SlideShare a Scribd company logo
1 of 12
Download to read offline
URISA
                        DRAFT MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL

                                                QUESTIONNAIRE
G. BABINSKI, GISP, KING COUNTY GIS CENTER
JULY 29, 2010

Participant Identification:
Name of Municipal GIS Organization: ____________________ ______ ___________________
Name of Participant: _____________________________________ Title: ___________________
Participant Phone & Email: ________________________________________________________
Date of Response: _____________________________
Introduction


GIS development life cycle:

GIS development typically starts as an idea and progresses towards full maturity. However, the reality of municipal
GIS operations is that development is limited by available funds. Often GIS starts as a capital project with the
system designed to create the ‘best GIS possible’ with the funds at hand. This development scenario leads to
frequent compromise and deferral of many aspects of ideal GIS development in order to ‘go operational’ quickly and
start delivering value for the agency’s investment. Even if a GIS implementation project is completed successfully, it
does not mean that an agency has a mature GIS, or even a cost-effective GIS operation.

GIS professional staff often know that their operation could benefit from enhancement and refinement but funds,
staff, or time for further development are very difficult to come by. Enhancements are often developed as part of
GIS operations, but rarely on a systematic basis with a desired end state in mind.

What is a ‘Capability Maturity Model?

A ‘Capability Maturity Model’ is defined as a tool to assess an organization’s ability to accomplish a defined task or set
of tasks. The concept of a capability maturity model originated with the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) as a
means of assessing the capability of software contractors to complete large software design and development
projects successfully. SEI published ‘Managing the Software Process’ in 1989 and continues to refine the software
capability maturity model. The Software CMM is ‘process focused’ in that it is based on how an organization
performs the individual processes that are involved in software design and development.

Since the development of the SEI CMM, the capability maturity model concept has been applied in other areas,
including:
    • System engineering
    • Project management
    • Risk management
    • Information technology services

The typical capability maturity model is based on an assessment of the subject organization’s maturity level based on
the characteristics of the organization’s approach to individual defined processes. These processes are usually
defined as:
    • Level 1 – Ad hoc (chaotic) processes - typically in reaction to a need to get something done.
    • Level 2 – Repeatable processes – typically based on recalling and repeating how the process was done the last
      time.
    • Level 3 – Defined process – the process is written down (documented) and serves to guide consistent
      performance within the organization.
    • Level 4 – Managed process – the documented process is measured when performed and the measurements
      are compiled for analysis. Changing system conditions are managed by adapting the defined process to meet
      the conditions.
PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL
QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 2

   • Level 5 – Optimized processes – The defined and managed process is improved on an on-going basis by
     institutionalized process improvement planning and implementation. Optimization may be tied to quantified
     performance goals.

GIS Maturity Assessments

In 2001 Gaudet, Annulis, and Carr published the ‘Workforce Development Model for Geospatial Technology.’
Although not an organizational maturity or capability assessment, it does provide a systematic approach to defining
the core job functions (defined as roles) of a GIS organization and the competencies associated with each of the
functions.

In 2007 the States of Georgia and Texas began collaborative development of a State GIS Maturity Assessment. This
assessment focuses on a number of typical state GIS program and project related components. These components
fall into seven broad categories:
     • Geospatial Coordination and Collaboration
     • Geospatial Data Development
     • GIS Resource Discovery and Access
     • Statewide Partnership Programs
     • Participation in Pertinent National Partnership Programs and Initiatives
     • Geospatial Polices, Standards, Guidelines, and Best Practices
     • Training, Education, and Professional Networking Activities

Within these seven categories, state GIS organizations assess their development in 56 specific detailed characteristics
based on their current implementation of each characteristic:
   1.00 pt – Fully Implemented
   0.75 pt. – In progress with full resources available to complete implementation
   0.50 pt. – In progress with partial resources available for implementation
   0.25 pt. – Planned – with resources assigned
   0.00 pt. – Not planned with no resources assigned

Because the State GIS Maturity Assessment seems focused on the typical coordination function of many state’s GIS,
it seem unsuitable for municipal GIS, with its enterprise operations focus and business end-user responsibilities.

Why develop a Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model?

GIS in a municipal environment is a highly complex system. Indeed, many of the processes that have had the CMM
approach applied to them in the past are themselves interdependent components of a municipal GIS. Because of this
complexity, it seems useful to think about the ideal capability of a municipal GIS operation in theoretical terms and
then analyze and measure individual GIS operations against this theoretical ideal state.

The purpose of this proposed model is to provide a means for any municipal GIS operation to gauge its maturity
against a variety of standards and/or measures, including:
   • A theoretical ideal end state of GIS organizational development
   • The maturity level of other peer GIS organizations, either individually or in aggregate
   • The maturity level of the subject organization over time
   • The maturity level of the organization against an agreed target state (perhaps set by organizational policy,
      budget limitations, etc.)

What is meant by ‘Municipal GIS operations’?

For this study municipal GIS operations refers to city or county agencies that are responsible for typical municipal
government services as commonly defined in the United States. The term also implies an enterprise-wide view of
GIS operations, as opposed to GIS as used within individual departments within a municipality.

What is meant by ‘maturity’ in relation to municipal GIS operations?

Maturity for the proposed model indicates progression of an organization towards GIS capability that maximizes the
potential for the use of state of the art GIS technology, commonly recognized quality data, and organizational best
practices appropriate for municipal business use. The Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model assumes two broad
areas of GIS operational development: enabling capability and execution ability.
PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL
QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 3


To clarify, maturity does not indicate old age. Maturity also does not necessarily mean that an organization excels at
every aspect of GIS operations. Just like a mature person may have well developed athletic and math abilities, but
intermediate cooking ability, and poor mechanical abilities, a mature GIS operation may excel at some of the
characteristics inherent in GIS operations, but be less developed in others. However, this model assumes that there
is a developmental ideal for GIS operations that any agency strives to achieve. This is similar to the classic Greek
ideal of striving to excel at all of the intellectual, mechanical, and physical aspects of life.

What are the characteristics of municipal GIS operations that are used to assess an agency’s maturity level?

As indicated above, the Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model is based on an assessment of both enabling
capability and execution ability. Briefly, enabling capability can be thought of as the technology, data, resources, and
related infrastructure that can be bought, developed, or otherwise acquired to support typical municipal GIS
operations. Enabling capability includes GIS management and professional staff. However the ability (execution
capability) of the staff to utilize the enabling technology at its disposal is subject to a separate assessment as part of
the model.

