1. 11/7/2011
ROI: King County Measures
the Benefits of GIS
2011 GIS-Pro Conference
November 2, 2011
Indianapolis, IN
Greg Babinski, MA, GISP
Finance & Marketing Manager
King County GIS Center
Seattle, WA
URISA President-Elect
Agenda
Introduction & background to the GIS ROI Study
GIS ROI Documentation Studies
2010 Oregon/King County GIS ROI Study
Preliminary Results
Next Steps
Discussion
1
2. 11/7/2011
ROI Estimates & Benefit-Cost Analysis
ROI Estimates & Benefit-Cost Analysis
Common tool for analyzing & configuring development
plans
Typically result in an estimate or forecast of business
benefits
2
3. 11/7/2011
King County,
Washington
Microsoft
Boeing
Paccar
Nordstrom's
Amazon
Starbucks
Port of Seattle
Weyerhaeuser
Population (1,931,000 (14th most populous US county)
Univ. of Washington
Area: 2130 square miles (sea level to 8,000’)
39 incorporated cities Google
Viable agricultural and private forestry areas Skype?
Remote wilderness & watershed lands
King County GIS - Development History:
Originated with 1992 PlanGraphics study
1992 Benefit Cost Analysis
1992-1994 King County – Seattle Metro merger
1993 joint King County – Metro GIS scoping
plan – reduced scope approved by King County
Council
1993-1997 GIS capital project executed
1997 KCGIS O&M begins
2002 KCGIS Consolidation implemented
3
5. 11/7/2011
King County GIS – 1992 GIS ROI Estimate
King County GIS – 1992 GIS ROI Estimate
5
6. 11/7/2011
2004 KCGIS Issue 4 Report:
Reduced budget delivered reduced scope
Only 15% of 126 applications completed via capital
project
Significant data deficiencies recognized
2004 – 2011 KCGIS Development:
500+/- desktop GIS users
100,000 annual internal web based GIS user sessions
2.2 million annual external web based GIS user sessions
50 GIS professionals
GIS use expanded from 12 to 35 county departments and
offices
6
7. 11/7/2011
GIS ROI Documentation Studies?
Why are they not required?
Why are they not performed?
GIS ROI Documentation Studies?
Baltimore County, MD
7
11. 11/7/2011
Oregon/KCGIS GIS ROI Study Project
Conceived during 2009 URISA AC in Anaheim
Approach finalized during 2009 ULA in Seattle
State of Oregon & King County joint funding
KCGIS 2010 Priority Initiative
Managed by KCGIS Center
KCGIS GIS ROI Study
May 2010 RFP sent to targeted consultants
June 2010 consultant selection
August 2010 contract signed
July 2010 work began
September & October 2011 Preliminary Results Released
11
12. 11/7/2011
KCGIS GIS ROI Study
Consultant Team from UW Evans School of Public Affairs:
Prof. Richard W. Zerbe
Danielle Fumia & Travis Reynolds
Pradeep Singh & Tyler Scott
KCGIS GIS ROI Study
Consultant Team from UW Evans School of Public Affairs:
Benefit-Cost Analysis Center
12
13. 11/7/2011
KCGIS GIS ROI Study
Consultant Team from UW Evans School of Public Affairs:
Society for Benefit-Cost Analysis
KCGIS GIS ROI Study
Scope of Work:
Literature Review
Qualitative Interviews (n = 30)
Quantitative Survey (n = 200)
Final ROI Report
Revised Interview/Survey Instruments for future studies
13
14. 11/7/2011
KCGIS GIS ROI Study
Methodology:
‘With versus without” research design.
What would have happened if KCGIS applications had not been
implemented and how is King County better off having them?
Literature review and qualitative interviews will identify key
benefits associated with GIS applications (e.g., increased
productivity).
Questionnaire will allow assessment of the extent to which these
benefits have been realized across different groups of users of GIS
applications, as opposed to what these users would have done in the
absence of GIS applications.
By comparing the “with and without” scenarios, we can assess and
monetize the added value of the GIS applications to compare to the
costs of implementation, maintenance, and/or additional training.
