweekly meetings
and teleconferences with 40 stakeholders throughout all the regions. A confidential survey was
made available to all key stakeholders that garnered more than 40 individual responses. The
NWCG Geospatial Core Team also sought limited, early input from Federal Response Plan
partners and state emergency managers and included their perspectives in the internal review.
As part of the process of reviewing the performance of and challenges facing the interagency
programs and functions, the NWCG Geospatial Core Team reviewed relevant reports issued by the
various NWCG member agencies’ bureaus and programs, as listed in Table 45. High-level
summaries of the key documents are available in Appendix G.
Table 45: Agency Policy and Guidance Reviewed by NWCG Geospatial Core Team
AGENCY MAIN AGENCY POLICY, DIRECTION OR GUIDANCE DOCUMENT

 Review and Update of the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy 2001
 GAO Report - Technologies Hold Promise for Wildland Fire Management, but Challenges Remain, 2003
 Report - Investigation of Geospatial Support of Incident Management, 2002
National Wildfire  National Wildland Fire Enterprise Architecture – Blue Print “Goals and Recommendations”, 2008
Coordinating Group  DOI Enterprise Architecture -Wildland Fire Modernization Blue Print 2005
(NWCG)  NWCG Geospatial Task Group Charter 2005
 Federal Geospatial Policy Landscape Diagram

 DOI Data Quality Management Guide 2008
 OMB Circular A -16 and A -130
 DOI Geospatial Technology Architecture, 2002
 DOI EA Geospatial Modernization Blue Print Recommendations and Architecture, 2007
 DOI Secretarial Order 3277 – Enhanced Geospatial Governance 2008
DOI / Office of  Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) Standards Reference Model, 1996
 Federal Geographic Data Center (FGDC) Goals FY 2010
Wildland Fire
 National Spatial Data Infrastructure – Future Directions Initiative, 2004
Coordination  National Spatial Data Infrastructure – Towards a National Geospatial Strategy and Implementation 2004
 Geospatial Line of Business Program Management Office Concept of Operations, 2007
 Geospatial Line of Business DRAFT Strategic Plan 2008
 Forest Service Geospatial Strategy for Fiscal Years 2005 - 200

 FS Information Resources Strategic Framework, 2009 9
 FS Geospatial Data Management Guide – Managing the USFS GIS, 2010
 FS Handbook FSH 6609.15 – Standards for Data and Data Structure
Forest Service  Geospatial Segment Conceptual Target Architecture
 BLM Geospatial Services Strategic Plan FY2008

 BLM Manual 1283 – Data Administration and Management
 BLM Manual Handbook 1283 -1 “Data Administration and Management”, 2006
Bureau of Land  BLM Manual 1278 provides policy involving data sharing
Management
 NPS Regulations, Directives and Policy
 NPS Director’s Order 11A -Information Technology Management, 2004 Draft
 NPS GIS Enterprise Program Planning, 2009
 NPS GIS Strategic Plan 2002 -200
National Park Service  NPS IRM Standards 2001 5
 NPS Data and Systems Stewardship Policy
 NPS GIS Data Specifications for Resource Mapping Inventories and Studies
 FWS Geographic Information Systems Strategic Plan 2006 -2009, 2006

 FWS Manual 270, Chapter 1 -Service Enterprise Architecture
 FWS Manual 270, Chapter 3 -Information Technology Governance
Fish and Wildlife  FWS Manual 270, Chapter 7 -Automated Information System Security
Service  FWS Manual 270, Chapter 8 -Geographic Information Systems
 BIA Office of the Chief Information Officer – Service Level Agreement

 BIA Office of the Geographic Information Officer - Geospatial Technology Strategic Plan 2003 – 200
 BIA Strategic Implementation Plan for the Geographic Data Service Center, 1993 6
Bureau of Indian Affairs
115
To better focus the effort, the following criteria were used to identify the key documents pertinent
to the respective land management agencies and/or wildland fire management:
Policy: Those documents that establish policy (i.e., a prescribed course of action, guiding
principle, or procedure considered to be expedient, prudent, or advantageous within an agency
and/or across agencies)
Agency Direction: Documents at the highest level within an agency that provide direction
related to the use and application of geospatial data and information
Interagency Direction and Coordination of Geospatial Data: Documents that describe
interagency use and/or application of geospatial data as it relates to wildland management.
Where feasible, the results of this analysis have been presented according to the key dimension
of change—i.e., people, process, technology, and physical infrastructure. The findings of this
study represent various levels of policy development among the various agencies. Summaries
of the interagency wildland fire community’s directives, policy, and guidance are in Appendix G.
2.6.2. Leadership Guidance and Staff Input

After reviewing the consolidated information from the interagency wildland fire community’s internal
analysis, the NWCG Geospatial Core Team and executive leadership met over January through
March 2010 to discuss the findings and to develop the proposed mission, vision, values, and
goals. These meetings provided the NWCG Geospatial Core Team with top-level guidance and
strategic direction. With that guidance, many wildland fire offices and directorates convened a
cross-section of their staff to develop objectives and strategies designed to achieve the proposed
goals. Their work was incorporated into the strategic framework, and the integrated draft of the
NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework was reviewed and further refined by a group of
designated representatives from various agencies, bureaus, programs, and regional offices.
116
3. Appendices
Appendix A: Charter Document
National Wildfire Coordinating Group Geospatial Committee Charter
1. Background
The National Wildfire Coordinating Group (NWCG) was formed in January 1974, to expand
operational cooperation and coordination between various public agencies having jurisdictional
responsibility for wildland fire management.
In 2007, the NWCG was re-chartered, expanding its responsibility and adding new partners. The
committee chartered herein is one of a number of support groups established by the NWCG to
provide stewardship for specific business segment areas in fire management.
Historically, most of the functional business area to be addressed by this committee was the
responsibility of the former Geospatial Task Group (GTG), under the Information Technology (IT)
Committee. The IT Committee was formerly recognized as the Information Resource
Management Working Team (IRMWT). The Geospatial Task Group is requesting its name to be
changed to the Geospatial Committee (GC).
2. Name
The name of this committee, hereinafter referred to as the Committee, is the Geospatial
Committee (GC) of the National Wildfire Coordinating Group Executive Board.
3. Authority
The Committee is established pursuant to the authorities granted in National Wildfire
Coordinating Group Charter, October 11, 2007.
The deliberations of this Committee are exempt from the Federal Advisory Committee Act
under section 204 of Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995.
The Chair is authorized to convene meetings and schedule agenda items. The Chair is also
authorized to make contacts, negotiate work assignments, make commitments on behalf of
the Committee, and commit such resources as are available within the Committee or as
authorized by the National Wildfire Coordinating Group Executive Board.
4. Purpose
The Committee is established to provide interagency oversight, strategic leadership and
enterprise-wide geospatial data for geospatial technology within the wildland fire environment.
5. Membership
Committee membership will reflect a mix of people who are knowledgeable in the subject
area of the Committee and who are from the NWCG member agencies and organizations.
With NWCG approval, agencies or organizations that are not NWCG members may be
selected for Committee membership.
117
The National Wildfire Coordinating Group Executive Board will appoint a Chair. The Term of
the Chair appointment will be 2 years and may be extended at the discretion of the National
Wildfire Coordinating Group Executive Board. The Chair may serve continuously for a
period up to, but not exceeding, 4 years.
The primary committee member roster will be approved by the National Wildfire
Coordinating Group Executive Board. The terms of each Committee member will be
indefinite. Replacement members will be selected by the Chair. Technical advisors may be
added as appropriate with Chair approval.
6. Organization
The Committee is under the direction of the National Wildfire Coordinating Group Executive
Board. The Committee may create subcommittees, units, and task teams with the
concurrence of the Equipment and Technology Branch Coordinator.
7. Cooperation and Coordination

The Committee will work through the respective Branch Coordinator to ensure appropriate
coordination, collaboration, and information sharing with other groups and organizations for
the subject matter and specific tasks of the Committee.
8. Responsibility
The Committee has the primary responsibility for business stewardship within NWCG for
geospatial technology.
9. Deliverables
Standards
Guidelines
Reviews, Assessments and Recommendations
Training Course Content
Geospatial Data
10. Meetings
The Committee shall document in a standard operating procedure the specific protocols and
procedures for conducting committee business.
11. Charter Amendments

