![[logo] US EPA](http://www.epa.gov/epafiles/images/logo_epaseal.gif){kind=logo}
Environmental Information & Public Access Committee FY 98/99
INTRODUCTION
The purpose of this report is to document the activities, deliberations, and recommendations of the 1998 - 1999 National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology's (NACEPT) Environmental Information and Public Access Committee (EIPAC).
The EIPAC evolved from prior information management advisory committees housed under NACEPT. While each committee over the years assessed a variety of information management issues, the increasing use of technology within EPA continually created new and more complex issues, necessitating the value of continued information management assessment within the NACEPT process. Examples of recommendations submitted to the Agency over the past 4 - 5 years from the information committees include:
- Strategic planning for management of EPA's information resources;
- Better access to and dissemination of EPA's data and information;
- More and better integration of environmental information;
- Development and use of environmental statistics; and
- Strengthening the Agency's CIO position, its mission and authority.
During the tenure of the 1998 Environmental Information and Public Access Committee, the Agency announced (August 1998) and unfolded (December 1998) a major reorganization initiative for comprehensive information management. As a result, the Agency's information managers were focused on reorganization activities. While many of the changes considered by the Agency were based on recommendations from prior NACEPT information committees, EIPAC was encouraged to delay making further recommendations until the reorganization process was complete. This report is a summary of discussions that took place prior to the announcement of reorganization.
The original charge developed for the EIPAC (see Appendix 1) was intentionally broad to encompass statistical interpretation and uses of data as well as broad information policy and infrastructure issues. The goal was to address information management concepts that would enhance decision-making, accountability, and public access to data. Some of these issues were addressed by earlier committees as separate topics. However, there was recognition that information management is a continually evolving process and that EPA could benefit from the broad perspectives of external users of EPA data. These perspectives are invaluable to EPA's ability to intelligently manage its information and maintain technology relevance.
Two EIPAC meetings were held prior to the announcement of the comprehensive information management initiative at EPA. During these meetings, committee members identified aspects of the charge that could benefit from immediate input from stakeholders. In addition, the Agency requested the Committee focus its initial efforts on EPA's newly established Center for Environmental Information and Statistics (CEIS). The EIPAC then concentrated on:
- Goals for CEIS;
- The CEIS customer survey and its results;
- Access to environmental data and information through CEIS; and
- The relationship of CEIS to the overall Agency information management framework and its budget.
The committee discussed the following issues and developed the recommendations presented here for the Agency's consideration.
SUMMARY OF DELIBERATIONS
(Place wheel and spokes graphic here.)
EPA managers provided committee members with an overview of information
management at EPA and presented several examples of public access
and information management projects. During their initial discussion
of information management issues, members indicated their hope
that EIPAC recommendations would have measurable impacts on the
Agency and that EPA would attempt to measure these effects and
subsequently provide feedback to stakeholders. EIPAC members also
felt that several of the issues identified during the presentations
were duplication of subjects being addressed by other advisory
committees. The committee understood its role as one "spoke on
the wheel" of many stakeholder groups that advise the Agency (See
Information Stakeholder Wheel). Therefore, the EIPAC wanted to
avoid duplication of efforts.
The EIPAC members identified three information issues relevant to EPA that would benefit from additional stakeholder input. These issues pertain to CEIS and other Agency information programs:
- Data Quality
- Public Access and Use
- Intergovernmental Coordination.
Initially the committee expected to address these issues in separate workgroups. However the members realized that the issues were very interrelated and relevant for all members' input.
SUMMARY OF EIPAC ISSUES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Issues of both substance (see above) and process (how to effectively
advise the Agency) were of major concern to the members. In addition,
the committee members felt that a dialog with key senior managers
of EPA's IRM offices was essential for effective development of
recommendations for the Agency.
