HomeMy WebLinkAboutGMI_Report2022_FinalPage 1Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
Geospatial Maturity
Index Report
An Analysis of GIS Programs
in North America
2022
Page 2Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
The survey is organized into three sections reflecting the core competencies
of a GIS program:
The Readiness section
of the survey explores
the capability of an
organization to establish
and sustain a GIS
program, with funding
and staff capacity, as
well as buy-in from senior
management and council.
Readiness Implementation Impact
The Implementation
section examines the
availability of tools,
processes, and data
to support robust GIS
programming.
The Impact section of
the survey measures the
benefits that the GIS
program has yielded for
both the organization
and the public.
Introduction
The 2022 Geospatial Maturity Index (GMI) is the fourth year that PSD Citywide has
published its benchmarking study for GIS programs. The GMI survey is a tool for public
sector organizations to measure the maturity of their GIS (geographic information system)
programs and serves as a resource to guide participants in advancing their programs.
Page 3Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
97
Total Participants
GMI 2022
A total of 97 organizations completed the 2022 GMI survey. Among the participants were 72
organizations from Canada and 25 from the United States. Organization types represented
included upper tier, lower tier, and single tier municipalities, police services, public utilities,
provincial government organizations, and conservation authorities.
Canadian Organizations
United States Organizations
72
25
Participation by Country:Participation by Organization Size:
Public Sector Participation:
• Upper Tier Municipalities
• Lower Tier Municipalities
• Single Tier Municipalities
1-50
51-200
201-500
501-1,000
1,001+
• Police Services
• Public Utility Organizations
• Provincial Government Organizations
North America’s Top 25 GIS Programs
For the first time in GMI history, two organizations have tied in earning the first place
ranking. Among 97 organizations, Halifax Regional Municipality, Nova Scotia and the City
of Burnaby, British Columbia have received the title of Top GIS Programs in North America,
with scores of 96.7%. City of Mississauga, Ontario and City of Irvine, California also tied to
receive the third-place rankings, each receiving a score of 95.6%.
3%
26%
21%
31%
19%
Page 4Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
Rank Score Organization Province / State Org. Size
1 96.67%Halifax Regional Municipality NS 1,001+
1 96.67%City of Burnaby BC 1,001+
3 95.56%City of Mississauga ON 1,001+
3 95.56%City of Irvine CA 1,001+
5 95.00%The City of Calgary AB 1,001+
6 94.44%City of Hamilton ON 1,001+
7 92.22%King County GIS Center WA 1,001+
8 91.67%Strathcona County AB 1,001+
9 91.11%County of Newell AB 51-200
10 90.56%District of North Vancouver BC 501-1,000
11 90.00%City of Winnipeg MB 1,001+
12 87.22%Miami-Dade County FL 1,001+
12 87.22%City of Round Rock TX 1,001+
14 86.67%Ville de Montréal QC 1,001+
15 86.11%City of Edmonton AB 1,001+
16 84.44%City of Seattle WA 1,001+
17 83.89%Coral Gables IT FL 501-1,000
18 83.33%Toronto Police Service ON 1,001+
18 83.33%City of Cupertino CA 201-500
20 82.78%City of Grande Prairie AB 501-1,000
21 82.22%City of Longview TX 501-1,000
21 82.22%City of Kitchener ON 1,001+
23 81.11%Regional Municipality of Peel ON 1,001+
24 78.89%City of Wenatchee WA 201-500
25 78.33%District of Kitimat BC 201-500
GMI 2022’s results have yielded the most diverse Top 25 Ranking results to date. Overall,
six provinces and five states are among the top performing GIS programs. United States
GMI participation skyrocketed from only six participants in 2020 to 25 participants in 2022,
taking up nine spots in the Top 25 list.
Large municipalities dominated the GMI ranking this year, with 17 participants from the
1001+ organization size filling up the top spots. An honourable mention goes out to the
County of Newell, Alberta who was the only 51-200 organization size in the Top 25 Ranking,
receiving a score of 91.1% and finishing ninth overall. The Toronto Police Service is another
organizational highlight, being the only non-municipality to secure a spot on the Top 25
Ranking, ranking 18th overall.