Changes to, or revocation of, this charter must follow the process outlined in the NWCG
Operating Principles and Guidelines.
12. Charter Approval

This charter is effective as of the date of approval by the Chair of the National Wildfire
Coordinating Group Executive Board and shall remain in effect until revised or revoked.
______________________________________ _____________________
Chair, National Wildfire Coordinating Group Date
Executive Board
118
Appendix B: Organizational Intent

Identification
The National Wildfire Coordinating Group Geospatial Committee (GC) is a planned interagency,
NWCG committee, known herein as the Committee.
1. Strategic Intent
1.1 Vision
1.1.1 To provide seamless, integrated, and adaptive geospatial capabilities across the
landscape.
1.2 Purpose
The Committee is established to provide interagency oversight, strategic leadership and
enterprise-wide geospatial data for geospatial technology within the wildland fire environment.
1.3 Mission
1.3.1 To provide leadership and coordination to facilitate the geospatial technology business of
the interagency wildland fire community.
1.3.2 Mission Goals

Foster a proactive and adaptive approach to emerging and innovative geospatial technologies
and techniques
Institute and maintain policies and procedures in order to coordinate and standardize
interagency wildland fire geospatial data
Create business processes and infrastructure for a wildland fire geospatial database which
allows simple centralized access and supports multiple applications
Develop and implement the program strategic framework necessary to meet the geospatial
needs of the wildland fire community.
1.4 Responsibility
The Committee is primarily responsible for providing business stewardship within NWCG for
geospatial technology management
2 Scope
2.1 The scope of the NWCG GC is described as:
Responsible for applying leadership, knowledge and expertise to the issues, matters, or concerns
relevant to geospatial technology management support to the interagency wildland fire
community.
3 Authorities
The NWCG GC is established under the following authorities:
National Wildfire Coordinating Group Charter, October 1, 2010
3.1 Delegation of Authority

The Committee is delegated the authority to:
119
Create subcommittees, units, and task teams with concurrence of the Equipment and
Technology Branch Coordinator
4 Organization Structure and Relationships

The committee consists of six primary members representing the U.S. Forest Service, Bureau of
Indian Affairs, Bureau of Land Management, US Fish and Wildlife Service, National Park Service,
National Association of State Foresters, and Fire Research.
4.1 Relationships
The committee is a subgroup of the Equipment and Technology Branch.
The committee succeeds and replaces the Geospatial Task Group (GTG).
4.2 Stakeholders and Partners

The NWCG Program Office is the primary partner in all aspects of performing the GC mission. The
Committee maintains partnerships with other NWCG subgroups as needed.
5 Membership
5.1 General: The Chair and Vice-chair are recommended by the Committee and approved
by the Executive Board.
5.2 Primary: The GC will be composed of voting representatives from:
Bureau of Indian Affairs (1)

Bureau of Land Management (1)
U.S. Forest Service (1)
National Association of State Foresters (1)
National Park Service (1)
US Fish and Wildlife Service (1)
5.3 Associate:
Department of Defense (1)
Department of Homeland Security (1)
Fire Research (1)
National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (1)
US Geological Survey (1)
Each primary member may designate one additional associate member from their agency.
At the discretion of the Chair, additional technical advisors may be added as associate members.
6 Products and Services
Education and training: Identify common GIS training needs and resources, and plan or
make recommendations for the development and presentation of training in cooperation
with other groups, programs, or agencies in the wildland fire community.
120
GIS Software Deployment: Serves as the GIS software recommending body, and a
source of geospatial guidance, recommendations, and best practices for all DOI and USDA
users. NWCG member agencies will share software testing results and deployment
methodologies.
Knowledge Base: Review and promote the implementation of an information
data systems for sharing solutions and avoid redundancy in research and development of
GIS and related applications and use. Explore possible merging of tools, documents,
frequently asked questions, list serves, and other helpful databases.
Geospatial Database Support: Develop standard database models and specifications
for DOI and USDA spatial data holdings and national data layers. Identify gaps, revision
schedules, acquisition contracts, and new data types to satisfy DOI and USDA geospatial
data requirements. Provide guidance on protocols for spatial data management, stewardship.
Identify best practices employed by NWCG member agencies and programs.
Spatially Enabling NWCG Business: Review and promote the implementation of
information and application systems to promote geographic data as a framework for the
broadest integration of databases and systems. Identify any significant redundancies
among the systems. Explore possible synergies and future opportunities for collaboration
between and among NWCG initiatives/systems.
Communication: Facilitate and serve as a focal point for communications in NWCG
committees and with other agencies, tribes and external partners about GIS issues,
programs, policies, and budget initiatives.
7 Deliverables
NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework
121
Appendix C: Organizational Assessments
LEADERSHIP ASSESSMENTFOR THE INTERAGENCY WILDLAND FIRE COMMUNITY
CHANGE MANAGEMENT ASSESSMENTFOR THE INTERAGENCY WILDLAND FIRE COMMUNITY
122
Appendix D: Executive Sponsor Activities
123
Appendix E: Sponsorship Coalition Checklist
124
Appendix F: Program Management Schedule

See the next page for a 2009–2010 illustrative example.
125
Tasks and Subtasks

September October November December January February March September
Duration Start Finish
NIFC Geospatial Governance Model - A Transformation 1 year 9/29/2009 9/30/2010

NIFC Geospatial Governance Model Project Management 1 year 9/29/2009 9/30/2010
Initiate Transformation Project - Hold Pre-planning Meeting 1 day 9/30/2009 9/30/2009
Draft Preliminary Kick-off Meeting Slides 1/2 day 9/29/2009 10/7/2009
Gain High-Level Understanding of Current Capabilities 1 day 9/30/2009 10/7/2009
Develop Organizational Change Profile 1 day 10/5/2009 10/7/2009
Review/Approve Project Approach 1 day 9/30/2009 10/31/2009
Draft Project Schedule 2 days 10/5/2009 10/8/2009
Confer with Stakeholders 1 day 9/30/2009 10/7/2009
Establish Project Budget 1 day 9/29/2009 9/30/2009
Establish Central Team Site (eShare) to Collect Documents 4 days 9/30/2009 10/31/2009
Identify NWCG Agency Geospatial Change Management Leads 4 days 9/30/2009 11/7/2009
Initiate Transformation Project Completed 4 days 10/7/2009 10/7/2009
Project Stewardship
Project Planning Initiated 7 days 9/29/2009 10/8/2009

Develop Communications / Change Management Strategy 20 days 10/5/2009 10/30/2009
Develop Change Management Strategy 20 days 10/5/2009 12/31/2009
Develop Risk Mgt Plan 20 days 10/5/2009 11/31/2009
Develop Performance Measures 20 days 10/5/2009 11/31/2009
Establish Project Milestone Deliverables Schedule 4 days 10/5/2009 10/31/2009
Develop Responsibility Assignment Matrix 5 days 10/5/2009 11/31/2009
Assign Team Resources 4 days 10/5/2009 10/8/2009
Baseline Project 4 days 10/5/2009 12/31/2009
Collect Firm-wide IC of Governance Models 4 days 10/5/2009 10/8/2009
Discuss Scope / Outlines of Task Deliverables 7 days 9/29/2009 11/10/2009
Develop Future State Vision and Capabilities Needed 4 days 10/5/2009 7/31/2010
Confer with Stakeholders 7 days 9/29/2009 7/31/2010
Draft Project Kick-off Slides 4 days 10/5/2009 10/8/2009
Hold Project Kick-Off Meeting 1 day 10/7/2009 10/7/2009
Update Schedule & WBS 1 day 10/8/2009 11/31/2009
Collect Agency Policy and Directive Documents 5 days 10/7/2009 12/31/2009
Project Planning Completed 7 days 9/29/2009 10/8/2009
Task 1 – Assessment of Wildfire Data Needs 17 days 10/8/2009 10/30/2009
Assessment of Wildfire Data Needs Initiated 1 day 10/8/2009 10/8/2009
Discuss with COTR specific areas to address 1 day 10/9/2009 11/30/2009

