1. The NGGDPP Five Year Plan: A Community Discussion Justin Hagerty, Working Group Chair 107 th Annual AASG Meeting

2. The Working Group (Nov. 2014)  Brian Buczkowski, USGS, Woods Hole Science Center  Cindy Evans, NASA, Astromaterials Acquisition and Curation Office  Jim Faulds, AASG, Nevada Bureau of Mines and Geology  Justin Hagerty (Chair), USGS, Astrogeology Science Center  Viv Hutchison, USGS, Core Science Analytics and Synthesis  Adam Mansur, Smithsonian, National Museum of Natural History  John Metesh, AASG, Montana Bureau of Mines and Geology  Anders Noren, Univ. Minnesota, Continental Scientific Drilling Office  Richard Ortt, AASG, Maryland Geological Survey  Kelly Rose, DOE, National Energy Technology Laboratory  John Yellich, AASG, Michigan Geological Survey

3. The Charter  Goal  Goal: Advise the NGGDPP on a Five Year Plan  Scope and Objectives  Evaluate Program accomplishments relative to Implementation Plan  Re-evaluate the split between Federal and State components  Assess technological developments since implementation  recommend Program improvements/initiatives  Develop short- and long-term priorities  Recommend outreach/marketing improvements  Duration and Deliverables  Meet for a period of one year, deliver a final report in Nov. 2015 to Betty Adrian

4. Community Feedback  Surveys  SurveyMonkey questions  Email questionnaire  Results  Themes from email responses  discussion topics (later)  SurveyMonkey  9 questions total (some are just for program statistics)  What state?  Proposed before?  Received funding?  19 total responses many with detailed comments

5. Community FeedbackCont. Survey Results (19 states responded)  Question #2 = Primary users?  Question #3 = Types of Collections?  Question #4 = Maintain a collections database?  Question #5 = Largest impediment?  Question #8 = Are proposal objectives appropriate?  Question #9 = Rate your experience with the program

6. Community Feedback Cont.  Topics of Interest for today  Strengths and weaknesses of the program  The proposal process  mix of requirements and efficiency  Data rescue, Inventory, digital infrastructure, metadata  What should the Program be doing that it isn’t?  What shouldn’t the Program be doing that it is?  Technological advancements that should be funded  Current funding levels  Bricks and mortar  Suggestions for improvement

7. Suggestions for Improvement  Funding and Match Enhance funding Reduce match Fund fewer but larger projects? Fund infrastructure to enable preservation  Proposal-Project Format Allow manager’s involvement Flexibility for changes in scope – emergency rescues  Infrastructure Development Currently prioritizes achiving materials over creating environment for keeping materials safe – allow for physical infrastructure Regional libraries Web applications for access to collections  Collaboration and Communication Establish short set of preservation and archival guidelines Webinars on best practices and success stories Annual report

8. More questions and/or input?  Points of Contact:  Justin Hagerty (chair)  jhagerty@usgs.gov (928)-556-7173  Jim Faulds  jfaulds@unr.edu (775)-682-8751  John Metesh  jmetesh@mtech.edu (406)-496-4159  Richard Ortt  richard.ortt@maryland.gov (410)-554-5503  John Yellich  john.a.yellich@wmich.edu (269)-387-8649