In response to a request from EPA to address CEIS issues, the
Committee examined the context of CEIS in: a) public access initiatives,
b) data suitability, data gaps, data quality, and c) the overall
management of EPA information and information resources. As a
result, the committee offered the following comments and recommendations
to CEIS and other IRM programs:
A. Public access initiatives:
The CEIS and other information projects must be sensitive to the
need to provide information to the public in a variety of media
and methods. Not all segments of society have access to computers.
CEIS should have available paper documents, videos, ad campaigns,
etc. - all of which contribute to providing environmental information
to the various segments of America's population. CEIS should consider
having state/local "branch" offices or partners.
A review of the CEIS website generated the following comments:
- A web site and other documents should be provided in other languages, especially Spanish;
- Distribution of information would be most cost-effective at local levels; a web site should be developed with a centralized, primary source of data/information that could be printed or down loaded at local libraries, universities, labs, etc.
- The CEIS website address should be added to other web sites for linkages.
- The Committee offered the following goals for CEIS and other public access projects within EPA:
- Enhance community capacity to participate in environmental decisions;
- Understand how data are used in decision making - internal to EPA and also to local communities, businesses, and industry who use the data for their decisions on environmental issues and quality;
- Increase data use in empowering communities and community development/consensus processes.
B. Data suitability and data gaps:
The Committee recommended that:
- data limitations be explained in various ways to a variety of audiences who may, or may not, be familiar with statistics;
- IRM planning and management be more centralized to ensure consistent data standards and compatibility with secondary uses;
- CEIS should take the lead in developing standards and types of data collected.
The Committee agreed to continue to review the process and findings of the CEIS data gaps/suitability study.
C. CEIS within EPA's overall management of information and information resources:
The Committee members suggested that CEIS should develop a more detailed and organized work plan. They suggested that the plan include current and proposed budget information for each of the CEIS programs. Plans should also include the CEIS budget and goals in context with the overall EPA IRM budget and goals.
The CEIS should develop a 3 - 5 year marketing plan. The plan should address CEIS as a "national referral center" of environmental information or a federal "environmental information broker." This would help establish its role in managing environmental information across and in cooperation with other federal agencies.
The members repeatedly and strongly suggested the need for consistency across information programs and policies. An evaluation of major information projects and policies across the Agency would help place the CEIS in context for its role in the Agency.
D. Other Agency issues:
The Committee recognized that progress has been made in the Agency in many of these areas. But they also felt that efforts made by information management and program staff are compromised by a lack of coordination, duplication, and competing or diminishing resources. Members voiced the need for the Agency to identify where EPA's various IRM functions reside and the organizational design needed to most efficiently manage information. Members requested an explanation of the extent of the authority the CIO has over agency-wide data policy. They also urged the Agency to continue to elevate IRM management issues to senior level managers.
To better understand EPA's information issues, activities, and approach to information management, the Committee developed the following matrix, with the intent to "fill in the blanks" in subsequent EIPAC meetings:
| # | Issue Area | Responsible Office | What is EPA doing? | What is Needed? | Recommendations |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 |
|
OIRM/Project Offices/Regional Offices/States |
REI? | Accurate Data/100% current | |
| 2 |
|
||||
| 3 | Regional/State/Local Roles | ||||
| 4 | Public Involvement/Process/Policy/Methodology | ||||
| 5 | Accountability Mechanisms/Performance Measures |
The matrix provided a prioritization of IRM issues that the Committee members wanted to address in subsequent meetings. It also provided an opportunity to identify who within the Agency is responsible for those issues and activities. The matrix included an area for additional development of EIPAC recommendations. Because the work of the EIPAC was curtailed shortly after this initial matrix was developed, the Committee did not refine the matrix, nor were they able to add detailed recommendations.
UNFINISHED EIPAC BUSINESS
The above matrix provides a structure of issues for deliberation by future information management advisory committees. The Committee strongly feels that ongoing stakeholder involvement (advisory committees being one mechanism) is essential to improving and maintaining data quality and public access to EPA's environmental data.
The Committee recommends that an ongoing information management advisory committee be established to provide advice and recommendations to EPA and its new organization for comprehensive information management.