CENDI Presentation on What's going on with Government Linked Data
CENDI/NFAIS Quality Workshop: The Importance of Quality and Integrity Kevin Kirby, Enterprise Data...
-
Upload
sarah-waln -
Category
Documents
-
view
213 -
download
0
Transcript of CENDI/NFAIS Quality Workshop: The Importance of Quality and Integrity Kevin Kirby, Enterprise Data...
CENDI/NFAIS Quality Workshop:The Importance of Quality and
Integrity
Kevin Kirby, Enterprise Data ArchitectUS Environmental Protection AgencyOffice of Environmental Information,Quality Staff (202) 566-1656 1For Conference Purposes Only
Prepared Nov 18, 2014
Presentation Roadmap
Quality: A Federal Policy Perspective
The Lifecycles in Data Quality / Data Management
Quality at EPA: An Agency Context
Quality at EPA: Information Quality Guidelines
Implementing Quality at EPA:- Standards, Registries, Controlled Vocabularies
2
Quality: A Federal Perspective
The Data Act, 2014
The Open Data Policy, 2013
The Information Quality Act, 2002
The Enterprise Architecture link
3
Federal Perspectives:The Data Act
The DATA Act: Digital Accountability and Transparency Act, Public Law No. 113-101
- Signed into law May 9, 2014
The DATA Act is the nation's first legislative mandate for data transparency.
- Requires open, standardized data, and to publish that data online.
4
Federal Perspectives:The Open Data Policy
The Open Data Policy: Managing Data as an Information Resource
Pursuant to Executive Order of May 9, 2013;Making Open and Machine Readable the New Default for Government Information
- “…establishes a framework to help institutionalize the principles of effective information management at each stage of the information's life cycle to promote interoperability and openness.”
The Open Data Initiative5
Federal Perspectives:The Information Quality Act
Enacted as Section 515 of the Fiscal Year 2001 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 106-554)
Required OMB to issue guidelines that provide policy and procedural guidance to Federal agencies for ensuring and maximizing the quality, objectivity, utility, and integrity of information disseminated by Federal agencies
• Requires each Federal Agency to issue guidelines; establish administrative processes for correction of information; report annually to OMB
• Issued February 2002 (67FR 8452)
6
Federal EA Framework
7
Mapping EPA Data to the Enterprise Architecture Framework.
Data Lifecycles:The Models
8
Lifecycle Models
9
Data Lifecycle Models
10
Geospatial Data Lifecycle
11
Data Lifecycle Model
12
PLAN
COLLECT
INTEGRATE & TRANSFORM
PUBLISH
DISCOVER &
INFORM
ARCHIVE
OR DISCAR
D
Simplified Data Lifecycle:Cradle to Grave
EPA Data Lifecycle Framework
13
14
Quality at EPA:An Agency Context
EPA Headquarters OfficeHeadquarters
Office of Administration and Resources Management
Office of Air and Radiation
Office of Chemical Safety and Pollution Prevention
Office of the Chief Financial Officer
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Office of Environmental Information
Office of General Counsel
Office of International and Tribal Affairs
Office of Research and Development
Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response
Office of Water
15
EPA Regional Offices
http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa#pane-4 16
Office of Environmental Information“Knowledge on Demand”
http://www2.epa.gov/aboutepa/organization-chart-office-environmental-information-oei
17
Assistant Administrator (Chief Information Officer)
Quality Staff
Office of Information Collection
(OIC)
Office of Technology Operations and
Planning(OTOP)
Office of Information Analysis and Access
(OIAA)
18
Quality at EPA:Information Quality
Guidelines
EPA Information Quality Guidelines
EPA Information Quality Guidelines (October, 2002)
“Guidelines for Ensuring and Maximizing the Quality, Objectivity, Utility, and Integrity of Information Disseminated by the Environmental Protection Agency”
Provides policy and procedural guidance on how EPA ensures quality of disseminated information, including
* EPA Peer Review Process, * Action Development Process, * Quality Program Framework* Risk Characterization Handbook
Describes administrative mechanism used for public challenges to EPA disseminated information, including * Requests for Correction * Requests for Reconsideration
19
EPA Information Quality Guidelines
Reference existing Agency policies Quality System Peer Review Policy Action Development Process Risk Characterization Policy and Handbook Program-Specific Policies
Agency Guidance Developed A Summary of General Assessment Factors for Evaluating
the Quality of Scientific and Technical Information (SPC, 2002)
EPA Pre-Dissemination Review Guidelines (OEI, 2006)
20
Administrative Mechanism
21
KEY: Quality Staff (QS), Information Owner (IO), Stakeholders (STK), Office of General Counsel Attorney-Advisor (OGC)
Requests cometo OEI QS
SCOPING MEETING(QS, IO, STK, OGC)
PrepareDRAFT RESPONSE
(IO)
FINAL DRAFT RESPONSE(QS, IO, STK, OGC input)
CLEARANCE PROCESS(OGC, CIO, OMB) Send
FINAL RESPONSE(IO)
(Goal to respond in 90 days)
Request for Correction Process
EPA IQG Requests for CorrectionAs of Nov 1, 2014
Re-ports25%
Risk As-
sessments30%
Rule-making
17%
Outreach & Com-munica-
tions7%
Guidance3%
Data & Info Sys-
tems/Tools11%
22
Implementing Quality at EPA
Quality System Assessments
Quality Management Plan reviews
EPA / ECOS adopted Data Standards
EPA System of Registries
EPA Environmental Data Gateway
EPA Field Operations Guidelines
23
FOG Quality Guidelines
• Personnel / Training
• Document Control
• Records Management
• Sample Handling
• Field Documentation
24
• Field Equipment
• Field Inspections
• Reports
• Internal Audits
• Corrective Action
New Developments Modest increase in number of IQG requests (FY 2010)
D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals decision (March, 2010) may open door to judicial review of agencies IQA responses
Increase in IQG requests challenging information that supports on-going agency action, such as IRIS assessments and TMDL development.
EPA approved the Field Operations Guidance as a Procedure under the EPA Quality Policy
25
26
QUESTIONS