Page 5Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
Halifax Regional Municipality, Nova Scotia
Ranking: 1st (tie) | Score: 96.67%
Halifax Regional Municipality’s GIS Department exists
within the organization’s IT department and has dedicated
training and resources towards team members and its GIS
program overall. The use of GIS has become widespread
within the organization with the Asset/Infrastructure
Management, Planning Services, IT Services, Public
Works, Emergency Services, Engineering, Finance, Parks &
Recreation, Energy and Environment, Transit, and Municipal
Clerk/Council departments all using GIS. Halifax Regional
Municipality received their highest overall category score in
the Readiness category with a score of 98.3%, followed by
96.3% in the Impact category and 95.5% in the Implementation category.
Halifax Regional Municipality’s GIS Department has taken GIS innovation to the next level by
integrating automated analysis processes to solve problems. Notably, the GIS Team created
the Sidewalk Rating Tool in 2022 to help the Public Works business unit with their annual
capital sidewalk program. The Tool combines a number of geoprocessing and reporting
tools to assess all candidate locations across the municipality, which has resulted in crucial
time savings for staff. Prior to the tool, each manual assessment of a sidewalk candidate
location took approximately 10 minutes to complete. With the tool, average processing time
diminished to 8.5 seconds. Additionally the GIS team developed a Voter/Population Tool
that helps determine number of electors and population boundaries of the organization’s 16
districts.
Halifax’s Regional Municipality’s GIS Department prioritizes the growth of their division by
recognizing that their reliance on GIS will only continue to expand. As of 2022, the team has
more staff in the GIS department than ever before, and they are currently in the process of
hiring more GIS specialists for the department. Over the next five years, Halifax Regional
Municipality hopes to continue to work towards becoming a Centre of GIS Excellence by
leveraging automation tools and maximizing the effectiveness of their resources.
98.31%
Readiness Score
95.52%
Implementation Score
96.30%
Impact Score
96.67%
Overall Score
Page 6Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
City of Burnaby, British Columbia
Ranking: 1st (tie) | Score: 96.67%
The City of Burnaby’s GIS Department demonstrates how
GIS programming supports and enhances government
services and enables organizations to innovate and grow.
In 2022, the City of Burnaby received a perfect score in
the Implementation category, followed by 96.6% in the
Readiness category and 92.6% in the Impact category.
The City of Burnaby’s GIS Department works seamlessly
with other departments within the organization, particularly
with the Engineering and Park and Recreation departments.
GIS staff members have extensive knowledge of data visualization, data management, GIS
data integration into external software systems, and GIS software development. Additionally,
a large portion of staff have completed the BCIT Advanced Diploma in GIS which includes
training in commercial and open source GIS solutions. Further, the GIS Department takes
pride in offering continued training on a quarterly basis through webinars, workshops, and
online courses as the team continues to grow.
The City of Burnaby’s GIS Department was heavily relied upon during the early days of the
Pandemic to create dashboards for COVID-19 cases. The City of Burnaby’s GIS Department
also received the MISA BC Spirit of Innovation Award in 2022 after municipalities were
legislated to provide infrastructure information within three days of a BC OneCall or “Dial
Before You Dig.” Previously, a request could take several hours or days depending on the
scope of the request. The Department developed an in-house solution that provides the
information within 3 minutes.
Looking towards the future, Burnaby’s GIS Department foresees continued growth and
innovation within the department and the organization as a whole. The Department hopes
to make more use of 3D GIS and augmented reality, and leverage machine learning in future
endeavors.
96.61%
Readiness Score
100%
Implementation Score
92.59%
Impact Score
96.67%
Overall Score
Page 7Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
County of Newell, Alberta
Ranking: 9th | Score: 91.11%
The County of Newell consistently tops the GMI survey
for organizations of their size and overall has consistently
ranked in the Top 25. Although the County of Newell has a
smaller GIS department located within its IT Department,
the County has nonetheless made effective use of its
resources and skills to earn a ninth place ranking this year.
They received their highest overall score in the Readiness
category with with a score of 94.9%, followed by 91% in the
Implementation category, and 87% in the Impact category.
The County of Newell has actually reduced the number of staff in their GIS department,
despite the organization’s increased use of GIS. The County remarked that “by leveraging
existing tools and technology, we have been able to reduce the number of GIS staff, have
grown the program, and increased customer satisfaction.” The County of Newell’s GIS
program maintains both internal and externally partnerships, collaborating with a number of
different departments within the organization and establishing strong external partnerships
with nonprofit organizations, local businesses, other levels of government, and neighboring
municipalities.