Cross-check with core NWCG team input 5 days 10/12/2009 11/30/2009
Confirm key documents such as the QFR and others 5 days 10/8/2009 10/15/2009
Identify and Categorize Stakeholders 5 days 10/8/2009 10/15/2009
Assess list for proposed additions/changes 1 day 10/16/2009 10/16/2009
Create questionnaire to address the use of geospatial technology including
2 days 10/9/2009 11/30/2009
Capability Development
software, data management and controls, and business rule topics

Circulate questionnaire to stakeholders 5 days 10/12/2009 11/30/2009
Collect and analyze feedback 2 days 10/19/2009 12/31/2009
Discuss format of Task 1 deliverable 3 days 10/7/2009 10/9/2009
Identify information requirements specific to wildland fire business areas within the
5 days 10/19/2009 10/23/2009
management, suppression, and planning domains
Identify and analyze the existing structures and processes within the NWCG
5 days 10/19/2009 10/23/2009
member agencies relating to the creation, management and use of geospatial data
Document core geospatial needs and policies of the existing fire program business
5 days 10/19/2009 10/23/2009
areas within the NWCG member agencies
Attend ProSci Change Management Class with Client 3 days 10/20/2009 10/22/2009
Conduct BAH Review Process 2 days 10/26/2009 10/27/2009
Client Review/Approve Task 1 Findings Report 1 day 10/28/2009 10/28/2009
Deliver Task 1 Findings Report 1 day 10/30/2009 12/31/2009
Assessment of Wildfire Data Needs Completed 17 days 10/8/2009 12/31/2009

Task 2- Stakeholder Analysis 36 days 10/8/2009 11/30/2009
Stakeholder Analysis Initiated 1 day 10/8/2009 11/31/2009
Analyze the situation: Identify and Categorize Stakeholders 5 days 10/8/2009 11/31/2009
Identify method to gather stakeholder Information 5 days 10/8/2009 10/15/2009
Schedule Interviews in Boise and Travel to SLC and MT during the first three weeks
10 days 10/8/2009 10/21/2009
of November
Review Interview Questions with NWCG Core Team 1 day 10/12/2009 10/16/2009
Ownership Buildling
Conduct Interviews 15 days 11/2/2009 12/31/2009

Discuss format of Task 2 deliverable 1 day 11/1/2009 1/2/2010
Analyze and Report Stakeholder Information: Baseline the dimensions of change
7 days 1/23/2010 1/27/2010
for the geospatial community current missions, visions, goals, roles and
Evaluate data creation, management strategies, and business rules relation to
wildland fire management among its people, process, technology/infrastructure, 7 days 1/23/2010 1/27/2010
and governance
Build ownership of strategic alignment elements and provide hypothesis of effective 15 days 1/2/2010 1/30/2010
roles and responsibilities
Client Review/Approve Task 2 Findings Report 1 day 1/23/2010 1/31/2010

Stakeholder Analysis Completed 36 days 10/8/2009 1/31/2010
Task 3- Analyze Agency Policy and Directives 58 days 10/8/2009 12/31/2009
Analyze Agency Policy and Directives Initated 58 days 10/8/2009 12/31/2009
Establish team e-Share site, log in and passwords 5 days 9/29/2009 10/5/2010
Gather and Analyze Agency Policy and Directive Documents on team e-Share site 42 days 10/8/2009 2/18/2010
(i.e. 2009 implementation guidance for Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy)
Create reference library on iShare Site 40 days 10/6/2009 2/18/2010
Discuss format of Task 3 deliverable 1 day 2/1/2010 2/1/2010
Review and Analyze Policies and directives relevant to the geospatial activities
Capability Development
required for wildland fire management to determine relevant impact on stakeholder 14 days 2/1/2010 2/18/2010
requirements
Identify gap analysis between current and proposed business processes 14 days 2/1/2010 2/18/2010
Build on stakeholder analysis to develop the strategic geospatial data framework 37 days 2/1/2010 2/18/2010
for the NWCG
Specifically consult QFR because it is a document that provides federal policy

42 days 1/8/2010 1/18/2010
leadership and the agency senior executives with the driving forces for change,
suggested mission strategies, and workforce and operational capability analyses
Report comparisons and contrasts among the agency documents against the
requirements of wildland fire management within the NWCG community to provide 14 days 2/1/2010 2/18/2010
a gap analysis
Client Review/Approve Task 3 Findings Report 1 days 2/28/2010 2/28/2010
Analyze Agency Policy and Directives Completed 58 days 2/28/2010 2/28/2010
Task 4 – Develop Strategic Framework / Governance Model 67 days 10/8/2009 3/31/2010
NWCG Geospatial Strategic Framework / Governance Model Initiated 1 day 10/8/2009 10/8/2009
Identify Preliminary Mission and Vision for NWCG Geospatial Community 1 day 10/8/2009 10/8/2009
Identify Preliminary Ownership of Geospatial Program and map to framework

36 days 10/8/2009 1/30/2010
Ownership Building / Capability Development
(establish roles and responsibilities)
Prep for Faciliated Session - Mission and Vision (1) 10 days 1/1/2010 2/14/2010
Conduct Facilitated Session for Mission and Vision (1) 1 day 2/15/2010 2/15/2010
Prep for Faciliated Session - Goals and Objectives (2) 16 days 1/1/2009 2/22/2010
Conduct Faciliated Session for Goals and Objectives (2) 1 day 1/22/2009 1/22/2010
Confirm Ownership of Geospatial Program and map to framework (establish roles
11 days 2/15/2009 2/22/2010
and responsibilities)
Develop Implementation Plan 162 days 10/8/2009 2/28/2010
Communication Planning 162 days 10/8/2009 2/28/2010
Change Management Planning 162 days 10/8/2009 2/28/2010
Draft Governance Model Deliverable 30 days 2/1/2009 3/15/2010
Conduct BAH Review Process of Governance Model Deliverable 5 days 3/15/2009 3/19/2010
Client Review/Approve Task 4 Findings Report 5 days 3/22/2009 3/26/2010
Deliver Task 4 NWCG Geospatial Governance Model 1 day 8/31/2009 8/31/2010
Present Project Findings 1 day 9/1/2009 9/1/2010
NWCG Geospatial Strategic Framework / Governance Model Completed 1 year 9/31/2009 9/31/2010
NIFC Geospatial Governance Model Project Management Completed 1 year 9/31/2009 9/31/2010
NIFC Geospatial Governance Model - A Transformation Completed 1 year 9/31/2009 9/31/2010
126
Appendix G: Summary of Authorities

Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-16, Revised August 19, 2002
This revised Circular provides for improvements in coordination and use of spatial data. Spatial
data refers to information about places or geography, and has traditionally been shown on maps.
This Circular describes the effective and economical use and management of spatial data assets in
the digital environment for the benefit of the government and the nation. The Circular affirms and
describes the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) as the technology, policies, standards,
human resources, and related activities necessary to acquire, process, distribute, use, maintain,
and preserve spatial data. The Circular describes the management and reporting requirements of
Federal agencies in the acquisition, maintenance, distribution, use, and preservation of spatial data
by the Federal Government. The Circular establishes the FGDC as the interagency coordinating
body for NSDI-related activities, chaired by the Secretary of the Interior with the Deputy Director for
Management, Office of Management and Budget (OMB) as Vice-Chair.
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-130, Revised 1996
Circular No. A-130 provides uniform government-wide information resources management policies
as required by the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1980, as amended by the Paperwork Reduction Act
of 1995, 44 U.S.C. Chapter 35. This Transmittal Memorandum contains updated guidance on the
"Security of Federal Automated Information Systems," The Paperwork Reduction Act establishes a
broad mandate for agencies to perform their information resources management activities in an
efficient, effective, and economical manner. To assist agencies in an integrated approach to
information resources management, the Act requires that the Director of OMB develop and
implement uniform and consistent information resources management policies; oversee the
development and promote the use of information management principles, standards, and
guidelines; evaluate agency information resources management practices in order to determine
their adequacy and efficiency; and determine compliance of such practices with the policies,
principles, standards, and guidelines promulgated by the Director.
DOI Secretarial Order No. 3277

