Issue Archive: March 2006

Mapped Ali: A Coordinated Effort

Author: Richard Kelly

Having a 9-1-1 program that coordinates the development of its Geographic Information Systems (GIS) map data in concert with the Master Street Address Guide (MSAG), and in conjunction with other agencies and organizations, can make the difference in having a successful resolution of a 9-1-1 call requiring the call taker to know exactly where the caller is. Many times this process requires coordinated effort between a combination of local interests and other jurisdictions, as well as State and Federal government entities. Part of this process is being able to handle and integrate diverse data sets and/or formats, as well as establishing effective data development standards for your agency.

Good coordination practices encourage improved data accuracy, developing a knowledgeable support network, and more cost-effective solutions to mapping problems. They also can lead to the establishment of standards for an entire group of entities rather than a single one. Good coordination can pave the way for ease of merging datasets from neighbors, which in itself can lead to increased data sharing and exchange, and they can be directly responsible for a reduction in volume of mistakes and errors.

Developing a Maintaining Data

In a nutshell, a PSAP takes a 9-1-1 calls and refers to a digital or printed map to determine the caller’s location. As technological advances provide PSAPs with instant access to local maps for call takers, the demand for complete and accurate data is proving to be a significant challenge to 9-1-1 entities across the nation. While a county or city with a large population and significant resources can typically provide fairly complete and accurate maps for their 9-1-1 systems, the vast majority of jurisdictions, particularly rural ones, are looking for ways to accomplish their mission with whatever assets they can muster. But where can you go and what can you do when confronted with minimal funding, few internal resources, and quite often, limited technical expertise?

The answer in many cases is not where to go, but rather who is—and who should be—involved in developing and maintaining the 9-1-1 mapping system data, as well as how everyone’s role is to be coordinated. Getting everyone who has a stake in maintaining the data is crucial to establishing an accurate and up-to-date mapping system. Fostering better lines of communications with outside interests can go a long way toward achieving this goal.

Set Your Guidelines

Creating a reliable and sustainable 9-1-1 mapping systems database poses numerous challenges. Chief among them is making sure that whatever data currently are in use for 9-1-1 call location is compared to the MSAG for both completeness and accuracy. Completeness is an ongoing task that is not only “filling in the blanks” of existing maps data but also keeping up new additions where streets and structures need to be added to the base map. Aside from completeness, accuracy is the single problem when determining proper call location information on most mapping solutions. In order to address this task in a timely and organized fashion, many 9-1-1 mapping programs must overcome limitations in their funding, staffing levels, and available “in-house” resources, including knowledge and training-level deficiencies.

The first step to ensuring that data are created correctly is to establish a set of standards or guidelines that outline exactly how the fields and attributes should be formatted in you GIS data. At this point a common question is, “Why do I need data standards when I know what I’m doing with my data?” There are several reasons why this is a crucial concern to any 9-1-1 mapping effort.

Adopting and following a set of data development guidelines will allow for the ready exchange of data with neighbors. This is becoming very important in today’s wireless age, where a cellular caller is moving from one jurisdiction to another during a call and a single jurisdiction’s data may not be enough. Remember, while having an “edge-of-the-world map” that covered only your jurisdiction—anything beyond the local cell tower (as is common in Phase I calls). It’s becoming common practice for jurisdictions to seek out their neighbor’s data resources in an effort to address these needs. Unless data sets are developed in th4e same format, it will be difficult to use them together in the same map.

Quality Control

Consistently following a single set of standards will provide more data continuity for your agency, as well as relieve staff training burdens and improve workflow understanding in the future. This is also the key to supporting effective quality control (QC). Establishing good QC procedures for 9-1-1 map data development is critical. Find out the location of your data and map out where you need to go with regard to your existing data. Work with responsible staff to determine realistic capabilities and goals for revising/updating existing data.

After establishing where your data stands and how much work your staff can process, develop a plan based on capabilities and work to be done. You’ll need to compare street centerlines to the MSAG to verify consistency and correlation. Check the street names first, followed by address range and parity, and then community/emergency service network (ESN) affiliation. You’ll need to adjust the street centerline data to match the MSAG, or vise versa, and check the relationship by geocoding test ALI data against street centerlines. Use errors between the two to correct the ALI or GIS databases. Once this is complete, concurrency must be maintained between the GIS data and the MSAG. Remember, if everyone follows a set of data development standards, errors can be reduced.