The County’s most successful GIS project in the last few years was the adoption of data
collection in the field. 2022 was the first year that the County had all its field staff, including
summer students, collecting GIS data in the field. The amount and types of data collected
increased with this expanded use. This was all accomplished without increasing the workload
of the County’s GIS staff.
94.92%
Readiness Score
91.04%
Implementation Score
87.04%
Impact Score
91.11%
Overall Score
Page 8Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
Toronto Police Service
Ranking: 18th | Score: 83.33%
The Toronto Police Service is the only non-municipal
organization to earn a Top 25 Ranking this year. They
received their highest overall score in the Readiness
category with with a score of 91.5%, followed by 90.7%
in the Impact category, and 70.1% in the Implementation
category.
GIS staff within Toronto Police Service are employed
within the Analytics & Innovation Unit, which is part of
the Information Technology Command. The GIS Team is
known as the Analytics Centre of Excellence (ANCOE) and is relatively new compared to
other organizations’ GIS teams, but has made remarkable progress and yielded positive
results since being created. GIS is used organization-wide by Toronto Police Services and is
especially useful for providing officers with live data through a mobile application designed
for smartphones.
The ANCOE team has extensive GIS training and qualifications while also providing training
to staff outside of the “core” team so that GIS knowledge and its value can be shared
extensively across the organization. The Toronto Police Service’s GIS team maintains strong
partnerships with external organizations, including other policing organizations, as well as
engaging in internal collaboration with the organization on a weekly basis.
Over the next five years, the ANCOE team hopes to grow and implement mobile application
development while increasing data-sharing agreements and integration with different levels
of government and policing agencies.
91.53%
Readiness Score
70.15%
Implementation Score
90.74%
Impact Score
83.33%
Overall Score
Page 9Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
Survey Highlights
Scores
The overall GMI score among survey respondents for 2022 was 62.4%, up from 61.2% in
2020 and 59.5% in 2019. While the Impact category still yielded the lowest average score
for respondents as in previous years, average scores in both the Implementation and Impact
categories have increased, demonstrating improvement in more advanced areas of GIS
competency by survey participants.
62.38%
Average Overall Score
66.33%
AverageImplementation Score
64.21%
Average Readiness Score
55.48%
AverageImpact Score
2022202020192018
Readiness Implementation ImpactOverall
0%
10%
30%
20%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
52%52.3%53.6%55.48%
59%61.4%63.6%66.33%
54%
63.5%65%64.21%
56%59.5%61.2%62.38%
Page 10Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
Top Performing Organizations by Type:
The role of GIS programs in optimizing geospatial data is invaluable to many public sector
organizations, not just municipalities. The participation by non-municipal organizations
provides insight into the maturity of GIS programs by organizations such as law enforcement
and public utilities, as well as providing real-world examples of different ways in which
geospatial data and information can be used.
The Toronto Police Service ranked 22nd in 2020, jumping four spots this year to finish 18th
with a score of 83.33%. The Toronto Police Service has optimized the use of geospatial
information to create a Public Safety Data Portal and is working towards greater integration
with different levels of policing agencies to become a leader in Police and Public Safety GIS.
Upper tier, lower tier, and single tier municipal survey respondents were all represented
in the Top 25 GIS Ranking. While first-place participants, the City of Burnaby and Halifax
Regional Municipality, both represent single tier municipalities, upper tier municipalities
received the highest overall survey scores on average among all organization types. One
outlier, however, is the average Impact score of conservation authorities and police services,
who scored considerably higher on average in this category than municipalities.