The components of the GIS CMM and the assessment categories

The GIS Capability Maturity Model assumes that mature agencies have more well developed enabling technology and
resources, and that their processes and practices maximize the effectiveness of their GIS infrastructure. Enabling
capability includes technology components, data, professional GIS staff, an appropriate organizational structure, and
other resources and infrastructure. Execution ability is the ability of the staff to maximize the use of the available
capability, relative to a normative ideal.

In the following GIS CMM questionnaire, the questions are categorized by enabling capability and execution ability.
For each question, the respondent is asked to self assess their organization and provide comments.

The enabling capability assessment scale is modeled after the State GIS Maturity Assessment. Because GIS enabling
capability to some degree is dependent on resource availability, the State GIS Maturity Assessment Scale (with its
resource-commitment focus) is well suited to indicating capability.

The execution ability assessment scale is modeled after the typical CMM process-based five-level scale. Because the
execution ability of a mature GIS organization depends on how well it performs in key process areas, the typical CMM
assessment scale (with its focus on process execution sophistication) is well suited to indicating ability.

The GIS CMM Questionnaire and the assessment process

Once agencies complete the questionnaire, they will have a benchmark resource for future self assessments. Once
the questionnaires are compiled and analyzed, the analysis will provide information for each agency to compare itself
with. This analysis information will be provided to each agency that participates in the study. It will also be
presented in aggregate at professional meeting and in papers.

References
         Capability Maturity Model, Wikepedia Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capability_Maturity_Model
         Accessed 8/3/2009).
         Selena Rezvani, M.S.W., An Introduction to Organizational Maturity Assessment: Measuring Organizational
         Capabilities, International Public Management Association Assessment Council, ND.
         Jerry Simonoff, Director, IT Investment & Enterprise Solutions, Improving IT investment Management in the
         Commonwealth, Virginia Information Technology Agency, 2008.
         Curtis, B., Hefley, W. E., and Miller, S. A.; People Capability Maturity Model (P-CMM), Software Engineering
         Institute, 2001.
         Niessinka, F., Clerca, V., Tijdinka, T., and van Vlietb, H., The IT Service Capability Maturity Model, CIBIT
         Consultants | Educators, 2005
         Ford-Bey, M., PA Consulting Group, Proving the Business Benefits of GeoWeb Initiatives: An ROI-Driven
         Approach, GeoWeb Conference, 2008.
PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL
QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 4

      Niessink, F. and van Vliet, H., Towards Mature IT Services, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science,
      Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, ND.
      Gaudet, C., Annulis, H., and Carr, J., Workforce Development Models for Geospatial Technology, University
      of Southern Mississippi, 2001.
PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL
QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 5

Name of Municipal GIS Organization:
GIS Capability Maturity Model Score Card

Enabling Capability Components

For each question in the ‘Enabling Capability’ section, read the brief description. Check the implementation category
that best describes your agency’s current status. Feel free to include any clarifying comments or questions.

1. Framework GIS Data
   The agency has access to adequate framework GIS data to meet its business needs. For the GISCMM,
   framework data is defined as NSDI framework layers (see: http://www.fgdc.gov/framework/).
    [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
    [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
    Comments:



2. Framework GIS Data Maintenance
    Data stewards are defined for each framework GIS data layer and the data is maintained (kept up to date) to
    meet business needs.
    [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
    [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
    Comments:



3. Business GIS Data
    The agency has access to adequate business data (non-framework GIS data) to meet its business needs.
    [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
    [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
    Comments:



4. Business GIS Data Maintenance
    Data stewards are defined for each business GIS data layer and the data is maintained (kept up to date) to meet
    business needs.
    [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
    [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
    Comments:
PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL
QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 6

5. Metadata
   Metadata is available and maintained for all framework and business data layers.
   [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
   [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
   Comments:



6. Spatial Data Warehouse
   A spatial data warehouse is available for stewards to compile framework and business data and for GIS users to
   access data for GIS applications.
   [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
   [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
   Comments:



7. Architectural Design
   An architectural design exists that defines the current state and planned future development of the technical
   infrastructure. The architectural design guides the investment in GIS technical infrastructure.
   [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
   [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
   Comments:



8. Technical Infrastructure
   The technical infrastructure is in place to maintain and operate the GIS. Technical infrastructure includes
   hardware (servers, storage, desktops, input and output peripherals), network components, operating system,
   and GIS software.
   [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
   [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
   Comments:



9. Replacement Plan
   A plan is in place and implemented to replace technical infrastructure components (hardware, network
   components, imagery) that have a defined ‘end of useful life.’
   [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
   [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
   Comments:
PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL
QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 7

10. GIS Software Maintenance
    Commercial GIS software is available to meet business needs and is under maintenance to ensure long term
    support and development. If open-source’ GIS software is used, an alternate support and development
    capability is available.
    [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
    [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
    Comments:



11. Data back-up and security
    A computer back-up system is in place to ensure the security of GIS data and applications. The backup system
    is tested periodically by tests to restore sample data. System security is in place to control internal and external
    access to GIS data and applications as appropriate.
    [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
    [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
    Comments:



12. GIS Application Portfolio
    A portfolio of custom or commercial off-the-shelf GIS applications is available to meet the business needs of GIS
    clients.
    [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
    [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
    Comments:



13. GIS Application Portfolio Management
    The agency’s GIS application portfolio is managed to a common design and development framework.
    [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
    [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
    Comments:



14. GIS Application Portfolio O&M
    The agency’s GIS application portfolio is kept viable via ongoing support and application maintenance.
    [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
    [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
    [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
    Comments:
PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL
QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 8

15. Professional GIS Management
   The agency GIS is managed by a dedicated, professional GIS manager.
   [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
   [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
   Comments:



16. Professional GIS Operations Staff
   The agency GIS is operated and maintained by an adequate staff of GIS professionals. (For purposes of the
   GISCMM, adequate operational staffing is defined as meeting the ‘roles’ defined by the Geospatial Technology
   Competency Model – see: http://www.aag.org/Roundtable/Resources/gaudet-et-al-2003.pdf - table 4).
   [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
   [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
   Comments:



17. GIS Staff Training and Professional Development
   The agency GIS manager and other professional staff have access to on-going training to maintain and develop
   their technical and operational knowledge, skills, and abilities.
   [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
   [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
   Comments:



18. GIS Governance Structure
   The agency has a formal GIS governance structure that links the GIS operation both to users (typically via a GIS
   technical committee or user committee) and to key decision makers (typically via an oversight committee).
   [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
   [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
   Comments:



19. GIS is Linked to Agency Strategic Goals
   The GIS exists as a defined organizational unit of the agency with a clearly defined role in supporting the
   strategic goals.
   [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
   [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
   Comments:
PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL
QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 9

20. GIS Budget
   The GIS unit develops a comprehensive budget that includes (at a minimum) labor, hardware, software, data,
   consulting, and training costs.
   [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
   [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
   Comments:



21. GIS Funding
   The GIS unit has dedicated funding for (at a minimum) labor, hardware, software, data, consulting, and training
   costs.
   [   ] 1.00 Fully implemented
   [   ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
   [   ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
   [   ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
   [   ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
   Comments:



22. GIS Financial Plan
   The GIS unit has a financial plan that includes a funding model (where the money is coming from) and that also
   projects future episodic costs for equipment and imagery replacement.
   [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented
   [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability
   [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available
   Comments:
PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL
QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 10

Execution Ability Components

For each question in the ‘Execution Ability’ section, read the brief question and description. Check the
implementation category that best describes your agency’s current status. Feel free to include any clarifying
comments or questions.

1. Client Services Evaluation and Development
   How does the GIS unit evaluate agency business needs for GIS services and develop new client service
   requests?
    [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes
    [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes
    [ ] Level Three: Defined processes
    [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes
    [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes
    Comments:



2. Service Delivery Tracking and Oversight
   How does the GIS unit track, monitor, and evaluate client service delivery?
    [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes
    [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes
    [ ] Level Three: Defined processes
    [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes
    [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes
    Comments:



3. Service Quality Assurance
   How does the GIS unit ensure the quality of services provided to clients?
    [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes
    [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes
    [ ] Level Three: Defined processes
    [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes
    [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes
    Comments:



4. Application Development Methodology
   How does the GIS unit develop custom GIS applications?
    [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes
    [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes
    [ ] Level Three: Defined processes
    [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes
    [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes
    Comments:



5. Project Management Methodology
   How does the GIS unit manage projects for which it is responsible? Projects could be either executed in-house
   or by an outside contractor.
    [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes
    [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes
    [ ] Level Three: Defined processes
    [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes
    [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes
    Comments:
PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL
QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 11

6. Quality Assurance and Quality Control
   How does the GIS unit assure a reasonable and appropriate level of quality for projects and for ongoing GIS
   system operation? System operations include database maintenance and spatial data warehouse processes.
    [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes
    [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes
    [ ] Level Three: Defined processes
    [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes
    [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes
    Comments:



7. GIS System Management
   How does the GIS unit manage the core GIS systems that it is responsible for? GIS system management
   includes system administration, database administration, network administration, system security, data backup,
   security, and restore processes, etc.
    [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes
    [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes
    [ ] Level Three: Defined processes
    [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes
    [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes
    Comments:



8. Process Event Management
   How does the GIS unit manage GIS system process events? Typical process events include planned hardware
   and software upgrades, unplanned hardware failure and data loss and restore events.
    [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes
    [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes
    [ ] Level Three: Defined processes
    [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes
    [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes
    Comments:



9. User Support, Help Desk, and End-User Training
   How does the GIS unit support end users, including user guides, help documentation, training, and ad-hoc help-
   desk and/or on-site support?
    [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes
    [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes
    [ ] Level Three: Defined processes
    [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes
    [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes
    Comments:



10. Contract and Supplier Management
    How does the GIS unit manage its purchasing and contracting processes to ensure the best value for the
    supplies and services that it acquires?
    [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes
    [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes
    [ ] Level Three: Defined processes
    [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes
    [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes
    Comments:
PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL
QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 12

11. Regional Collaboration
    How does the GIS unit manage regional collaboration to ensure that opportunities to share in the development
    and operation of data, infrastructure, and applications are pursued, and that the agency’s GIS is leveraged to
    benefit other potential local partners?
    [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes
    [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes
    [ ] Level Three: Defined processes
    [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes
    [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes
    Comments:



12. Staff Development
    How does the GIS unit manage the process of developing its staff to ensure that individual staff member skills
    are developed appropriate to current and emerging technical and business needs? How does the GIS unit
    ensure that its staff resources meet its operational requirements for individual GIS competencies, including back-
    up and succession planning?
    [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes
    [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes
    [ ] Level Three: Defined processes
    [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes
    [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes
    Comments:



13. Performance Management
    How does the GIS unit manage performance, including both individual performance and the performance of the
    GIS unit as a whole?
    [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes
    [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes
    [ ] Level Three: Defined processes
    [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes
    [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes
    Comments:




Please provide any final general comments here:




Thank you for participating in this survey.




W:gbURISAMuniGISCMMURISA-MuniGISCMM-Draft-Questionairre.doc                  July 29, 2010

More Related Content

Similar to Urisa muni giscmm-draft-questionairre

A Proposed Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model
A Proposed Municipal GIS Capability Maturity ModelA Proposed Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model
A Proposed Municipal GIS Capability Maturity ModelGreg Babinski
 
URISA’s Local Government GIS Capability Maturity Model
URISA’s Local Government GIS Capability Maturity ModelURISA’s Local Government GIS Capability Maturity Model
URISA’s Local Government GIS Capability Maturity ModelGreg Babinski
 
GIS Capability Maturity Model - Final Version
GIS Capability Maturity Model - Final VersionGIS Capability Maturity Model - Final Version
GIS Capability Maturity Model - Final VersionGregBabinski
 
The GIS Capability Maturity Model (2013)
The GIS Capability Maturity Model (2013)The GIS Capability Maturity Model (2013)
The GIS Capability Maturity Model (2013)GregBabinski
 
You Can’t Manage What you Don’t Measure URISA’s Proposed Municipal GIS Capab...
You Can’t Manage What you Don’t Measure  URISA’s Proposed Municipal GIS Capab...You Can’t Manage What you Don’t Measure  URISA’s Proposed Municipal GIS Capab...
You Can’t Manage What you Don’t Measure URISA’s Proposed Municipal GIS Capab...Greg Babinski
 
URISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETA
URISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETAURISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETA
URISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETAGreg Babinski
 
GIS - Project Planning and Implementation
GIS - Project Planning and ImplementationGIS - Project Planning and Implementation
GIS - Project Planning and ImplementationMalla Reddy University
 
URISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETA
URISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETAURISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETA
URISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETAGreg Babinski
 