Data Development

In most systems the minimum data needed in ALI address matching and plotting on a map is a street centerline file, with high and low ranges for each side of the street and/or an address. Additional common data layers that can be used are community and ESN boundaries, water features, PSAP extents, railroads and airfields, landmarks/attractions, wireless towers, and sectors/footprints and imagery. Imagery—digital aerial photography—is becoming popular for PSAP digital map displays as public domain access becomes more common in every state. Imagery provides an unparalleled display of visual information that is intuitive and user-friendly. It can also be the best source from which to create other data—such as street centerlines—or from which to align existing map layers.

The downsides to using imagery technology are: it can be confusing when other data layers used are not lined up; it is outdated as soon as it is captured; and it can be cost-prohibitive for some organizations that need to purchase it. Before using imagery with existing map layers in a GIS, it is advisable to check for proper graphics alignment. Another layer that should be checked is address points for unclear point proximity—they should be within close proximity to the structure they represent on the imagery.

Another potential problem with map graphics is street direction flow—direction from start to end point on a line in comparison to address ranges flow—then “breaks” in street segments occur and there are boundary alignment problems. Comparing and matching street versus MSAG addressing methodologies and correlation is the single most important QC issue. Variations in syntax can make a good map virtually worthless to 9-1-1 mapping systems due to mismatches. A good rule of thumb to follow is that the GIS data should match the naming format in the MSAG. Choose a naming convention format and stick with it, be careful of extra spaces and periods, and watch for variations in street names.

This is also where “buffered” addressing methods (a “100” block range is shown as 100 – 199 even though the last address may be 117) and “real/potential” addressing (a “100” block range only reflects the actual addresses on the ground such as 100-117) can be checked for large anomalies. Legacy data issues refer to discrepancies between the MSAG entries and the GIS data. Discrepancies between map files and MSAG should be reconciled as soon as possible. Only complete data sets will ensure a good hit rate on the map. Data attributes need to be complete and consistent and unknown/missing data need to be identified and filled in.

The ESN layer also needs to be reviewed. Verification with representatives from fire, law, and EMS responders can be challenging but needs to be done. Once the boundaries of the ESNs are verified, check each ESN for roads with the same name and range. Only after developing a process to validate your data for completeness and accuracy—and in conjunction with the MSAG—can you have a reasonable expectation that most incoming calls with ALI will be plotted on your map.

A National Set of Standards

Data development and coordination work doesn’t need to be done in a vacuum. NENA is working in partnership with the Urban and Regional Information Systems Association (URISA) to establish a national set of standards by which 9-1-1 records should be created and maintained. Many states have 9-1-1 commissions or coordinating bodies that have established 9-1-1 GIS data development Best Practices guidelines, such as the Texas Commission on State Emergency Communications. Many regional planning councils and districts coordinate between multiple local governments to better develop data sets that follow a single standard and are subsequently more easily exchanged between neighbors. Some regional governments have even launched efforts to establish a statewide geodatabase design from a grass roots user level. Finally, local groups can form planning committees, councils, and user groups to help gain consensus and support for a wide range of initiatives.

Cooperative purchasing to leverage aggregated local dollars and maximize purchasing capabilities is provide a strong incentive to get groups to work together toward acquiring badly needed and usually expensive data sets and/or services. Federal agencies (U.S. Geological Survey and the Department of Agriculture), state agencies (data centers and land management and transportation departments), regional governments and water authorities), and even some private sector interests actively participate in this process. Street centerline data and address points are important to many of these entities. Many addressing coordinators, city planning departments, county appraisal districts, transportation departments, utility departments, disaster management officials, state agency users, and the U.S. Bureau of the Census rely on current street centerline data in their GIS systems.

Funding

Data acquisition can also occur through budget sharing and revenue generation via grants, consortiums, data updating partnerships, and service provisioning. Grants are one of the easiest ways to acquire supplemental funding, but can also be time-consuming because of the required research and grant proposal application process. Many software companies have grant programs to get new mapping operations up and running, or enhance existing ones, by providing copies of their GIS and mapping software applications. In many cases the only requirement is that the customer pays for recurring maintenance.

Since 9/11, state and federal agencies have offered homeland security funding, which has typically been used for response equipment and training. GIS data development, and the establishment of resources required to generate and maintain it, can also be eligible for grant funding. Consortiums (groups of business partners usually bound together through agreements or contracts) have been formed in numerous states between local governments and even the private sector in an effort to determine and meet the data needs of all partners.

