Difference between revisions of "DisasterResponse telecon 2016-11-03"
From Earth Science Information Partners (ESIP)
(Created page with " < Back to the Disasters Homepage<br> '''Organizers:''' Karen Moe, Dave Jones, Sean Barberie '''Agenda:''' * Planning for the winter meeting * Sessions submit...") |
|||
Line 25: | Line 25: | ||
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ||
==Notes== | ==Notes== | ||
+ | Attendees: Sean, Karen, Dave, Bob Chen, Bob Downs, Brian Wee, Erin, Ken Keiser, Maggi Glasscoe, Paul Lemieux, Tripp Corbett. | ||
+ | |||
+ | * To lead off Karen is discussing our proposed sessions a little bit. | ||
+ | * At the last meeting there was a strong discussion of keeping everyone updated by producing regular reports of new and newsworthy events. | ||
+ | * Hurricane Matthew response data options? Does Dave have some input on this? And can we come up with a timeline? | ||
+ | * The best way to do this may be through collaboration with the Disaster Lifecycle cluster and the AHC. Best to organize some discussion at the Winter meeting. | ||
+ | * We also want to re-introduce the idea of "what makes a trusted data source?" | ||
+ | * Q: in terms of data requirements, does Maggi have any input on what makes for data requirements in a disaster response scenario? | ||
+ | * A: Possibly, but only as case studies. The Napa Earthquake response is a good case study because it worked through the clearing house. So there is a fair amount to consider in terms of data sharing, information sharing, and tech development (e.g. the clearing house). | ||
+ | * Tripp input on D3M workshop: Workshop needed to deliver a prioritized list on which data products were immediately needed in which areas. So although they did form a firmer grasp of what was needed, the priorities were not set, and that is possibly a place where ESIP could play a role. | ||
+ | * ESRI just won a contract to stand up an arcgis server for data delivery in operational situations. Presents many opportunities for disaster response work. | ||
+ | * Can we hold a working-session during the winter meeting to get more info on what data is needed, who needs it, etc? | ||
+ | * We might be able to take that further by showing a use-case or two to give more direct info and clarity. | ||
+ | * How do we balance turn around time vs. data confidence? | ||
+ | * Can we identify two key use-cases to showcase in the meeting? | ||
+ | * Erin points out that, given the timing, it might be interesting to show snow and ice datasets available, since there will be a lot of snow in the northeast. | ||
+ | * ESRI has been working with NSIDC on the SMAP data products, so they might be able to provide some data or present. | ||
+ | * Brian Wee comments: there is a danger in generically discussing non-specific data sets or non-specific use-cases. Being too generalized keeps us from making real, actionable progress. | ||
+ | * Key outcomes from D3M workshop? | ||
+ | * It was a meeting that was attended by around 56 people. DHS FEMA attended. Investor owned utilities were there. Held at Edison Electric Institute. Hurricane Matthew was discussed. A number of private companies discussed what sort of data they needed to improve their situational awareness. | ||
+ | * Very positive responses. | ||
+ | * highly encouraging for us to continue this relationship: try to get investor-owned companies involved with ESIP, possibly through a series of ESIP webinars. | ||
+ | * This can all do a lot to further the visibility and influence of the ESIP federation. | ||
+ | * Need to plan a path forward that has multiple years in mind, while incorporating the feedback from private industry on what their needs are. | ||
+ | * We will have activities at the winter meeting to move in this direction. There is also a question about how to help reorganize ESIP to fit what these groups are asking. | ||
+ | * ACTION ITEM: take a step between now and the next meeting to come up with a use-case timeline for the ESIP meeting. | ||
+ | * Maggi comment: will look into exercise timelines and follow up over email. | ||
+ | |||
==Recording of Telecon== | ==Recording of Telecon== | ||
To access this and previously saved telecon recordings, click [https://esip.sharefile.com/app/#home/shared/fo871c56-e32f-42e4-a08b-5d8988e0f041 here]. Log in as guest@esipfed.org, password Earth111. | To access this and previously saved telecon recordings, click [https://esip.sharefile.com/app/#home/shared/fo871c56-e32f-42e4-a08b-5d8988e0f041 here]. Log in as guest@esipfed.org, password Earth111. |
Latest revision as of 15:26, November 3, 2016
< Back to the Disasters Homepage
Organizers: Karen Moe, Dave Jones, Sean Barberie
Agenda:
- Planning for the winter meeting
- Sessions submitted (Karen)
- Data Driven Decision Making Summary (Dave)
- NASA Disaster Application Goals (Dave)
- Pathway Forward for Cluster
- Continued discussion of data needs for disaster response and data driven decision making.