URISA Geospatial Management Competency Model - Strawman Draft
URISA Geospatial Management Competency Model - Strawman DraftURISA Geospatial Management Competency Model - Strawman Draft
URISA Geospatial Management Competency Model - Strawman DraftGreg Babinski
 
IMPROVING ENTERPRISE GIS OPERATIONS VIA STAFF USAGE ANALYSIS AND SURVEYS
IMPROVING ENTERPRISE GIS OPERATIONS VIA STAFF USAGE ANALYSIS AND SURVEYSIMPROVING ENTERPRISE GIS OPERATIONS VIA STAFF USAGE ANALYSIS AND SURVEYS
IMPROVING ENTERPRISE GIS OPERATIONS VIA STAFF USAGE ANALYSIS AND SURVEYSGreg Babinski
 
URISA GIS Management Institute® The GIS Capability Maturity Model and the GMI...
URISA GIS Management Institute® The GIS Capability Maturity Model and the GMI...URISA GIS Management Institute® The GIS Capability Maturity Model and the GMI...
URISA GIS Management Institute® The GIS Capability Maturity Model and the GMI...Greg Babinski
 
Managing a County GIS for Results
Managing a County GIS for ResultsManaging a County GIS for Results
Managing a County GIS for ResultsGreg Babinski
 
Dynamic AI-Geo Health Application based on BIGIS-DSS Approach
Dynamic AI-Geo Health Application based on BIGIS-DSS ApproachDynamic AI-Geo Health Application based on BIGIS-DSS Approach
Dynamic AI-Geo Health Application based on BIGIS-DSS ApproachIOSR Journals
 
Senior Capstone - Systems Operations Manual
Senior Capstone - Systems Operations ManualSenior Capstone - Systems Operations Manual
Senior Capstone - Systems Operations ManualKevin Kempton
 
HUMAN AND ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUE- GIS
HUMAN AND ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUE- GISHUMAN AND ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUE- GIS
HUMAN AND ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUE- GISTanvir Rashed
 
Project Organizational Responsibility Model - ORM
Project Organizational Responsibility Model -  ORMProject Organizational Responsibility Model -  ORM
Project Organizational Responsibility Model - ORMGuttenberg Ferreira Passos
 
Project Report on Employee Management System.docx
Project Report on Employee Management System.docxProject Report on Employee Management System.docx
Project Report on Employee Management System.docxDhineshkumarPrakasam
 
Capabilities based planning essay
Capabilities based planning essayCapabilities based planning essay
Capabilities based planning essayGlen Alleman
 

Similar to Urisa muni giscmm-draft-questionairre (20)

A Proposed Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model
A Proposed Municipal GIS Capability Maturity ModelA Proposed Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model
A Proposed Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model
 
URISA’s Local Government GIS Capability Maturity Model
URISA’s Local Government GIS Capability Maturity ModelURISA’s Local Government GIS Capability Maturity Model
URISA’s Local Government GIS Capability Maturity Model
 
GIS Capability Maturity Model - Final Version
GIS Capability Maturity Model - Final VersionGIS Capability Maturity Model - Final Version
GIS Capability Maturity Model - Final Version
 
The GIS Capability Maturity Model (2013)
The GIS Capability Maturity Model (2013)The GIS Capability Maturity Model (2013)
The GIS Capability Maturity Model (2013)
 
You Can’t Manage What you Don’t Measure URISA’s Proposed Municipal GIS Capab...
You Can’t Manage What you Don’t Measure  URISA’s Proposed Municipal GIS Capab...You Can’t Manage What you Don’t Measure  URISA’s Proposed Municipal GIS Capab...
You Can’t Manage What you Don’t Measure URISA’s Proposed Municipal GIS Capab...
 
URISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETA
URISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETAURISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETA
URISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETA
 
GIS - Project Planning and Implementation
GIS - Project Planning and ImplementationGIS - Project Planning and Implementation
GIS - Project Planning and Implementation
 
URISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETA
URISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETAURISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETA
URISA Develops the Geospatial Management Competency Model (GMCM) for USDOLETA
 
URISA Geospatial Management Competency Model - Strawman Draft
URISA Geospatial Management Competency Model - Strawman DraftURISA Geospatial Management Competency Model - Strawman Draft
URISA Geospatial Management Competency Model - Strawman Draft
 
IMPROVING ENTERPRISE GIS OPERATIONS VIA STAFF USAGE ANALYSIS AND SURVEYS
IMPROVING ENTERPRISE GIS OPERATIONS VIA STAFF USAGE ANALYSIS AND SURVEYSIMPROVING ENTERPRISE GIS OPERATIONS VIA STAFF USAGE ANALYSIS AND SURVEYS
IMPROVING ENTERPRISE GIS OPERATIONS VIA STAFF USAGE ANALYSIS AND SURVEYS
 
URISA GIS Management Institute® The GIS Capability Maturity Model and the GMI...
URISA GIS Management Institute® The GIS Capability Maturity Model and the GMI...URISA GIS Management Institute® The GIS Capability Maturity Model and the GMI...
URISA GIS Management Institute® The GIS Capability Maturity Model and the GMI...
 
Managing a County GIS for Results
Managing a County GIS for ResultsManaging a County GIS for Results
Managing a County GIS for Results
 
Dynamic AI-Geo Health Application based on BIGIS-DSS Approach
Dynamic AI-Geo Health Application based on BIGIS-DSS ApproachDynamic AI-Geo Health Application based on BIGIS-DSS Approach
Dynamic AI-Geo Health Application based on BIGIS-DSS Approach
 
Senior Capstone - Systems Operations Manual
Senior Capstone - Systems Operations ManualSenior Capstone - Systems Operations Manual
Senior Capstone - Systems Operations Manual
 
HUMAN AND ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUE- GIS
HUMAN AND ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUE- GISHUMAN AND ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUE- GIS
HUMAN AND ORGANIZATIONAL ISSUE- GIS
 
Project Organizational Responsibility Model - ORM
Project Organizational Responsibility Model -  ORMProject Organizational Responsibility Model -  ORM
Project Organizational Responsibility Model - ORM
 
APR Workshop 2010-Participatory Monitoring & Evaluation-Susan Perez
APR Workshop 2010-Participatory Monitoring & Evaluation-Susan PerezAPR Workshop 2010-Participatory Monitoring & Evaluation-Susan Perez
APR Workshop 2010-Participatory Monitoring & Evaluation-Susan Perez
 