This order implements enhanced geospatial governance to manage the Department’s geospatial
decisions, and it clarifies the roles and responsibilities of the Department’s bureaus and offices.
Federal Geographic Data Committee, March 1996, FGDC Standards Reference Model
This document describes a reference model for Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC)
Standards. It is intended to provide guidance and direction to FGDC Standards developers and
users. This document was developed by the FGDC Standards Working Group (SWG). The FGDC
Steering Committee sets high-level strategic direction for the FGDC as a whole. The Executive
Committee of officials from agencies with a major geospatial component in their mission and a
subset of the Steering Committee, provide additional guidance to the Steering Committee. The
Coordination Group advises on the day-today business of the FGDC. The Committee structure is
composed of agency-led Subcommittees and Working Groups. The Subcommittees are organized
by data themes, e.g. ―Cadastral.‖ Working Groups play a crosscutting role, dealing with issues that
span many subcommittees, e.g. ―Standards.‖ The FGDC committees and working groups provide
the basic structure for institutions and individuals to interact regarding all aspects of NSDI
implementation. Collectively they establish and implement strategic guidance and specific actions
that support improved collection, sharing, dissemination and use of geospatial data, contributing to
127
the development of the NSDI. The National Geospatial Advisory Committee (NGAC) is a Federal
Advisory Committee sponsored by the Department of the Interior. The NGAC, which reports to the
FGDC Chair, provides advice and recommendations on the management of Federal geospatial
programs and provides a forum to convey views representative of non-federal stakeholders in the
geospatial community. The NGAC includes representatives from all levels of government,
academia, and the private sector.
Federal Geographic Data Center (FGDC) Goals for Fiscal Year 2010
Articulates the 2010 goals of the FGCD.
NSDI Framework, August 2004

The National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) is a means to assemble geographic data
nationwide to serve a variety of users. The framework is one of the key building blocks and forms
the data backbone of the NSDI. The framework concept was developed by representatives of
county, regional, State, Federal, and other organizations under the auspices of the Federal
Geographic Data Committee (FGDC). Framework has three parts: data, procedures and
technology for building and using the data and institutional relationships and business practices
that supports the environment. Geospatial data themes providing the core, most commonly used
set of base data are known as framework data. They are geodetic control, orthoimagery, elevation
and bathymetry, transportation, hydrography, cadastral, and governmental units. The framework is
designed to facilitate production and use of geographic data, to reduce operating costs, and to
improve service and decision making.
NSDI Future Directions Report, June 15, 2004, Revised June 30, 2004
The purpose of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) Future Directions Initiative was to
craft a national geospatial strategy and implementation plan to further the development of the
NSDI. Drawing on the collective insights and contributions of the geospatial community at-large,
three overarching action areas emerged that provide the context for the goals and objectives
enumerated in this document.
Federal Geographic Data Committee, April 1997, A Strategy for the NSDI
This document updates the 1994 Strategic Plan for the NSDI. The vision remains the same. Rather
than listing specific tasks for different organizations, the new strategy has become the focus of a
process through which broad community consensus was achieved on desirable goals and
objectives. These goals and objectives will serve as a structure under which many organizations
can work together. Each community will craft its own tactical plan to advance the goals and
objectives. The strategy was reviewed by a number of organizations, culminating in an open
meeting in Chicago in November, 1996.
The executive order stressed partnerships. No one organization can build the NSDI. The NSDI can
only become a reality through cooperation among state, local, and tribal governments, the private
sector, the academic community, and the federal government. Each of these communities of
interest has different and sometimes conflicting ways of defining problems, of looking at geographic
solutions, of collecting data, and of representing data. Common solutions are not easy to achieve,
and agreement on a strategy will not succeed unless the different voices used for talking about
geography find their way into that strategy.
128
NSDI Future Directions Initiative, Towards a National Geospatial Strategy and

Implementation Plan, June 2004
The purpose of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) Future Directions
Initiative was to craft a national geospatial strategy and implementation plan to further the
development of the NSDI. Drawing on the collective insights and contributions of the geospatial
community at-large. The National Geospatial Strategy lays out a context for action and guides the
development of partnerships, core datasets, and a common direction to address the needs of the
geospatial community. It is based on communication, cooperation, and partnerships and is
designed to be a catalyst for coordination with the power to transform attitudes, policies and
services. It reflects a comprehensive and integrated approach to provide access to critical
geospatial data and products. The strategy recognizes the need of the geospatial community to
communicate the value of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure (NSDI) beyond the current user
and supplier communities.
The intent of the National Geospatial Strategy is to move this community forward by pursuing a
shared vision supported by common goals and objectives. It is the product of more than twelve
months of consultation across the geospatial community. It promotes efforts to change the way we
currently conduct business and will have a significant impact on our business practices. It is
ambitious because the geospatial community believes we cannot delay the work and investments
needed to establish the spatial data infrastructure for this country.
Congressional Research Service Report for Congress ―Geospatial Information and Geographic
Information Systems (GIS): Current Issues and Future Challenges, June 8, 2009‖
The federal government and policy makers increasingly use geospatial information and tools like
GIS for producing floodplain maps, conducting the Census, mapping foreclosures, and responding
to natural hazards such as wildfires and hurricanes. For policy makers, this type of analysis can
greatly assist in clarifying complex problems that may involve local, state, and federal government,
and affect businesses, residential areas, and federal installations.
Congress has recognized the challenge of coordinating and sharing geospatial data from the local,
county, and state level to the national level, and vice versa. The cost of geospatial information to
the federal government has also been an ongoing concern. As much as 80% to 90% of
government information has a geospatial component, according to different sources. The federal
government’s role has changed from being a primary provider of authoritative geospatial
information to coordinating and managing geospatial data and facilitating partnerships.
Challenges to coordinating how geospatial data are acquired and used—collecting duplicative data
sets, for example—at the local, state, and federal levels, in collaboration with the private sector, are
not yet resolved.
The federal government has recognized the need to organize and coordinate the collection and
management of geospatial data since at least 1990, when the Office of Management and Budget
(OMB) revised Circular A-16 to establish the Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and to
promote the coordinated use, sharing, and dissemination of geospatial data nationwide. OMB
Circular A-16 also called for development of a national digital spatial information resource to enable
the sharing and transfer of spatial data between users and producers, linked by criteria and
standards. Executive Order 12906, issued in 1994, strengthened and enhanced Circular A-16, and
129
specified that FGDC shall coordinate development of the National Spatial Data Infrastructure
(NSDI).
Department of the Interior Enterprise Architecture (IEA) Conceptual Architecture, Version

1.0, May 2005
Federal Agencies are continually being asked by citizens, industry, and other government agencies
to improve their performance and efficiency. Identifying performance gaps and related solutions
involves an integrated mix of management disciplines, including strategic planning, enterprise
architecture, capital planning, project management, security, and human capital management.
Achieving the integration of these disciplines is vital to the effective governance of scarce
resources, so that higher levels of mission performance can be achieved.
The Interior’s Enterprise Architecture (IEA) provides a framework for developing strategies that
integrate investment management processes, consolidated technologies, and advocate common
processes and data standardization across all the Bureaus. The Interior Conceptual Architecture
(ICA), a component of the IEA, provides a consolidated enterprise list of guiding principles to help
make investment decisions and guide information technology (IT) toward the envisioned future.
These Principles are in turn derived from the Interior Common Requirements Vision (CRV) which is
a framework linking technical architecture requirement to business information requirements,
business strategy, and environmental trends. Aligning the CRV with the ICA facilitates line-of-sight
visibility between business strategy and ICA Principles.
U.S. Department of the Interior Enterprise Architecture Geospatial Modernization Blueprint

Recommendations and Architectures, December 2007
The purpose of this Geospatial Modernization Blueprint is to define how geospatial data and
technology will be used to enhance the business activities of DOI and its bureaus and to achieve
their mission and goals. A key unifying principle that will enable the DOI to balance its stewardship
skills and responsibilities with the forces of larger human and natural influences is geospatially
based information. Today, the DOI budget data suggest that more than $270 million is being spent
annually on geospatial data, labor, services, and technologies.
To gain a better understanding of geospatial costs and value, and to discover opportunities to
improve its usefulness, DOI initiated this Blueprint study of its geospatial business and technical
environments during the fall of 2005. The objective of the Blueprint study is to answer some basic
questions: Are there better, more efficient ways to use geospatial capabilities in the Department?
Are there opportunities for gaining increased benefit from current investments and expenditures?
A key finding of this Blueprint is that across DOI, geospatial business stakeholders are consistently
confronted by a common set of issues and needs related to geospatial technology and data that, if
resolved, would benefit their overall work performance.
Geospatial Line of Business

