Personal tools
You are here: Home Grants Grants Archives Report Format for Metadata Implementation Projects
Document Actions

Report Format for Metadata Implementation Projects

Category 1: 2004

NSDI Cooperative Agreements Program
Metadata Implementation Project
Interim and Final Project Report Format



Indicate Agreement Number:
Indicate whether Interim or Final Report

List:
Organization: Name, address, Web address
Project Leader: Name, telephone, email
List (if appropriate) collaborating organizations: Name, point of contact, address, Web address

In writing the report keep in mind the goals for this project category are that metadata becomes a standard operating practice through metadata training, metadata creation experience and organizational support; and that the resulting metadata is harvestable through the Geospatial One-Stop Portal at http://www.GeoData.gov. This is achieved through one of the following options: a registered Clearinghouse server, Open Archives Initiative Protocol (OAI-PMH) or FGDC browse-enabled Web Directory.

Project Narrative
Summarize the project activities. Include its accomplishments, successes strengths and weaknesses, further challenges, and collaboration activities as appropriate. What are the organizational practices that have developed to support metadata creation and maintenance for the future?

Measurable Project Results:

  • The number of individuals capable of creating metadata
  • The number of metadata files or datasets documented

Describe metadata service

  • Indicate how metadata is served or posted
  • Indicate how many metadata entries were created
  • Indicate if you need assistance in providing for metadata service

Next Steps (if appropriate)

  • Describe the next phase in your project
  • Are there issues in metadata management and service
  • Requirements (more technical assistance, software, other?)
  • What areas need work?

Feedback on Cooperative Agreements Program:

  • What are the program strengths and weaknesses?
  • Where does the program make a difference?
  • Was the assistance you received sufficient or effective?
  • What would you recommend doing differently?
  • Are there factors that are missing or need to consider that were missed?
  • Are there program management concerns that need to be addressed? Time frame?
  • If you were to do this again, what would you do differently?
Last Updated: Apr 09, 2007 07:57 AM
Spinner Image