APR Workshop 2010-Monitoring and Evaluation (2)- Susan Perez
APR Workshop 2010-Monitoring and Evaluation (2)- Susan PerezAPR Workshop 2010-Monitoring and Evaluation (2)- Susan Perez
APR Workshop 2010-Monitoring and Evaluation (2)- Susan Perez
 
Project Report on Employee Management System.docx
Project Report on Employee Management System.docxProject Report on Employee Management System.docx
Project Report on Employee Management System.docx
 
Capabilities based planning essay
Capabilities based planning essayCapabilities based planning essay
Capabilities based planning essay
 

More from Greg Babinski

GMA GIS Return on Investment (ROI) Template
GMA GIS Return on Investment (ROI) TemplateGMA GIS Return on Investment (ROI) Template
GMA GIS Return on Investment (ROI) TemplateGreg Babinski
 
GMI-GMCM Assessment Scale.pdf
GMI-GMCM Assessment Scale.pdfGMI-GMCM Assessment Scale.pdf
GMI-GMCM Assessment Scale.pdfGreg Babinski
 
BURISA News Issue 192
BURISA News Issue 192BURISA News Issue 192
BURISA News Issue 192Greg Babinski
 
URISA Newsletter Issue 193
URISA Newsletter Issue 193URISA Newsletter Issue 193
URISA Newsletter Issue 193Greg Babinski
 
BURISA Newsletter Issue 194 (Final Issue)
BURISA Newsletter Issue 194 (Final Issue)BURISA Newsletter Issue 194 (Final Issue)
BURISA Newsletter Issue 194 (Final Issue)Greg Babinski
 
King County GIS Funding and Billing Procedures 2015-2016
King County GIS Funding and Billing Procedures 2015-2016King County GIS Funding and Billing Procedures 2015-2016
King County GIS Funding and Billing Procedures 2015-2016Greg Babinski
 
GIS for Equity & Social Justice Best Practices
GIS for Equity & Social Justice Best PracticesGIS for Equity & Social Justice Best Practices
GIS for Equity & Social Justice Best PracticesGreg Babinski
 
GIS v. IT - One of these things is not like the other
GIS v. IT - One of these things is not like the otherGIS v. IT - One of these things is not like the other
GIS v. IT - One of these things is not like the otherGreg Babinski
 
Babinski geography as human ecology wsu19720614
Babinski geography as human ecology wsu19720614Babinski geography as human ecology wsu19720614
Babinski geography as human ecology wsu19720614Greg Babinski
 
Examining the meaning of confederate civil war monuments
Examining the meaning of confederate civil war monumentsExamining the meaning of confederate civil war monuments
Examining the meaning of confederate civil war monumentsGreg Babinski
 
Martin Luther King, William Bunge, URISA, and GIS for Equity and Social Justi...
Martin Luther King, William Bunge, URISA, and GIS for Equity and Social Justi...Martin Luther King, William Bunge, URISA, and GIS for Equity and Social Justi...
Martin Luther King, William Bunge, URISA, and GIS for Equity and Social Justi...Greg Babinski
 
The future of urisa as an international organization
The future of urisa as an international organizationThe future of urisa as an international organization
The future of urisa as an international organizationGreg Babinski
 
URISA’s GIS Management Institute
URISA’s GIS Management InstituteURISA’s GIS Management Institute
URISA’s GIS Management InstituteGreg Babinski
 
2002 KCGIS O&M Issue Status Report #4: Status of Original GIS Capital Project...
2002 KCGIS O&M Issue Status Report #4: Status of Original GIS Capital Project...2002 KCGIS O&M Issue Status Report #4: Status of Original GIS Capital Project...
2002 KCGIS O&M Issue Status Report #4: Status of Original GIS Capital Project...Greg Babinski
 
A Day in the Life of King County GIS
A Day in the Life of King County GISA Day in the Life of King County GIS
A Day in the Life of King County GISGreg Babinski
 
Flight of the Malfunction: My 2013 Trip to Morotai & WWII 13th AAF Sites
Flight of the Malfunction: My 2013 Trip to Morotai & WWII 13th AAF SitesFlight of the Malfunction: My 2013 Trip to Morotai & WWII 13th AAF Sites
Flight of the Malfunction: My 2013 Trip to Morotai & WWII 13th AAF SitesGreg Babinski
 
A Survey and Analysis of GIS Web Mapping Applications in Washington State
A Survey and Analysis of GIS Web Mapping Applications in Washington StateA Survey and Analysis of GIS Web Mapping Applications in Washington State
A Survey and Analysis of GIS Web Mapping Applications in Washington StateGreg Babinski
 
No GIS is an Island How (and why) we should compare ourselves and share our s...
No GIS is an Island How (and why) we should compare ourselves and share our s...No GIS is an Island How (and why) we should compare ourselves and share our s...
No GIS is an Island How (and why) we should compare ourselves and share our s...Greg Babinski
 
Law and the Geoweb’ Panel Discussion. 2011 AAG Conference
Law and the Geoweb’ Panel Discussion. 2011 AAG ConferenceLaw and the Geoweb’ Panel Discussion. 2011 AAG Conference
Law and the Geoweb’ Panel Discussion. 2011 AAG ConferenceGreg Babinski
 
Measuring Enterprise GIS Performance For the King County GIS Center
Measuring Enterprise GIS Performance For the King County GIS CenterMeasuring Enterprise GIS Performance For the King County GIS Center
Measuring Enterprise GIS Performance For the King County GIS CenterGreg Babinski
 

More from Greg Babinski (20)

GMA GIS Return on Investment (ROI) Template
GMA GIS Return on Investment (ROI) TemplateGMA GIS Return on Investment (ROI) Template
GMA GIS Return on Investment (ROI) Template
 
GMI-GMCM Assessment Scale.pdf
GMI-GMCM Assessment Scale.pdfGMI-GMCM Assessment Scale.pdf
GMI-GMCM Assessment Scale.pdf
 
BURISA News Issue 192
BURISA News Issue 192BURISA News Issue 192
BURISA News Issue 192
 
URISA Newsletter Issue 193
URISA Newsletter Issue 193URISA Newsletter Issue 193
URISA Newsletter Issue 193
 
BURISA Newsletter Issue 194 (Final Issue)
BURISA Newsletter Issue 194 (Final Issue)BURISA Newsletter Issue 194 (Final Issue)
BURISA Newsletter Issue 194 (Final Issue)
 
King County GIS Funding and Billing Procedures 2015-2016
King County GIS Funding and Billing Procedures 2015-2016King County GIS Funding and Billing Procedures 2015-2016
King County GIS Funding and Billing Procedures 2015-2016
 