The Geospatial Line of Business (LoB) is a Presidential e-government initiative sponsored by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB) to promote effective geospatial investments and better
performance across the Federal government for technology and information. The Geospatial LoB
focuses on improving the effectiveness of government through the widespread use of geospatial
130
information, which aims to improve the quality and timeliness of agency decision-making across a
wide variety of programmatic contexts.
The Geospatial LoB aims to further refine the opportunities for optimizing and consolidating
Federal geospatial-related investments to reduce the cost of government and, at the same time,
improve services to citizens. Cross-agency coordination of geospatial activities can identify,
consolidate, and reduce or eliminate redundant geospatial investments. Developing the Geospatial
Line of Business (LOB) will result in a more coordinated approach to producing, maintaining, and
using geospatial data, and will ensure sustainable participation from Federal partners to establish a
collaborative model for geospatial-related activities and investments.
Geospatial Line of Business Common Solutions and Target Architecture, August 2006,
Redacted March 2007
The Geospatial LoB has set forth ambitious and transformational goals to better serve the Nation’s
interests. Building on the policy foundation of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
Circular A-162 (―Coordination of Geographic Information and Related Spatial Data Activities‖) and
the President’s Management Agenda, the Geospatial LoB will establish a new and more citizen-
centric collaborative model for geospatial-related activities and investments. This will create a
framework for sustainable participation from non-Federal partners, and create a more coordinated
and leveraged approach to producing, maintaining, and using geospatial data and services. Future
cost savings and greater satisfaction of customer and business needs will be realized by
optimizing, and where appropriate, consolidating geospatial assets and activities through enhanced
performance accountability and compliance mechanisms and coordinated budget planning and
cost avoidance strategies. Provisioning the Nation with easy to use geospatial capabilities will
promote cheaper, smarter and more efficient government business, services and information.
Geospatial Line of Business Strategic Plan, February 2008

The purpose of this Strategic Plan is to present key goals and deliverables for the Geospatial LoB.
This document rests on foundation documents that include a Common Solution and Target
Architecture document, a Performance Management Plan, and an OMB Exhibit 300. Through the
development of these documents, the partner agencies have developed consensus on the goals
and objectives described in this plan.
United States Department of the Interior Data Quality Management Guide, August 2008
This Data Quality Management Guide provides a description of the processes needed to guide the
efforts of DOI’s organizations for continuous data quality improvement in the acquisition, creation,
maintenance, storage, and application of data. This Guide provides general technical guidance for
all data communities at DOI (e.g., geospatial, law enforcement, finance, recreation, and facility
management).
DOI Enterprise Geographic Information Management, Team Charter, 2006 Draft

The Enterprise Geographic Information Management (EGIM) initiative of the Department of the
Interior (DOI) is a framework for the standardization and coordination of GIS activity across the
Department’s Bureaus. The purpose of the EGIM Team is to provide strategic leadership for that
Enterprise GIS effort within DOI. A Departmental team of bureau representatives and area experts
will meet to collaboratively determine need for standardization, implementation of GIS, direction on
131
policy, programs, initiatives, funding priorities, organizational needs, as well as coordinating GIS
activities among bureau, program and DOI areas. EGIM is a joint effort with all the bureaus.
DOI Enterprise Transition Plan, Draft June 2009

This document describes the high-level plan for achieving the target enterprise architecture DOI
has defined through its completed segment architectures. Although there is a strong link between
DOI’s modernization blueprints and its investment business cases, successful implementation of
the Enterprise Transition Plan is dependent on appropriate funding of modernization activities. It is
also important to note that the DOI segment architectures that are completed or under
development do not only equate to system retirements. The segment architectures created at DOI
are focused on increasing performance and satisfying mission needs, in addition to solution
optimization.
USDI Geospatial Services Model, Serving the Geographic Business Needs of the U.S.
Department of the Interior, July 2007
The purpose of this document is to define how geospatial data and technology will be used to
enhance the business activities of DOI to achieve its mission and goals. Geospatial data and
technology are strategic, national assets involving major investments. While geospatial capabilities
have been implemented across all DOI bureaus, these capabilities have not been documented and
implemented in systematic ways, leading to impediments to potential interoperability and lost
potential for cost savings.
DOI’s geospatial investments are not currently managed as a cohesive set of assets and services.
Historically, the costs of DOI’s Geospatial services and products have been hidden from true
understanding at the enterprise level, with a few exceptions. Costs and efficiency improvements or
benefits to the business have not been quantitatively established. Geospatial information is
produced and maintained by many different bureaus and program areas resulting in a confusing
collection of data and services that are difficult for business areas to utilize. The Geospatial
Services Model effort describes a recommended path to a target future state and milestones for
measuring performance.
National Wildfire Coordination Group (NWCG) and Agency Citations:
Department of the Interior Enterprise Architecture (IEA) Wildland Fire Management

Modernization Blueprint, Version 1.1, April 2005
The Wildland Fire Management Line of Business (LOB) Modernization Blueprint identifies a series
of existing architectural issues and opportunities for business improvement by evaluating strategic
objectives, business functionality, technology, data, and systems that are used within the current
business operational architecture. The Modernization Blueprint is a proactive, business driven
assessment that allows the Department of the Interior (DOI) to ensure compliance with business
drivers.
Review and Update of the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy, January 2001
The Interagency Federal Wildland Fire Policy Review Working Group (Working Group), at the
direction of the Secretaries of the Interior and Agriculture, reviewed the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire
Management Policy & Program Review (1995 Report) and its implementation. The Working Group
132
found that the policy is generally sound and continues to provide a solid foundation for wildland fire
management activities and for natural resources management activities of the federal government.
In this Review and Update of the 1995 Federal Wildland Fire Management Policy (Review and
Update), the Working Group recommends selected changes and additions to the 1995 Federal
Wildland Fire Management Policy (1995 Federal Fire Policy) to clarify purpose and intent and to
address issues not fully covered in 1995. The Working Group further found that implementation of
the 1995 Federal Fire Policy remains incomplete in many areas, especially those that involve
collaboration, coordination, and integration across agency jurisdictions and across different
disciplines. The Working Group recommends a number of strategic implementation actions to
ensure that federal wildland fire management policy is successfully implemented in all applicable
federal agencies on a collaborative, coordinated, and integrated fashion as quickly as possible.
Investigation of Geospatial Support of Incident Management Final Report, November 2002

