Uploaded on

 

More in: Technology , Business
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Be the first to comment
    Be the first to like this
No Downloads

Views

Total Views
172
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0

Actions

Shares
Downloads
0
Comments
0
Likes
0

Embeds 0

No embeds

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
    No notes for slide

Transcript

  • 1. March   11Transportation for the NationCase Study – Ohio:Collaboration on Street Centerline in OhioTFTN Strategic Plan Case Study
  • 2. OverviewThe Location Based Response System (LBRS) is a partnership between stateand local governments to develop highly-accurate (+/- 1M), field-verifiedstreet centerlines and address point locations for the entire state. The state hasdeveloped a set of standards and provides financial incentive to counties thatparticipate. The state contracts with the county through a Memorandum ofAgreement (MOA) to provide funds upon successful completion of a datacollection and maintenance system meeting LBRS requirements.Project BackgroundA MOA was drafted, and its language requires that the county establish a GISManagement Team to guide the development of the county’s LBRS project.This also means that the county owns the development process and isresponsible for QC and verification. Each county is responsible for ongoingmaintenance with annual updates to the State; however, their specificationsare incorporated into the process in an as-needed basis. The state heldoutreach meetings with the vendor community regarding requirements, andmaintains open communication during the development process to ensure asuccessful outcome. The state requires participation of county 911coordinators, engineers, commissioners, auditors, etc., and the State GIS teamis required to have a stake in the process.A key component that drove activity was to fully engage 911 coordinators atthe county level with their need for precise locations. Data was accepted from64 counties, 10 of which were actively participating—74 out of 88 counties.They understand local management and business processes well enough toget certified road mileage, which is how they re-distribute their mileage.Funding is needed to match their standards.There are many real-world and high-profile use cases in which LBRS helpedsave lives. An example is from Mercer County, Ohio; where a woman trappedin her car was able to call 911, and the dispatcher pinpointed her positionusing the LBRS: http://www.wane.com/dpp/news/woman-rescued-from-submerged-car. Examples like this one gained exposure and backing fromstate legislators, who inevitably wrote strong letters of support and helped tosolidify the effort.Lessons Learned and Challenges • A standardized maintenance application for county use must be provided, as well as financial support to counties for ongoing maintenance. This is important for total county support, especially in the south eastern part of the
  • 3. state. Digital submission of the transportation network for the annual certification process must also be required to encourage all counties to participate; currently, 74 of the state’s 88 counties are participating. • A lack of resources—funding, personnel, software, and training—at the local level to develop and/or maintain data is problematic. Identification of new funding sources and partners must continue to overcome this. Once a county resource becomes familiar with the state requirements for LBRS, they often move to another position with another firm, because at that point they are considered a highly skilled asset to any company, primarily the vendors. • A lack of resources at the state level—funding and personnel—requires delaying projects and limiting the number of projects that can be completed in a given year. Limited ability to meet LBRS requirements within the vendor community has been a matter of learning by experience of which firms are capable of meeting the standards, and working directly with them to ensure success. Counties are still not sharing data with other counties, which forces some counties to go to the state to get data from neighboring counties. • Contractor support for LBRS ranged from CAMA specialists like WTH Technology, Inc., to Woolpert and MRT who had people on the ground verifying data.ConclusionsThe Ohio LBRS program is a result of the successful culmination of manyorganizations working together to provide accurate centerline datathroughout the state for which emergency response organizations and stategeospatial programs can use as needed. There are several real world successstories related to the program, which further demonstrates the need andviability for accurate and interoperable services such as this.LBRS Funding resources include eSecureOhio LBRS Capital Funds, ODOTSpecial Project Funds, ODOT 408 Safety Funds, CEAO Safety Funds, the NTIABroadband Grant, Cellular 911 Service Fees, and USGS Grants.Sources: Stuart R. Davis—State CIO/Assistant Director, Ohio Department ofAdministrative Services, Office of Information Technology; David Blackstone—GIS Manager, Office of Technical Services; Jeff Smith—Spatial Data FrameworkManager, Ohio Office of Information Technology; and Raechel DeRussy—Executive Assistant, Ohio Department of Administrative Services Office ofInformation Technology