Upper Tier
Municipality
Lower Tier
Municipality
Single Tier
Municipality
King County
GIS Center
City of
Irvine
City of
Mississauga
City of
Burnaby
Halifax
Regional
Municipality
Canadian Local Government US Local Government Non-Municipal
City of
Irvine
Toronto
Police Service
City of
Burnaby
Halifax
Regional
Municipality
Page 11Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
Single Tier Municipality:
63.17%
Readiness Score 66.20%
Implementation Score 54.79%
Impact Score
61.79%
Overall Score
Lower Tier Municipality:
65.17%
Readiness Score 63.58%
Implementation Score 55.37%
Impact Score
61.64%
Overall Score
Upper Tier Municipality:
71.80%
Readiness Score 73.54%
Implementation Score 57.24%
Impact Score
68.08%
Overall Score
Province/State/Federal Government Organization:
62.71%
Readiness Score 69.15%
Implementation Score 57.41%
Impact Score
63.52%
Overall Score
Law Enforcement/Police Service:
58.90%
Readiness Score 70.90%
Implementation Score 65.74%
Impact Score
65.42%
Overall Score
Conservation Authority/Agency/Organization:
62.71%
Readiness Score 56.72%
Implementation Score 72.22%
Impact Score
63.33%
Overall Score
Page 12Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
Survey results show that on average, larger organizations received higher overall scores
than smaller organizations. For all organization sizes, the Impact category was the lowest
scoring category among survey participants, while the Implementation category was the
highest scoring category for four out of the five population groups.
Top Performing Organizations by Staff Size:
City of King City County of Newell City of Cupertino
District of North Vancouver
Halifax Regional Municipality & City of Burnaby
1-50 51-200 201-500 501-1,000 1,001+
1-50:
55.37%
Readiness Score 61.19%
Implementation Score 46.30%
Impact Score
54.81%
Overall Score
51-200:
49.42%
Readiness Score 52.30%
Implementation Score 35.93%
Impact Score
46.44%
Overall Score
501-1,000:
69.94%
Readiness Score 66.85%
Implementation Score 61.70%
Impact Score
66.32%
Overall Score
201-500:
58.98%
Readiness Score 60.00%
Implementation Score 46.30%
Impact Score
55.56%
Overall Score
1,001+:
77.29%
Readiness Score 82.44%
Implementation Score 74.88%
Impact Score
78.48%
Overall Score
Page 13Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
20%
52%
28%
89%
11%
North American Trends in GIS
The GMI survey is a unique opportunity to learn about GIS trends facing public sector
organizations. Through exploring and analyzing results from each category, the survey
provides examples of how GIS departments are utilizing GIS data to service the public
and improve internal processes, challenges they currently face, and areas for growth
and improvement.
Readiness
GIS Foundations
Formal GIS Department GIS Strategic Plan GIS Data Policy
Yes
No
Yes
In Progress
No
Yes
No, but workflow methodology is in place
No, we do not have workflow methodology or policy in place
The Readiness category of the GMI survey examines critical performance indicators of an
advanced GIS department including a GIS strategy or masterplan, geospatial data policy,
dedicated departmental staff, and technology and training.
44%
38%
18%
Page 14Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
Staff Capacity of Current and Future GIS Operations:
61.86%
41.24%
Current Deliverables:
61.86% of participants stated that they have sufficient number of
staff to maintain their organization’s current GIS deliverables
Future Deliverables:
41.24% of participants stated that they have sufficient number of
staff to maintain their organization’s future GIS deliverables.
The largest proportion of survey respondents
(36%) reported having two to five full-time
GIS staff members, followed by 30% of
organizations who reported only having 0-1
full time staff. These results indicate that
GIS programs are still significantly small
departments compared to other public
sector departments. Despite small program
sizes, 61.9% of survey respondents reported
that they have enough staff to meet current
GIS deliverables. However, only 41.2% of
respondents reported having enough staff to
meet future deliverables.
Among survey participants, a strong majority of 88.6% of respondents reported having a
formal GIS department or team. However, only 38.1% of respondents reported having a GIS
Strategic Plan in place and 20% of respondents reported having a GIS Policy. Municipal
organizations had the highest percentage of respondents who reported having a GIS
Strategic Plan and Policy compared to non-municipal organizations. Among municipal
organizations, larger organization sizes were more likely to have a Plan in place, however, our
results indicated that there is no correlation between size of organization and the existence
of a GIS Policy.
On average, organizations who reported having a GIS Strategy and GIS Policy received
higher GMI survey scores overall, followed by organizations who reported having a Strategy
and Policy in progress. Organizations who reported no GIS Strategy or GIS Policy received
the lowest GMI survey scores on average overall.