This report documents research initiated by the Geospatial Task Group (GTG) to gather and
analyze field-based information on the effectiveness of geospatial technology in support of wildfire
management.
The study was conducted during the summer of 2002 and represents collaboration between The
National Center for Landscape Fire Analysis, The Bolle Center for People and Forests (both at The
University of Montana), and staff from the GTG. Participant observation techniques were used
during visits to the following fires: the Rodeo-Chediski Fire in Arizona, the Cathedral Fire in
Montana and Idaho, and the Monument, Easy Creek, and Biscuit Fires in Oregon. In all, the
investigation team visited seven Type I Teams, two Type II Teams, and three Area Commands.
During site visits interviews were conducted with appropriate fire management personnel and
geospatial technicians.
National Wildland Fire Enterprise Architecture (NWFEA) Blueprint Part I: Goals and
Recommendations, Version 2.9, July 2008
The purpose of the National Wildland Fire Enterprise Architecture (NWFEA) Blueprint is to support
the wildland fire community’s need to function as a Virtual Single Agency (VSA). The wildland fire
community is striving to expand its use of an interagency management structure that allows the
disparate members of the wildland fire community both to maintain their independent strong ties to
their governing agencies and at the same time take advantage of both the organizational and
economic efficiencies of a single agency. The goal of the NWFEA Blueprint is to recommend
changes to the wildland fire community that will result in continually improving interagency
cooperation, management efficiencies, and support to field operations. The Blueprint enables these
improvements by providing focused attention to the four main enterprise architecture components:
business, data, applications, and technology.
GAO Geospatial Information, Technologies Hold Promise for Wildland Fire Management, but
Challenges Remain
The report found that geospatial information technologies—sensors, systems, and software that
collect, manage, manipulate, analyze, model, and display information about locations on the
earth’s surface—can aid in managing wildland fires by providing accurate, detailed, and timely
information to federal, state, and local decision makers; fire-fighting personnel; and the public. This
information can be used to help reduce the risk that a fire will become uncontrollable, to respond to
133
critical events while a fire is burning, and to aid in recovering from fire disasters. However, there
are multiple challenges to effectively using these technologies to manage wildland fires, including
challenges with data, systems, infrastructure, staffing, and the effective use of new products. The
National Wildfire Coordinating Group—composed of representatives from the five land
management agencies and from other federal, state, and tribal organizations—has several
initiatives under way to address specific challenges, but progress on these initiatives has been
slow, and not all of the challenges are being addressed. A root cause of many of these challenges
is the lack of an overall strategy guiding interagency management of information resources and
technology. To improve interagency management of information resources and technology,
different teams within the Coordinating Group plan to establish an interagency geospatial strategic
plan, a strategy for information resources management, and an interagency enterprise
architecture—a blueprint for operational and technical change in support of wildland fire
management. However, these efforts lack the senior level endorsement and detailed plans and
milestones necessary for success. Until effective interagency management of information
resources and technology is a priority, the wildland fire community will likely continue to face
challenges in effectively using geospatial information technologies.
USDA Forest Service Geospatial Strategy for Fiscal Years 2005–2009

This Geospatial Strategy is a result of a decision by the Geospatial Executive Board (GEB) to
clearly articulate a vision and strategy for U.S. Forest Service geospatial activities. The goals and
objectives in this strategy are designed to be implemented over the next five years. Progress
toward achieving these goals will be assessed through a number of performance measures
associated with each objective.
Geospatial Data Management Guide, Managing the U.S. Forest Service Geographic
Information System, February 2010
The Geospatial Executive Board (GEB) sponsored Enterprise Geographic Information Systems
(EGIS) Phase II Team is charged with providing guidance for the implementation of EGIS. As part
of that implementation, an EGIS Geospatial Data Management Guide was identified as being an
important deliverable. The Geospatial Data Management Guide introduces GIS users and data
managers to the hardware and software architecture in the U.S. Forest Service Data Center. It
makes recommendations and provides guidance on how to manage and use Geospatial data most
efficiently in that environment.
FSH 6609.15, Standards for Data and Data Structures Handbook, Chapter 40, Geospatial
Metadata Standards, September 2004
The objectives of Standards for Data and Data Structures Handbook is to create, maintain, and
publish Federal Geographic Data Committee compliant metadata for geospatial data collected,
generated, or disseminated by the U.S. Forest Service and provide standards to measure
geospatial metadata policy compliance.
Geospatial Segment Conceptual Target Architecture

The geospatial segment architecture ensures alignment of mission and technology in critical areas
such as improving housing, utilities and infrastructure in rural America, reducing the prevalence of
food borne hazards, and managing and protecting America’s public and private lands. The key to
improved geospatial performance and accountability is to manage the specific operational and
developmental requirements of USDA’s diverse agencies within a USDA-wide baseline of
134
technology, services, and data assets. Coordination of the business and technical geospatial
resources at the enterprise level would provide the oversight necessary to guide the evolution of
geospatial data and services from the current baseline to the target state.
USDA Forest Service Information Resources Strategic Framework, Draft October 2009
This framework articulates a long-term information resources vision for the U.S. Forest Service that
supports the agency mission, while taking into account current and future trends that will have an
impact on that mission. It is designed to serve as a critical tool to help agency leadership make
informed decisions regarding information resources investments, direction, and governance.
Bureau of Land Management Geospatial Services Strategic (GSSP) Plan FY2008

The GSSP was conceived and developed based on input and insights from personnel across the
Bureau and supports a geospatial services initiative that will increase the value of geospatial
investments for the BLM. Six major goals are outlined in the GSSP that support other key Bureau-
wide (and government wide) information management strategic planning efforts, including the
Federal Geospatial Line of Business; DOI Geospatial Modernization Blueprint; BLM Assessment,
Inventory, and Monitoring (AIM) Initiative; BLM Strategic Plan; and Enterprise Architecture efforts
at the Federal, DOI, and Bureau levels. Implementing the strategic goals and actions of this
strategy will result in geospatial services that provide coordinated discovery, acquisition,
management, and deliver geospatial services that are faster, easier, and less costly for the
Bureau’s lines of business to access and utilize these services.
As a framework for geospatial services in the Bureau, the GSSP identifies roles and
responsibilities, establishes priorities, and provides a governance structure for securing approvals
from management that will lead to the Bureau’s commitment of resources to enable implementation
of this plan. The GSSP identifies future, tiered-down action plans that will require further analysis
and work in order to identify the activities and timetables required to reach the stated goals. The
GSSP contains the ―What‖; the action plans identify the operational and tactical ―hows‖ and
―whens.‖
Bureau of Land Management Revised Manual 1283, Data Administration and Management,
November 2002
This Manual Section provides policies and guidelines to direct Bureau of Land Management (BLM)
efforts in the effective management of data collected and used to support the BLM mission. The
BLM, as an information resource, needs to ensure that the data it collects, uses, and disseminates
relates to its mission requirements, is applied and used objectively, and has appropriate controls to
protect privacy, proprietary, and confidential information. This policy requires a system of controls
in place to establish standards, quality control, and assurance for data oversight and monitoring of
BLM’s data resources. The goal is to ensure that the BLM’s information system produces quality
information that meets legal compliance requirements to support BLM program decisions, assure
resource program integrity, and provide service to BLM employees and the public.
Bureau of Land Management Handbook 1283-1, Data Administration and Management,

December 2006
This Handbook will concentrate on the planning aspects and quality assurance of data. Quality
levels are established to guide the collection, correction, and quality control of data supporting the
BLM program activities. The results of data analyses will help the Bureau determine the minimum
135
data integrity and quality levels it will accept for each corporate database. Meeting or exceeding
these data quality levels will improve decision-making; provide supporting evidence in judicial
proceedings; and enhance data currency and maintenance over time.
Bureau of Land Management Manual 1278, External Access to BLM Information, November
1993
This manual section describes the policies and authorities for managing access to the BLM
information recorded on all media. It also provides guidance for making determinations concerning
the confidentiality of BLM information. This manual describes the procedures for processing all
types of requests for access to BLM information under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and
the privacy act. It also provides procedures for the sharing and exchange of information with
outside entities.
Director’s Order Number 11A, Information Technology Management, Draft 2004

Director's Order (DO) 11A identifies and documents the NPS's commitment to accomplish the
information management tasks that are required by Federal law and by Department of the Interior
policies. NPS will adopt this policy to manage its information as a national resource. This DO
establishes and defines the practices, standards and procedures for the NPS's Information
Management and Technology governance structure. DO 11A also outlines the authority, roles and
responsibilities of the NPS Chief Information Officer (CIO).
NPS Enterprise GIS Program Plan, Draft August 2009

The NPS Enterprise GIS (EGIS) Program is sponsored by the OCIO/NISC Resource Information
Services Division (RISD), the NPS GIS Council (GISC), and regions, programs, and parks as a
collaborative effort to evolve the utilization of GIS from predominantly localized use on desktop
computers into the realm of NPS-wide practices and services that benefit NPS staff, affiliates,
visitors, and the public. EGIS represents many complex information technologies (IT) for deploying
enterprise geospatial services with numerous possible approaches so is difficult to capture as a
single mission with succinct supporting vision statements. This document includes the initial ideas
and requirements for the NPS EGIS Program (EGISP) but will necessarily need subsequent
iterative elaboration as the Program matures.
NPS GIS Strategic Plan for FY 2002–2005

This document describes the mission goals for NPS Geospatial Information Systems.
NPS Automated Data Processing Program Standards Manual, December 1998