KCGIS GIS ROI Study
Current Status:
Interviews & Surveys completed:
Use Survey Monkey
Feed data base
Run excel based algorithms
Preliminary Benefits Report
14
15. 11/7/2011
KCGIS GIS ROI Study: Preliminary Results
30 Detailed Interviews Completed
175 Survey Responses (some partial responses)
KCGIS GIS ROI Study: Preliminary Results
PERTINENT SURVEY QUESTIONS
Please estimate the number of each output you currently produce (in 2010), being clear
about the time frame (per day, per year, etc.). Also state the total number of outputs
from your agency (if known), and the number of employees and full-time employees
(FTEs) currently working on producing this output.
If you answered that you did not produce a given output in the previous section, you may
skip the personal production questions.
• How many units of this output do you personally produce? Choose # of units:
• How many units of this output do you personally produce Per Unit of Time:
• What percent of your time do you spend producing each output now? (%)
• What percent of your time do you spend producing each output now: Per Unit of
Time:
• Number of Employees in your workgroup (including you) currently producing this
output:
• Total FTEs in your workgroup (including you) currently producing this output:
15
16. 11/7/2011
KCGIS GIS ROI Study: Preliminary Results
PERTINENT SURVEY QUESTIONS
Again, the outputs commonly produced by your agency are listed below in the first
column. If you were not present when the output was produced without GIS, please
answer No to the first question but provide your best estimate for the remaining
questions.
For each output, please indicate how having GIS has impacted labor productivity for you
personally and for your agency overall.
• Did you personally produce this output without GIS?
• How many units of this output did you personally produce prior to GIS? Choose # of
units:
• How many units of this output did you personally produce Per Unit of Time prior to
GIS:
• What percent of your time did you spend producing each output prior to GIS? (%)
• What percent of your time did you spend producing each output Prior to GIS: Per Unit
of Time:
• Number of Employees in your workgroup (including you) producing this output prior
to GIS:
• Total FTEs in your workgroup (including you) producing this output prior to GIS:
KCGIS GIS ROI Study: Preliminary Results
“An analysis of the survey responses indicate that overall the use of GIS
– compared to not having the GIS technology -- had a benefit of
$159.9 million per year.
“The benefits were further broken down into benefits received from
cost-savings and benefits received from increased productivity, which
was estimated to be $11.1 million and $148.8 million per year
respectively.
“We think it likely that the demand curve for GIS type output has
increased in recent year. If we allow for this, we estimate the gross
gains from increase in productivity and lower costs for pre-GIS output
to be $308.8 million per year.
“Thus a reasonable estimate of total gains is between $159.9 million
and $309 million per year. “
16
17. 11/7/2011
KCGIS GIS ROI Study: Preliminary Results
“Thus a reasonable estimate of total
gains is between $159.9 million and
$309 million per year. “
KCGIS GIS ROI Study: Preliminary Results
Results by Departments:
DNRP (except WTD): $87.44 million
Wastewater Treatment: $54.45 million
Department of Transportation: $18.76 million
Department of Assessments: (-)$2.7 million
Based on no increase in demand curve
17
18. 11/7/2011
KCGIS GIS ROI Study: Preliminary Results
Benefits with no shift in demand curve: $159.9 million per year
KCGIS GIS ROI Study: Preliminary Results
Benefits with shift in demand curve: $308.8 million per year
18
19. 11/7/2011
KCGIS GIS ROI Study
Future Steps:
Finalize Cost-Benefits Report
Determine ROI
Great interest within KC government
Compare with Twin Cities/Metro GIS Parcel Data ROI study
Compliment & Inform Multnomah County ROI study
Follow on FGDC CAP grants anticipated
URISA ROI Workshop development
Acknowledgement:
• State of Oregon GIS
• Richard O. Zerbe & UW GIS ROI Study Team
Comments & Discussion
19
20. 11/7/2011
Greg Babinski, MA, GISP
URISA President-Elect
SUMMIT Chief Editor
Finance & Marketing Manager
King County GIS Center
201 South Jackson Street, Suite 706
Seattle, WA 98104
206-263-3753
greg.babinski@kingcounty.gov
www.kingcounty.gov/gis
20