The private sector has a continual need for data generated and maintained by local 9-1-1 entities and planning departments (street centerlines being the primary example). Organizations such as national data warehousing firms have instituted “Data Updating Partnerships” where they provide numerous enhanced data resources back to local governments in exchange for a regular supply of locally updated map files. Finally, some enterprising local entities have gone into the business of services provisioning (such as Web site development and custom data analysis) and developing value-added products from their existing data files. In turn, they sell them and the revenues are then used to support their programs. In some very successful cases, they have been transitioned from government-funded to financially-independent organizations. The legal limitations on some of these endeavors may be restricted by specific state and local government statutes, so do some research before launching into any of these courses. The good news is that much can be learned about these types of programs by simply browsing the Internet and contacting the organizations which are successfully running these programs.

A Regional Approach

Once you have built and are maintaining your map, what does the future hold? While the main focus of most PSAPs is getting a mapping system up and running, many entities that maintain these maps are finding a number of benefits to developing a regional approach to map administration. Enterprise GIS management at the county, regional, state and national levels is quickly becoming the driving force behind joint data development. Multi-jurisdiction data sharing for 9-1-1, as well as homeland security work, is a growing demand. A successful data exchange network requires good coordination of people and resources. The foundations of which are: (1) having a set of standards in which GIS data is developed by all partners; and (2) having a data exchange infrastructure in place to facilitate the easy interchange of data between partners. A data exchange network can be localized as a LAN (Local Area Network) between city departments or up to a statewide WAN (Wide Area Network). Transmission of map data through one of these networks is typically through secure lines such as a frame relay. However, recent advances in security technologies such as firewalls and encryption algorithms are making the use of  internet protocols—considered in the past a risky and open or exposed transmission medium—more viable, particularly with the rise of technological sophistication at today’s PSAPs.

While everything discussion in this article may seem like a lot to contend with, keep in mind that virtually everyone across the country is trying to find more efficient ways to deal with 9-1-1 map data development. Remember that to improve your capabilities in developing/maintaining GIS/map data, foster better lines of communication with outside interests as well as within your own organization with data standards and good quality control processes. Get familiar with your and your neighbors’ data; work with new and different types of data formats. Keep in mind that different data sets from the same geographic area, developed independently from each other, could be confusing when used together if not checked beforehand. There are usually alternatives for program support and funding, so do your research and consider creative partnerships. When you improve your channels of communication and coordination, you improve your 9-1-1 location capabilities in the long run!

Richard Kelly is GIS sales engineer for Plant Equipment, Inc. (Temecula, CA). Before coming to Plant in 2004, he was director f Planning Information Services as well as GIS manager at the Capital Area Planning Council in Austin, TX. Richard has a bachelor’s degree in cartography and photogrammetry, and a mater’s in applied geography, concentration in GIS, from Southwest Texas State University. He can be reached at (512) 670-2749 or via e-mail at rkelly@penic.com.

The Bottom Line

To improve your capabilities in developing/maintaining GIS/map data:

• Foster better lines of communication with outside interests
• Establish data standards and good quality control processes
• Be familiar with your and your neighbors’ data
• Be familiar with your and your neighbors’ data
• Be aware and able to work with new and different types and formats of data
• Remember that different data sets from the same geographic area, developed independently from each other, could be confusing when used together if not checked beforehand
• Remember that quality control of 9-1-1 map data development is critical
• There are usually alternatives for program support and funding if you do your research and consider creative partnerships
• Improve your channels of communication and coordination and you will improve your 9-1-1 location capabilities.

 

[Sidebar]

A Sample of Typical 9-1-1 Oriented GIS Grants

Current and Recent Programs

• 2005 Department of Homeland Security Commercial Equipment Direct Assistance Program (www.esri.com/grants/nonesri/05048_dhs.cedap.html)

• NSDI Cooperative Agreements Program (www.fgdc.gov/funding/funding.html)
• 2005 Department of Education Emergency Response and Crisis Management Grant Program (www.esri.com/grantas/past/2005-past/05061_doe.html)
• The Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (http://12.46.245.173/cfda/cfda.html)

**This is an example of grant research portal that can be used to locate potential funding from the Federal government.

 

Other Past Programs

• 2005 ESRI and International Association of Fire Chiefs, Fire GIS Leadership Grant Program
• ESRI Local Government Start-up Program
• MapInfo E-Government Grant Program
• 2004 ODP Homeland Security Grant Funding