How to Join
Please join my meeting from your computer, tablet or smartphone. https://www.gotomeeting.com/join/691265765
You can also dial in using your phone.
United States: +1 (872) 240-3311
Access Code: 691-265-765
Notes
Attendees: Sean, Karen, Dave, Bob Chen, Bob Downs, Brian Wee, Erin, Ken Keiser, Maggi Glasscoe, Paul Lemieux, Tripp Corbett.
- To lead off Karen is discussing our proposed sessions a little bit.
- At the last meeting there was a strong discussion of keeping everyone updated by producing regular reports of new and newsworthy events.
- Hurricane Matthew response data options? Does Dave have some input on this? And can we come up with a timeline?
- The best way to do this may be through collaboration with the Disaster Lifecycle cluster and the AHC. Best to organize some discussion at the Winter meeting.
- We also want to re-introduce the idea of "what makes a trusted data source?"
- Q: in terms of data requirements, does Maggi have any input on what makes for data requirements in a disaster response scenario?
- A: Possibly, but only as case studies. The Napa Earthquake response is a good case study because it worked through the clearing house. So there is a fair amount to consider in terms of data sharing, information sharing, and tech development (e.g. the clearing house).
- Tripp input on D3M workshop: Workshop needed to deliver a prioritized list on which data products were immediately needed in which areas. So although they did form a firmer grasp of what was needed, the priorities were not set, and that is possibly a place where ESIP could play a role.
- ESRI just won a contract to stand up an arcgis server for data delivery in operational situations. Presents many opportunities for disaster response work.
- Can we hold a working-session during the winter meeting to get more info on what data is needed, who needs it, etc?
- We might be able to take that further by showing a use-case or two to give more direct info and clarity.
- How do we balance turn around time vs. data confidence?
- Can we identify two key use-cases to showcase in the meeting?
- Erin points out that, given the timing, it might be interesting to show snow and ice datasets available, since there will be a lot of snow in the northeast.
- ESRI has been working with NSIDC on the SMAP data products, so they might be able to provide some data or present.
- Brian Wee comments: there is a danger in generically discussing non-specific data sets or non-specific use-cases. Being too generalized keeps us from making real, actionable progress.
- Key outcomes from D3M workshop?
- It was a meeting that was attended by around 56 people. DHS FEMA attended. Investor owned utilities were there. Held at Edison Electric Institute. Hurricane Matthew was discussed. A number of private companies discussed what sort of data they needed to improve their situational awareness.
- Very positive responses.
- highly encouraging for us to continue this relationship: try to get investor-owned companies involved with ESIP, possibly through a series of ESIP webinars.
- This can all do a lot to further the visibility and influence of the ESIP federation.
- Need to plan a path forward that has multiple years in mind, while incorporating the feedback from private industry on what their needs are.
- We will have activities at the winter meeting to move in this direction. There is also a question about how to help reorganize ESIP to fit what these groups are asking.
- ACTION ITEM: take a step between now and the next meeting to come up with a use-case timeline for the ESIP meeting.
- Maggi comment: will look into exercise timelines and follow up over email.
Recording of Telecon
To access this and previously saved telecon recordings, click here. Log in as guest@esipfed.org, password Earth111.