Many of the most promising opportunities for applying government open data reside at the state, local, and tribal level. Local leaders understand their constituents’ needs and can use public data knowledgeably to address their concerns. Despite the potential benefits, however, too few state, local, and tribal governments have the data resources to fuel these kinds of innovative projects. The lack of data infrastructure is particularly pronounced outside of major urban areas.
A 2014-2015 survey by Governing magazine demonstrated the data challenges at the state level. Governing interviewed over 75 officials in 46 states between October 2014 and March 2015 to assess their view of the quality of government datasets. Every official they interviewed said that he or she encountered data quality issues, with 54 percent reporting facing such challenges frequently. These data quality issues are mirrored at the local and tribal level and reflect operational, legal, and technological barriers that will take dedicated investment for governments to overcome.
Several government programs are working with cities, tribes, and states to help build their technology capabilities and data resources. For example, the White House’s Smart Cities Initiative has invested $160 million in local governments around the country. Additionally, many of the various federal grant programs have data components. For example, Department of Health and Human Services grants provide funding for health data systems, Department of Justice grants provide funding for police data systems, and Department of Education grants fund the collection and publication of performance data.
However, these efforts lack cross-agency coordination. The result is that officials at all levels of government lack a clear vision of the data resources available. Furthermore, city, state, and tribal leaders who want to establish a comprehensive data management plan have agency-specific funding lines that make it difficult to implement data management best practices. The current grant structure makes developing a multi-year data management strategy more complex, which contributes to broader problems such as siloed databases and a lack of interoperability.
The Council on Financial Assistance Reform should conduct a 100-day National Data Infrastructure Review to identify these unique data grant programs, publish a comprehensive list, and make them easily searchable on grants.gov. This list will enable governors, mayors, and tribal leaders to better plan for data infrastructure development and management. It will support local leaders looking to move toward greater data standardization across their jurisdiction. In addition, it will provide models for data stewards across the federal government considering new grant programs to support local data.
State, local, and tribal government data should be a critical consideration in any national effort to improve data infrastructure, for two reasons. First, data collection and management systems themselves should be considered a key part of the infrastructure that modern cities need to run efficiently and effectively. Second, accurate, usable local data is essential to guide other infrastructure investments. Data on traffic flows and commuting patterns, for example, is critical to allocating investments in public transportation; planners must consider data on flood risk when designing construction in flood-prone areas; and engineers need data on energy usage patterns to guide decisions on power generation and energy supply.
Finally, accurate state, local, and tribal data can support evidence-based policymaking by providing information on the impact of different government programs. Better data at this level could strengthen the design and implementation of federal programs across all agencies.