The National Park Service Information and Telecommunications Division last published Information
Resources Management (IRM) standards in 1990, and they have become outdated. The NPS IRM
Standards Committee met in April 1996 to discuss updates to the standards. In recognition of the
rapid rate at which computer systems become outdated, they agreed that the new IRM standards
would set goals for automation modernization rather than documenting the current state of
computer hardware and software in use throughout the Service. This 1996 update to the NPS IRM
Standards Manual is designed to guide decisions on procurement throughout the Service. It should
support the procurement offices in their purchasing and give guidance to the information systems
staff in planning system upgrades and modernization. The standards are effective immediately, but
are only relevant when new procurements are being considered. That is, the standards do not
mandate the procurement of new systems, but are to be used to guide new purchase decisions
136
when a park or office needs to upgrade and has the funds to do so. The principle changes
recommended by this document are the procurement of the Microsoft Office suite (WORD,
EXCELL, ACCESS, and POWERPOINT). The 1996 standards updates describe a target
architecture envisioned by the Standards Committee.
National Park Service Data and Systems Stewardship Policy Draft

The National Park Service (NPS) will use current data, metadata, and software standards, life cycle
management, as mandated by federal, DOI, and NPS directives for information and system
development and management. Because 80 - 90% of NPS data is spatial or can be related to a
geographic location, Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) data and content standards for
metadata and NPS geographic information systems (GIS) guidelines should be implemented
consistently to promote enterprise data access and use. Spatial information and systems enhance
eGov initiatives, make NPS information and services more useful to citizens, NPS operations,
support decision making, and enhance reporting to Congress.
National Park Service GIS (Geographic Information System) Data Specifications for
Resource Mapping, Inventories, and Studies, June 2002
Resource Management (RM) and Inventory and Monitoring (I&M) projects and activities generate
both spatial and tabular data sets. These data sets will be incorporated into park, regional, and
national databases and made available to a wide range of users. In order for this to occur
effectively, certain standards and product specifications must be followed. This document provides
general standards for spatial data collection and submission Park-, network-, region-, and program-
level project managers may require further specifications and must approve any deviation from
these standards.
Fish and Wildlife Service Information Resources Management Manual Part 270, Chapter 1,
Service Enterprise Architecture, May 2009
This chapter describes the Departmental policies that FWS must follow for FWS Service Enterprise
Architecture (SEA), and identifies the Service officials responsible for ensuring our compliance.
Information Technology Governance, July 2003
This chapter establishes a Chief Technology Officer (CTO) Council to help ensure a uniform,
Service-wide approach to information technology (IT) that aligns with Departmental and Federal
mandates, minimizes duplication of effort, ensures compatibility, shares expertise, and fosters
collaboration.
Automated Information System Security, September 2002
This chapter identifies the policies, procedures, and responsibilities that form the basis of the
Service’s automated information technology (IT) security program, which is designed to ensure an
appropriate level of security for Service automated information systems and associated data and
resources. The goal is to protect the Service’s investment in systems, data and associated
resources from loss, unauthorized disclosure, alteration, or destruction and to inform Service
employees of their responsibilities to safeguard Service data and IT. This chapter does not apply to
the deployment and support of departmentally mandated systems.
137
Geographic Information Systems
This chapter states the objectives of our spatial data management program and how we implement
Geographic Information System (GIS) technology, describes the roles and responsibilities of
Service employees managing and implementing GIS, and describes the general authorities under
which our GIS program operates.
Geographic Information Systems Strategic Plan U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Department
of the Interior FY 2006–2009
The strategic plan is intended to ensure that the Service is highly efficient and effective in
managing geospatial data resources and technology to successfully deliver on this potential in
support of the Service’s mission.
This plan is tiered to the Service Information Resources and Technology Management (IRTM)
Strategic Plan and, indirectly, to the Service and Department of the Interior overall mission
strategic plans. It also encompasses the geospatial goals and objectives laid out in the IRTM
Strategic Plan and replace the existing Service GIS Strategic Plan that covered the time period
from 2001 to 2004. Since then, new customer demands, laws, technologies, and challenges have
emerged that drive the need to update the plan. This Service GIS Strategic Plan is designed to
cover all geospatial data resource and technology management activities at a high level in the
Service. More detailed plans may be needed for specific programs, offices, or projects.
Bureau of Indian Affairs Office of the Geographic Information Officer, Geospatial

Technology Strategic Plan 2003–2006
This strategic plan proposes immediate and near term elements necessary to insure that BIA
business evolves in harmony not just with the technology of land management, but also with our
partners in the trust relationship. Standard desktop deployment of geospatial data, information and
technology will be the hallmark of a mature BIA IT enterprise that succeeds in meeting these
challenges.
Bureau of Indian Affairs Strategic Implementation Plan for the Geographic Data Service
Center, 1993 Document Summary
This plan proposes a plan of operation for the Geographic Data Service Center (GDSC). The
GDSC serves as the policy and technical arm of the BIA Indian Integrated Resources Information
Program. Its role is to provide Geographic Information Systems, Remote Sensing and Computer
Systems (GIS/RS) services to those managing Tribal and Bureau programs at Tribal, Area, and
Agency offices. The Strategic Plan is a visionary statement, containing general concepts directing
the course of GIS/RS in the Bureau.
Office of the Assistant Secretary-Indian Affairs (OAS-IA), Deputy Assistant Secretary

(DAS)/Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) Office of Information Operations (OIO)
Service Level Agreement (SLA)
This agreement identifies the scope of basic Information Technology (IT) services that will be
provided by the Office of the Chief Information Officer (OCIO) to all BIA organizations, and
associated performance targets. Under this agreement, OCIO is responsible for solving IT
problems, identifying new requirements, guiding technology enhancements and planning for
hardware and software upgrades.
138
Appendix H: Acronyms
A-16 Circular Number A-16
ADS Authoritative Data Source
AutoCAD Software supporting computer-aided design and drafting
BIA Bureau of Indian Affairs (DOI)
BLM Bureau of Land Management (DOI)
BRM Business Reference Model
COD Common Operating Data
CIO Chief Information Officer
CMBT Core Modernization Blueprint Team
Core Team Core Modernization Blueprint Team (CMBT)
COTS Commercial off-the-shelf
CPIC Capital Planning and Investment Control
CTO Chief Technology Officer
DHS Department of Homeland Security
DOD Department of Defense
DOI U.S. Department of the Interior
DRG Digital Raster Graphics
EA Enterprise Architecture
EGIM Enterprise Geospatial Information Management
eGov Electronic Government
ELA Enterprise License Agreement
EOS Earth Observing System
EOSDIS EOS Data and Information System
ERDAS Software package for processing imagery, including satellite, radar, etc.
ESRI Environmental Systems Research Institute (creators of GIS software)
FEA Federal Enterprise Architecture
FGDC Federal Geographic Data Committee
FMS Facility Management Systems
FTP File Transfer Protocol
FWS Fish and Wildlife Service (also referred to as USFWS) (DOI)
FY Fiscal Year (for the Federal Government, October 1–September 30)
GAO Government Accountability Office
GeoLoB Geospatial Line of Business
GeoMAC Geospatial Multiagency Coordination
GIS Geographic Information Systems
GISS GIS Specialist
GITA Geospatial Information & Technology Association
GMBT Geospatial Methodology for Business Transformation
GMO Geospatial Management Office
GOS Geospatial One-Stop (http://gos2.geodata.gov/wps/portal/gos)
GOTS Government-off-the-Shelf
GPS Global Positioning System
GSTOP GIS Standard Operating Procedures
GTG Geospatial Task Group
ICS Incident Command System
IP Internet Protocol
139
IRB Investment Review Board

