Status Meeting with Federal Geographic Data Committee

Washington, DC — Department of the Interior

April 9, 1999

1:00 — 2:00 PM

Present: Bob Rugg, John Moeller, Barbara Poore

The purpose of the meeting was to review progress and discuss future plans regarding the contract agreement between UCGIS and FGDC.

1. Metadata teaching materials project. The project is going smoothly and FGDC is very pleased with the progress to date.
2. Workshop on factors affecting participation in NSDI. The West Virginia proposal was withdrawn as a result of the resignation of the proposed project director.
3. New project on Exploratory Studies of NSGIC/FGDC Framework Survey. Barbara had already prepared a draft RFP, which she previously shared with Greg and shared again at the meeting. She will send an electronic copy to Bob and he will circulate the draft for review and modification by the Research Management Committee, and then issue the RFP to UCGIS member institutions as soon as possible. Support for these studies will include funds previously allocated for the NSDI workshop plus additional funds set aside by FGDC for the current fiscal year. Two to three projects may be funded.
4. New project to develop an NSDI internship program. John mentioned his desire to set up an NSDI internship program and Bob asked how UCGIS could help. As a result of the discussion, John will explore the feasibility of funding a UCGIS specialist in GIS internships to work with FGDC over the coming summer to develop an NSDI internship program. Barbara will check on the legal feasibility of funding the summer salary and expenses of the specialist under the existing contract between FGDC and UCGIS.
5. Plans for workshop at the summer assembly. John and Barbara reacted positively to the plan to expand the workshop to include other Federal agencies. They offered numerous suggestions of agencies to be contacted and agreed to supply contact information for those not already on our list. John mentioned that he would eventually like to see a science advisory subcommittee of FGDC.
6. Review process. Barbara needs better information about the outcome of the review process in order to respond constructively to inquiries made directly to her. Bob agreed that FGDC should be given a confidential copy of the review summary produced by RMC, along with the recommended choice of an awardee for projects under this program. This way, RMC will continue to make the selection but FGDC will have access to the rationale for making the selection. FGDC does not need to review all proposals or participate directly in the selection of winning proposals. However, Bob made the offer that RMC would share proposals of similar merit with FGDC and invite their participation in the final selection. This offer was warmly accepted.
7. Standards activities. Bob mentioned the strong current interest in certification and, in this context, asked whether UCGIS could apply to FGDC for travel support to broaden academic participation in standards activities. John used a definite "no" in stating that FGDC will not fund travel to standards meetings for UCGIS as an organization. However, as in the past, FGDC subcommittees and working groups have discretionary funds that can be used to broaden participation in individual cases.
8. Funding level. John asked whether or not UCGIS approved of the current strategy of making small grants with limited time horizons. Bob stated that UCGIS was not in unanimity about this question, but that he was comfortable with the approach for two reasons: (a) it helps to focus UCGIS as an organization on applied research opportunities and (b) it gives UCGIS opportunities for short term successes that are important for establishing the reputation of a young organization.