GIS for Equity & Social Justice Best Practices
GIS for Equity & Social Justice Best PracticesGIS for Equity & Social Justice Best Practices
GIS for Equity & Social Justice Best Practices
 
GIS v. IT - One of these things is not like the other
GIS v. IT - One of these things is not like the otherGIS v. IT - One of these things is not like the other
GIS v. IT - One of these things is not like the other
 
Babinski geography as human ecology wsu19720614
Babinski geography as human ecology wsu19720614Babinski geography as human ecology wsu19720614
Babinski geography as human ecology wsu19720614
 
Examining the meaning of confederate civil war monuments
Examining the meaning of confederate civil war monumentsExamining the meaning of confederate civil war monuments
Examining the meaning of confederate civil war monuments
 
Martin Luther King, William Bunge, URISA, and GIS for Equity and Social Justi...
Martin Luther King, William Bunge, URISA, and GIS for Equity and Social Justi...Martin Luther King, William Bunge, URISA, and GIS for Equity and Social Justi...
Martin Luther King, William Bunge, URISA, and GIS for Equity and Social Justi...
 
The future of urisa as an international organization
The future of urisa as an international organizationThe future of urisa as an international organization
The future of urisa as an international organization
 
URISA’s GIS Management Institute
URISA’s GIS Management InstituteURISA’s GIS Management Institute
URISA’s GIS Management Institute
 
2002 KCGIS O&M Issue Status Report #4: Status of Original GIS Capital Project...
2002 KCGIS O&M Issue Status Report #4: Status of Original GIS Capital Project...2002 KCGIS O&M Issue Status Report #4: Status of Original GIS Capital Project...
2002 KCGIS O&M Issue Status Report #4: Status of Original GIS Capital Project...
 
A Day in the Life of King County GIS
A Day in the Life of King County GISA Day in the Life of King County GIS
A Day in the Life of King County GIS
 
Flight of the Malfunction: My 2013 Trip to Morotai & WWII 13th AAF Sites
Flight of the Malfunction: My 2013 Trip to Morotai & WWII 13th AAF SitesFlight of the Malfunction: My 2013 Trip to Morotai & WWII 13th AAF Sites
Flight of the Malfunction: My 2013 Trip to Morotai & WWII 13th AAF Sites
 
A Survey and Analysis of GIS Web Mapping Applications in Washington State
A Survey and Analysis of GIS Web Mapping Applications in Washington StateA Survey and Analysis of GIS Web Mapping Applications in Washington State
A Survey and Analysis of GIS Web Mapping Applications in Washington State
 
No GIS is an Island How (and why) we should compare ourselves and share our s...
No GIS is an Island How (and why) we should compare ourselves and share our s...No GIS is an Island How (and why) we should compare ourselves and share our s...
No GIS is an Island How (and why) we should compare ourselves and share our s...
 
Law and the Geoweb’ Panel Discussion. 2011 AAG Conference
Law and the Geoweb’ Panel Discussion. 2011 AAG ConferenceLaw and the Geoweb’ Panel Discussion. 2011 AAG Conference
Law and the Geoweb’ Panel Discussion. 2011 AAG Conference
 
Measuring Enterprise GIS Performance For the King County GIS Center
Measuring Enterprise GIS Performance For the King County GIS CenterMeasuring Enterprise GIS Performance For the King County GIS Center
Measuring Enterprise GIS Performance For the King County GIS Center
 