ISC Information Sharing Council
IT Information Technology
LCM lifecycle management
MODIS Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer
MOU Memorandum of Understanding
MVGO Mission, Vision, Goals, and Objectives
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NIFC National Interagency Fire Center
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
NPS National Park Service (DOI)
NRPC Natural Resource Program Center
NWCG National Wildfire Coordinating Group
NWFEA National Wildland Fire Enterprise Architecture
NWIS National Water Information System
OCIO Office of the CIO
OGC Open GIS Consortium
OMB Office of Management and Budget
OPM Office of Personnel Management
OSM Office of Surface Mining (DOI)
OWFC Office of Wildland Fire Coordination (DOI)
PLSS Public Land Survey System
PMB Policy, Management, and Budget Office (DOI)
PMO Project Management Officer
QFR Quadrennial Fire Report
ROI Return on Investment
RSAC Remote Sensing Application Center
SDSE Spatial Data Sharing Environment
SLA Service Level Agreement
SME Subject Matter Expert
SOA Service Oriented Architecture
SOP Standard Operating Procedure
SWOT Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats
USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
USFS U.S. Forest Service
USGS U.S. Geological Survey (DOI)
VEG Vegetation Mapping Program
140
Appendix I: Glossary
After-Action Reporting: A method of identifying and tracking important problems and best work
practices in an operation or exercise after it has been completed.
Annual Performance Goal: A target level of performance included in the Agency’s Annual
Performance Plan that is expressed as a tangible, measurable objective, against which actual
achievement can be compared.
Annual Performance Plan: An annual plan required by the Government Performance and Results
Act that sets out measurable goals and defines what the Agency will accomplish during a fiscal year.
Appropriate Management Response: The response to a wildland fire is based on an evaluation of
risks to firefighter and public safety, the circumstances under which the fire occurs, including
weather and fuel conditions, natural and cultural resource management objectives, protection
priorities, and values to be protected. The evaluation must also include an analysis of the
context of the specific fire within the overall local, geographic area, or national wildland fire
situation.
Benefits: Fire effects with positive value or that contributes to the attainment of organizational
goals. (Synonym: Resource Benefits, Aka Fire Benefits)
Business Case: Systematic documentation to support the evaluation and justification of program
financial, staffing, and technology resources. The business case also answers the question, "Why
do we need this project/system/initiative?"
Contingency Program: Programs that provide contingency planning and operational capabilities for
key government officials.
Disaster: As used in this plan, this term is broadly defined to include disasters and emergencies
that may be caused by any natural or man-made event.
Disaster or Emergency Declaration: A declaration by the President which authorizes supplemental
Federal assistance under the Stafford Act. The declaration is in response to a Governor’s request
and may cover a range of response, recovery and mitigation assistance for State and local
governments, eligible private-nonprofit organizations, and individuals.
Emergency Management: The process through which the Nation prepares for emergencies and
disasters, mitigates their effects, and responds and recovers from them.
Emergency Management Community: As used in this plan, the emergency management
community includes individuals at all levels of government who are involved in any phase of
emergency management, including planning, operations and support.
External Factors: Those factors that are beyond the Agency’s control and influence whether a
strategic goal can be accomplished.
Escaped Prescribed Fire: Prescribed fire that has exceeded or is expected to exceed
prescription parameters or otherwise meets the criteria for conversion to wildfire. Criteria for
conversion are specified in ―Interagency Prescribed Fire – Planning and Implementation
Procedures Reference Guide‖.
Federal Response Plan (FRP): The plan designed to address the consequences of any disaster or
emergency situation in which there is a need for Federal assistance under the authorities of the
141
Stafford Act. Twenty-seven federal departments and Agencies and the American Red Cross are
signatories to the plan.
Fire Management: All activities related to the management of wildland fires.
Fire Type: The type of fire based on whether the ignition was planned (type: prescribed) or
unplanned (type: wildfire).
Governance: The structure and process used for a program to provide leadership and decision-
making. It is the framework for decision-making, methods of interaction, and related rules that
supports creation of mission objectives and capabilities, enables collaboration, sets expectations
and develops ownership, grants decision rights and responsibilities, and verifies performance for
effective program stewardship.
Incident Objectives: Site specific guidance and direction necessary for the selection of
appropriate strategy(s) and the tactical direction of resources on an incident.
Initial Attack: An aggressive action to put the fire out consistent with firefighter and public safety
and values to be protected.
Interoperability: The ability of systems or communications to work together.
Knowledge Management: As used in this plan, knowledge management refers to NWCG becoming
a center or portal, through which users throughout the nation can access information and expertise on
all aspects of emergency management. This new role builds on NWCG 's coordination and strong
partnerships with others in the emergency management community, and moves the Agency more firmly
into the information age.
Mission: A broad statement of purpose for the Agency.
Mitigation: Taking sustained actions, such as supporting the use of strong building codes and
guiding community disaster resistance, to reduce or eliminate long-term risk to people and property
from hazards and their effects.
Response: Conducting emergency operations to save lives and property, including positioning
emergency equipment and supplies; evacuating potential victims; providing food, water, shelter, and
medical care to those in need; and restoring critical public services.
Strategic Goal: A broad target that defines how the Agency will carry out its mission over a five to
seven year period of time.
Strategic Objective: A specific and measurable element necessary to achieve a strategic goal.
Strategic Plan: A long-range planning document that defines the mission of the Agency and
broadly identifies how it will be accomplished, and that provides the framework for more detailed
annual and operational plans.
Strategy: A description of how a strategic objective will be Achieved
Support: As used in the objectives and strategies outlined in this plan, support may include, but is
not limited to: information, facilitation, coordination, technical assistance, or financial assistance.
Vision: An idealized statement of the best possible future.
142

NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework Final Draft 20101203

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework Final Draft 20101203

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

A NATION PREPARED

NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework 2010

2.1.2. Element C.1.2: Baseline of Current GIS Capabilities .............................................. 32

Figure 21: Notional Return on Investment Curve ............................................................................ 50

Table 29: Element O.3.3 Implementation Activities ........................................................................ 88

This document provides a status of the interagency geospatial stakeholder community, an

1.1. Current Status of the NWCG Geospatial Stakeholder Community

1.1.1. United States Forest Service Geospatial Fire Program

1.1.2. Bureau of Land Management Geospatial Fire Program

1.1.3. National Park Service Geospatial Fire Program

1.1.4. US Fish and Wildlife Geospatial Fire Program

1.1.5. US Bureau of Indian Affairs Geospatial Program

1.1.6. US Department of Interior Office of Wildland Fire Coordination

1.1.7. United States Geological Survey

1.2. Case for Change

Current Issues Results/Challenges

Figure 1: Representative Issues and Challenges

Table 1: Stakeholder-Identified Threats and Weaknesses

Policies and Procedures

Common Operating Data (COD)

Figure 2: Duplicate Program Support of the Wildland Fire Community

Reduction of Duplication and Improved Efficiencies

Data Availability and Management

1.2.4. Physical Infrastructure

Centralized Data Storage and Access

Classified Geospatial Information

Level of US Government Classification

1.3. Challenges to Implementation

1.3.1. NWCG Infrastructure

1.3.2. Workforce Management

1.3.3. Limited Resources

1.3.5. Change Management

1.4. Scope of NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework

1. Assessing wildland fire data needs

1.4.1. Needs Assessment

Wildland Fire Interagency Community

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Figure 4: Stakeholder Participation

Table 2: NWCG Wildland Fire Business Areas

Figure 5: Alignment of Key Stakeholder Job Functions to Wildland Business Areas

Table 3: Recommended Revised Geospatial Fire Business Areas

TESTING Managerial testing to help with prioritization, capability design and

CHANGE MANAGEMENT Identification and development of change management plans and

1.4.2. Stakeholder Analysis

The stakeholder analysis survey included the following key information:

Section 1, Participant Profile: Level, Products, Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs),

1.4.3. Agency Policy and Guidance Analysis

Figure 6: Federal Government Policy and Guidance

1.4.4. Strategic Framework Development

Figure 7: Recommended Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework

1.5. Approach to Development of the NWCG Geospatial Technology

1.5.1. Work Streams

Capability Development – Defines, builds, and deploys future geospatial technology

1.5.2. Phases Aligned with the Life-Cycle Time Periods

Evaluate – Monitors and evaluates implementation activities and interagency geospatial

Figure 8: Implementation Status Icon Key

Figure 9: NWCG Geospatial Technology Strategic Framework

2. Detailed Description of the NWCG Geospatial Technology

In the following sections, we provide phase-by-phase descriptions of the numbered process

2.1. Phase 1: Envision

2.1.1. Element C.1.1: Envision Strategic Context of GIS Program

Capability Development Element C.1.1

Element C.1.1 Best Practice Considerations