Full-Time GIS Staff
0-1
2-5
6-10
11-25
26-20
51+
30%
36%
6%4%
8%
16%
Page 15Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
Implementation
The Implementation section of the GMI survey explores the availability of resources to
support GIS departments and the roles and responsibilities of GIS programs overall. The
majority of survey respondents (97%) reported having commercialized software to support
GIS solutions. Only 19% of respondents, however, indicated having a data security policy
in place. GIS data policies establish guidelines and requirements for managing geospatial
information and can include standards surrounding data sharing, data maintenance, and
data ownership. Data security policies were most commonly reported by organizations with
staff sizes of 1001+, with 43.3% of these organizations having one. Survey respondents
who reported having a GIS data policy scored significantly higher on average (86.51%) than
organizations who did not (53%).
GIS Data Catalogue Data Security Policy GIS Software
All layers catalogued
Some layers catalogued
No
Yes
In Progres
No
Proprietary Commercial
Software
Hybrid
36%
14%
33%19%97%
3%
31%67%
Page 16Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
Impact
Partnerships with External Organizations:
Partnerships with external organizations are opportunities for GIS programs to optimize
their initiatives and support other organizations in achieving industry-specific goals and
objectives. The majority of survey respondents (85.6%) reported the existence of external
partnerships. The most common collaboration type was with other levels of governments,
followed closely by neighbouring municipalities. Respondents reported the least amount
of external collaboration with local businesses. In terms of internal collaboration, survey
respondents reported that collaboration most commonly (28% of respondents) takes place
on an ad hoc basis, followed by 25% of respondents who reported internal collaboration on
a monthly basis.
Furthermore, collaboration with senior management is another important form of
engagement for GIS departments to build awareness and corporate buy-in for their short-
and long-term goals. 16.5% of survey respondents reported meeting with senior management
on a quarterly basis and 7.2% reported engagement on a monthly basis. However, the largest
proportion of survey respondents (49.5%) reported that their GIS departments meet with
senior management only on an ad-hoc basis.
0
10
30
20
40
50
60
70
80
Academic Institutions Non- Profit Organizations Local Businesses Other Levels of Government Neighbouring Municipalities
Page 17Geospatial Maturity Index Report | 2022
GIS Communications Plan
The objective of a GIS Communications Plan is to
communicate the benefits and value of GIS data,
and by extension, GIS programs and departments. A
Communications Plan is both a tool and resource to
increase awareness and understanding of organizations’
GIS initiatives in an effort to maximize the impact that
GIS data has within the organization and the general
public. Among other resources such as GIS Master Plans
and Data Policies, the uptake of GIS Communication
Plans is still limited within the sector, with only a small
percentage (13.5%) of survey respondents reported
having one. A Communications Plan was most commonly
reported by organizations with a size of 501+. Survey
respondents who reported having a Communication
Plan scored significantly higher on average (85.4%)
than respondents who do not have one (54.2%).
The Impact section also explores the extent to which public sector organizations provide
formal GIS training. Providing training to municipal staff and the public on how to interpret
geospatial data and use GIS technology is one of the most direct ways in which GIS initiatives
can be maximized. 74.2% of survey respondents reported that formal training is provided to
internal users, while only 47.4% of respondents reported formal training available to external
users. When training is provided, the majority of survey respondents (58.8%) reported that
training is provided on an ad-hoc basis. A small percentage of survey respondents (21.7%)
reported no formal training is provided at all.
Yes
In Progress
No
18%
69%
13%
Conclusion
As the value of geospatial information increases year over year in supporting organization-
wide decision-making, so too does the importance of GIS programs. When asked the biggest
GIS challenges facing their organizations, survey respondents provided a variety of answers
including lack of staff awareness and buy-in, cost of implementation and resourcing, and
maintenance of data, among others.
Despite these challenges, results of the 2022 GMI Survey have shown progress among
public sector organizations in the maturity of GIS programs in North America. Since
2018, average overall scores have grown steadily and for the first time in GMI history, the
Implementation sector of the survey had the highest overall score, demonstrating a greater
prioritization of tools and resources to better support GIS programming than in previous
years. As organizations rely more greatly on geospatial data, we hope to see even more
budgets, time, and capacity dedicated to GIS programs and departments to reach their goals
and objectives.
www.psdcitywide.com
+1 519-690-2565
@psdcitywide.com