Urisa muni giscmm-draft-questionairre

  • 1. URISA DRAFT MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL QUESTIONNAIRE G. BABINSKI, GISP, KING COUNTY GIS CENTER JULY 29, 2010 Participant Identification: Name of Municipal GIS Organization: ____________________ ______ ___________________ Name of Participant: _____________________________________ Title: ___________________ Participant Phone & Email: ________________________________________________________ Date of Response: _____________________________ Introduction GIS development life cycle: GIS development typically starts as an idea and progresses towards full maturity. However, the reality of municipal GIS operations is that development is limited by available funds. Often GIS starts as a capital project with the system designed to create the ‘best GIS possible’ with the funds at hand. This development scenario leads to frequent compromise and deferral of many aspects of ideal GIS development in order to ‘go operational’ quickly and start delivering value for the agency’s investment. Even if a GIS implementation project is completed successfully, it does not mean that an agency has a mature GIS, or even a cost-effective GIS operation. GIS professional staff often know that their operation could benefit from enhancement and refinement but funds, staff, or time for further development are very difficult to come by. Enhancements are often developed as part of GIS operations, but rarely on a systematic basis with a desired end state in mind. What is a ‘Capability Maturity Model? A ‘Capability Maturity Model’ is defined as a tool to assess an organization’s ability to accomplish a defined task or set of tasks. The concept of a capability maturity model originated with the Software Engineering Institute (SEI) as a means of assessing the capability of software contractors to complete large software design and development projects successfully. SEI published ‘Managing the Software Process’ in 1989 and continues to refine the software capability maturity model. The Software CMM is ‘process focused’ in that it is based on how an organization performs the individual processes that are involved in software design and development. Since the development of the SEI CMM, the capability maturity model concept has been applied in other areas, including: • System engineering • Project management • Risk management • Information technology services The typical capability maturity model is based on an assessment of the subject organization’s maturity level based on the characteristics of the organization’s approach to individual defined processes. These processes are usually defined as: • Level 1 – Ad hoc (chaotic) processes - typically in reaction to a need to get something done. • Level 2 – Repeatable processes – typically based on recalling and repeating how the process was done the last time. • Level 3 – Defined process – the process is written down (documented) and serves to guide consistent performance within the organization. • Level 4 – Managed process – the documented process is measured when performed and the measurements are compiled for analysis. Changing system conditions are managed by adapting the defined process to meet the conditions.
  • 2. PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 2 • Level 5 – Optimized processes – The defined and managed process is improved on an on-going basis by institutionalized process improvement planning and implementation. Optimization may be tied to quantified performance goals. GIS Maturity Assessments In 2001 Gaudet, Annulis, and Carr published the ‘Workforce Development Model for Geospatial Technology.’ Although not an organizational maturity or capability assessment, it does provide a systematic approach to defining the core job functions (defined as roles) of a GIS organization and the competencies associated with each of the functions. In 2007 the States of Georgia and Texas began collaborative development of a State GIS Maturity Assessment. This assessment focuses on a number of typical state GIS program and project related components. These components fall into seven broad categories: • Geospatial Coordination and Collaboration • Geospatial Data Development • GIS Resource Discovery and Access • Statewide Partnership Programs • Participation in Pertinent National Partnership Programs and Initiatives • Geospatial Polices, Standards, Guidelines, and Best Practices • Training, Education, and Professional Networking Activities Within these seven categories, state GIS organizations assess their development in 56 specific detailed characteristics based on their current implementation of each characteristic: 1.00 pt – Fully Implemented 0.75 pt. – In progress with full resources available to complete implementation 0.50 pt. – In progress with partial resources available for implementation 0.25 pt. – Planned – with resources assigned 0.00 pt. – Not planned with no resources assigned Because the State GIS Maturity Assessment seems focused on the typical coordination function of many state’s GIS, it seem unsuitable for municipal GIS, with its enterprise operations focus and business end-user responsibilities. Why develop a Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model? GIS in a municipal environment is a highly complex system. Indeed, many of the processes that have had the CMM approach applied to them in the past are themselves interdependent components of a municipal GIS. Because of this complexity, it seems useful to think about the ideal capability of a municipal GIS operation in theoretical terms and then analyze and measure individual GIS operations against this theoretical ideal state. The purpose of this proposed model is to provide a means for any municipal GIS operation to gauge its maturity against a variety of standards and/or measures, including: • A theoretical ideal end state of GIS organizational development • The maturity level of other peer GIS organizations, either individually or in aggregate • The maturity level of the subject organization over time • The maturity level of the organization against an agreed target state (perhaps set by organizational policy, budget limitations, etc.) What is meant by ‘Municipal GIS operations’? For this study municipal GIS operations refers to city or county agencies that are responsible for typical municipal government services as commonly defined in the United States. The term also implies an enterprise-wide view of GIS operations, as opposed to GIS as used within individual departments within a municipality. What is meant by ‘maturity’ in relation to municipal GIS operations? Maturity for the proposed model indicates progression of an organization towards GIS capability that maximizes the potential for the use of state of the art GIS technology, commonly recognized quality data, and organizational best practices appropriate for municipal business use. The Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model assumes two broad areas of GIS operational development: enabling capability and execution ability.
  • 3. PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 3 To clarify, maturity does not indicate old age. Maturity also does not necessarily mean that an organization excels at every aspect of GIS operations. Just like a mature person may have well developed athletic and math abilities, but intermediate cooking ability, and poor mechanical abilities, a mature GIS operation may excel at some of the characteristics inherent in GIS operations, but be less developed in others. However, this model assumes that there is a developmental ideal for GIS operations that any agency strives to achieve. This is similar to the classic Greek ideal of striving to excel at all of the intellectual, mechanical, and physical aspects of life. What are the characteristics of municipal GIS operations that are used to assess an agency’s maturity level? As indicated above, the Municipal GIS Capability Maturity Model is based on an assessment of both enabling capability and execution ability. Briefly, enabling capability can be thought of as the technology, data, resources, and related infrastructure that can be bought, developed, or otherwise acquired to support typical municipal GIS operations. Enabling capability includes GIS management and professional staff. However the ability (execution capability) of the staff to utilize the enabling technology at its disposal is subject to a separate assessment as part of the model. The components of the GIS CMM and the assessment categories The GIS Capability Maturity Model assumes that mature agencies have more well developed enabling technology and resources, and that their processes and practices maximize the effectiveness of their GIS infrastructure. Enabling capability includes technology components, data, professional GIS staff, an appropriate organizational structure, and other resources and infrastructure. Execution ability is the ability of the staff to maximize the use of the available capability, relative to a normative ideal. In the following GIS CMM questionnaire, the questions are categorized by enabling capability and execution ability. For each question, the respondent is asked to self assess their organization and provide comments. The enabling capability assessment scale is modeled after the State GIS Maturity Assessment. Because GIS enabling capability to some degree is dependent on resource availability, the State GIS Maturity Assessment Scale (with its resource-commitment focus) is well suited to indicating capability. The execution ability assessment scale is modeled after the typical CMM process-based five-level scale. Because the execution ability of a mature GIS organization depends on how well it performs in key process areas, the typical CMM assessment scale (with its focus on process execution sophistication) is well suited to indicating ability. The GIS CMM Questionnaire and the assessment process Once agencies complete the questionnaire, they will have a benchmark resource for future self assessments. Once the questionnaires are compiled and analyzed, the analysis will provide information for each agency to compare itself with. This analysis information will be provided to each agency that participates in the study. It will also be presented in aggregate at professional meeting and in papers. References Capability Maturity Model, Wikepedia Article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Capability_Maturity_Model Accessed 8/3/2009). Selena Rezvani, M.S.W., An Introduction to Organizational Maturity Assessment: Measuring Organizational Capabilities, International Public Management Association Assessment Council, ND. Jerry Simonoff, Director, IT Investment & Enterprise Solutions, Improving IT investment Management in the Commonwealth, Virginia Information Technology Agency, 2008. Curtis, B., Hefley, W. E., and Miller, S. A.; People Capability Maturity Model (P-CMM), Software Engineering Institute, 2001. Niessinka, F., Clerca, V., Tijdinka, T., and van Vlietb, H., The IT Service Capability Maturity Model, CIBIT Consultants | Educators, 2005 Ford-Bey, M., PA Consulting Group, Proving the Business Benefits of GeoWeb Initiatives: An ROI-Driven Approach, GeoWeb Conference, 2008.
  • 4. PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 4 Niessink, F. and van Vliet, H., Towards Mature IT Services, Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, ND. Gaudet, C., Annulis, H., and Carr, J., Workforce Development Models for Geospatial Technology, University of Southern Mississippi, 2001.
  • 5. PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 5 Name of Municipal GIS Organization: GIS Capability Maturity Model Score Card Enabling Capability Components For each question in the ‘Enabling Capability’ section, read the brief description. Check the implementation category that best describes your agency’s current status. Feel free to include any clarifying comments or questions. 1. Framework GIS Data The agency has access to adequate framework GIS data to meet its business needs. For the GISCMM, framework data is defined as NSDI framework layers (see: http://www.fgdc.gov/framework/). [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 2. Framework GIS Data Maintenance Data stewards are defined for each framework GIS data layer and the data is maintained (kept up to date) to meet business needs. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 3. Business GIS Data The agency has access to adequate business data (non-framework GIS data) to meet its business needs. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 4. Business GIS Data Maintenance Data stewards are defined for each business GIS data layer and the data is maintained (kept up to date) to meet business needs. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments:
  • 6. PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 6 5. Metadata Metadata is available and maintained for all framework and business data layers. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 6. Spatial Data Warehouse A spatial data warehouse is available for stewards to compile framework and business data and for GIS users to access data for GIS applications. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 7. Architectural Design An architectural design exists that defines the current state and planned future development of the technical infrastructure. The architectural design guides the investment in GIS technical infrastructure. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 8. Technical Infrastructure The technical infrastructure is in place to maintain and operate the GIS. Technical infrastructure includes hardware (servers, storage, desktops, input and output peripherals), network components, operating system, and GIS software. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 9. Replacement Plan A plan is in place and implemented to replace technical infrastructure components (hardware, network components, imagery) that have a defined ‘end of useful life.’ [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments:
  • 7. PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 7 10. GIS Software Maintenance Commercial GIS software is available to meet business needs and is under maintenance to ensure long term support and development. If open-source’ GIS software is used, an alternate support and development capability is available. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 11. Data back-up and security A computer back-up system is in place to ensure the security of GIS data and applications. The backup system is tested periodically by tests to restore sample data. System security is in place to control internal and external access to GIS data and applications as appropriate. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 12. GIS Application Portfolio A portfolio of custom or commercial off-the-shelf GIS applications is available to meet the business needs of GIS clients. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 13. GIS Application Portfolio Management The agency’s GIS application portfolio is managed to a common design and development framework. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 14. GIS Application Portfolio O&M The agency’s GIS application portfolio is kept viable via ongoing support and application maintenance. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments:
  • 8. PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 8 15. Professional GIS Management The agency GIS is managed by a dedicated, professional GIS manager. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 16. Professional GIS Operations Staff The agency GIS is operated and maintained by an adequate staff of GIS professionals. (For purposes of the GISCMM, adequate operational staffing is defined as meeting the ‘roles’ defined by the Geospatial Technology Competency Model – see: http://www.aag.org/Roundtable/Resources/gaudet-et-al-2003.pdf - table 4). [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 17. GIS Staff Training and Professional Development The agency GIS manager and other professional staff have access to on-going training to maintain and develop their technical and operational knowledge, skills, and abilities. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 18. GIS Governance Structure The agency has a formal GIS governance structure that links the GIS operation both to users (typically via a GIS technical committee or user committee) and to key decision makers (typically via an oversight committee). [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 19. GIS is Linked to Agency Strategic Goals The GIS exists as a defined organizational unit of the agency with a clearly defined role in supporting the strategic goals. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments:
  • 9. PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 9 20. GIS Budget The GIS unit develops a comprehensive budget that includes (at a minimum) labor, hardware, software, data, consulting, and training costs. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 21. GIS Funding The GIS unit has dedicated funding for (at a minimum) labor, hardware, software, data, consulting, and training costs. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments: 22. GIS Financial Plan The GIS unit has a financial plan that includes a funding model (where the money is coming from) and that also projects future episodic costs for equipment and imagery replacement. [ ] 1.00 Fully implemented [ ] 0.75 In progress with full resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.50 In progress but with only partial resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.25 Planned and with resources available to achieve the capability [ ] 0.00 This is not planned or it is planned but no resources are available Comments:
  • 10. PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 10 Execution Ability Components For each question in the ‘Execution Ability’ section, read the brief question and description. Check the implementation category that best describes your agency’s current status. Feel free to include any clarifying comments or questions. 1. Client Services Evaluation and Development How does the GIS unit evaluate agency business needs for GIS services and develop new client service requests? [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes [ ] Level Three: Defined processes [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes Comments: 2. Service Delivery Tracking and Oversight How does the GIS unit track, monitor, and evaluate client service delivery? [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes [ ] Level Three: Defined processes [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes Comments: 3. Service Quality Assurance How does the GIS unit ensure the quality of services provided to clients? [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes [ ] Level Three: Defined processes [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes Comments: 4. Application Development Methodology How does the GIS unit develop custom GIS applications? [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes [ ] Level Three: Defined processes [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes Comments: 5. Project Management Methodology How does the GIS unit manage projects for which it is responsible? Projects could be either executed in-house or by an outside contractor. [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes [ ] Level Three: Defined processes [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes Comments:
  • 11. PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 11 6. Quality Assurance and Quality Control How does the GIS unit assure a reasonable and appropriate level of quality for projects and for ongoing GIS system operation? System operations include database maintenance and spatial data warehouse processes. [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes [ ] Level Three: Defined processes [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes Comments: 7. GIS System Management How does the GIS unit manage the core GIS systems that it is responsible for? GIS system management includes system administration, database administration, network administration, system security, data backup, security, and restore processes, etc. [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes [ ] Level Three: Defined processes [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes Comments: 8. Process Event Management How does the GIS unit manage GIS system process events? Typical process events include planned hardware and software upgrades, unplanned hardware failure and data loss and restore events. [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes [ ] Level Three: Defined processes [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes Comments: 9. User Support, Help Desk, and End-User Training How does the GIS unit support end users, including user guides, help documentation, training, and ad-hoc help- desk and/or on-site support? [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes [ ] Level Three: Defined processes [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes Comments: 10. Contract and Supplier Management How does the GIS unit manage its purchasing and contracting processes to ensure the best value for the supplies and services that it acquires? [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes [ ] Level Three: Defined processes [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes Comments:
  • 12. PROPOSED URISA MUNICIPAL GIS CAPABILITY MATURITY MODEL QUESTIONNAIRE – PAGE 12 11. Regional Collaboration How does the GIS unit manage regional collaboration to ensure that opportunities to share in the development and operation of data, infrastructure, and applications are pursued, and that the agency’s GIS is leveraged to benefit other potential local partners? [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes [ ] Level Three: Defined processes [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes Comments: 12. Staff Development How does the GIS unit manage the process of developing its staff to ensure that individual staff member skills are developed appropriate to current and emerging technical and business needs? How does the GIS unit ensure that its staff resources meet its operational requirements for individual GIS competencies, including back- up and succession planning? [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes [ ] Level Three: Defined processes [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes Comments: 13. Performance Management How does the GIS unit manage performance, including both individual performance and the performance of the GIS unit as a whole? [ ] Level Five: Optimized processes [ ] Level Four: Managed and measured processes [ ] Level Three: Defined processes [ ] Level Two: Repeatable processes [ ] Level One: Ad-hoc processes Comments: Please provide any final general comments here: Thank you for participating in this survey. W:gbURISAMuniGISCMMURISA-MuniGISCMM-Draft-Questionairre.doc July 29, 2010