NOAA Technical Information Series NESDIS
DSMR-00146 Version 1.0

doi: 10.25923/0s62-kd16

Data Stewardship Maturity Report for NOS Hydrographic Surveys Collection

<table>
  <tr>
    <th colspan="5">Table 1 Legend</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>Level 1</th>
    <th>Level 2</th>
    <th>Level 3</th>
    <th>Level 4</th>
    <th>Level 5</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>Ad Hoc</td>
    <td>Minimal</td>
    <td>Intermediate</td>
    <td>Advanced</td>
    <td>Optimal</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>Little or no management</td>
    <td>Limited Management</td>
    <td>Defined Management, partially implemented</td>
    <td>Well-defined Management, fully implemented</td>
    <td>Full Management, audited, measured, controlled</td>
  </tr>
</table>

<table>
  <tr>
    <th colspan="3">Table 1. Scores for the Nine DSMM Key Components at a Glance</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>Preservability - 5</th>
    <th>Accessibility - 3.5</th>
    <th>Usability - 5</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>Production Sustainability - 5</td>
    <td>Data Quality Assurance - 3</td>
    <td>Data Quality Control/Monitoring - 3.5</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>Data Quality Assessment - 3.5</td>
    <td>Transparency/Traceability - 2.25</td>
    <td>Data Integrity - 4.5</td>
  </tr>
</table>

NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information January 2020
Cover Image: Data Stewardship Rating Diagram for NOS Hydrographic Surveys Collection

Shades of green are used to represent level 1 through level 5 ratings; denoting Ad Hoc, Minimal, Intermediate, Advanced, and Optimal stages for each of the nine key components, respectively. The dark green level indicates all the practices are completely satisfied. The lighter green levels indicate only some of the practices are satisfied. The lightest green level indicates none of the practices are satisfied.

The stewardship maturity of NCEI data product, NOS Hydrographic Surveys Collection, is assessed based on a reference stewardship maturity framework. The current maturity ratings of NOS Hydrographic Surveys Collection are at Level 1 or higher for all nine key components with zero Level 1, one Level 2, four Level 3, one Level 4, and three Level 5 key components.
The National Environmental Satellite, Data, and Information Service (NESDIS) manages the Nation’s civil Earth-observing satellite systems, as well as global national data bases for meteorology, oceanography, geophysics, and solar-terrestrial sciences. From these sources, it develops and disseminates environmental data and information products critical to the protection of life and property, national defense, and the national economy, energy development and distribution, global food supplies, and the development of natural resources.

Publication in the NOAA Technical Memorandum series does not preclude later publication in scientific journals in expanded or modified form. The NESDIS series of NOAA Technical Reports is a continuation of the former NESS and EDIS series of NOAA Technical Reports and the NESC and EDS series of Environmental Science Services Administration (ESSA) Technical Reports.

Copies of earlier reports may be available by contacting NESDIS Chief of Staff, NOAA/NESDIS, 1335 East-West Highway, SSMC1, Silver Spring, MD 20910, (301) 713-3578.
ASSESSMENT REVISION HISTORY

<table>
  <tr>
    <th>Revision</th>
    <th>Description</th>
    <th>Date</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td>V01r00</td>
    <td>Initial Release</td>
    <td>12/16/2021</td>
  </tr>
</table>
NOAA Technical Information Series NESDIS DSMR-00146
Version 1.0
doi: 10.25923/0s62-kd16

Data Stewardship Maturity Report for NOS Hydrographic Surveys Collection

Lori Hager
NOAA's National Centers of Environmental Information (NCEI)
151 Patton Avenue, Asheville, NC 28801, (828) 271-4800

Recommended Citation

Lori Hager. (2021), Data Stewardship Maturity Report for NOS Hydrographic Surveys Collection
Table of Contents

List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... 7
Preface ............................................................................................................................... 8
1. Introduction .................................................................................................................. 9
2. Results ........................................................................................................................... 10
3. Acknowledgment ....................................................................................................... 15
4. References .................................................................................................................. 16
Appendix I  The Scientific Data Stewardship Maturity Matrix (DSMM) ......................... 17
List of Tables

Table 1. Scores for the Nine DSMM Key Components at a Glance  1
Table 2. Dataset and Data Stewardship Maturity Assessment Metadata  11
Table 3. Stewardship Maturity Levels and Detailed Justifications for Each of Nine DSMM Key Components for the Dataset.  12
Preface

In response to the President's Open Government Initiative and related policies, NOAA has committed to providing improved public access to all of its environmental information, to enable research and commercial innovation through ease of data discovery and use [Casey, 2016].

OneStop supports NOAA's efforts by leveraging existing access technologies and infusing specific innovations to provide improved discover, access, and visualization services for NOAA's data. Also, OneStop is viewed by a NESDIS as a pathfinder effort with an initial focus on selected high-priority datasets from NESDIS and other program data meeting OneStop standards, but eventually scalable across NOAA's data. Lastly, OneStop is implementing the USGEO Common Framework for Earth Observation Data and leveraging/supporting the NOAA Big Data Project (BDP) and Big Earth Data Initiative (BEDI) [Casey, 2016].

As with any process of improvement planning, agencies need to find out where they are in terms of their compliance to the federal regulations and what they need to do if any areas of non-compliance are identified. To this end, a unified framework would be beneficial for assessing the current stage of stewardship practices applied to individual datasets and for providing a road map that will guide future investments towards enhanced stewardship of environmental datasets. The value and quality of a dataset depends in part on the stewardship practices applied after its development and production. Therefore, a unified framework providing a holistic view of the quality of stewardship practices applied to individual datasets is beneficial to data stewards and users [Casey, 2016].

The Data Stewardship Maturity Matrix (DSMM), jointly developed by domain (data management, technology, and science) subject matter experts from NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI) and Cooperative Institute for Climate and Satellites – North Carolina (CICS-NC), provides such a consistent framework [Peng et al., 2016]. The DSMM, leveraging institutional knowledge and community practices and standards, defines a graduated maturity scale for each of nine key components of scientific data stewardship to enable a consistent assessment of the measureable stewardship practices applied to a given data set or product.

The NOAA Data Stewardship Maturity Technical Series captures stewardship maturity assessment results for individual datasets, provides consistent representation and citable documents of those assessments, ensures transparency, and allows better data quality information integration and content-based search and discovery of NOAA data.
NOAA Technical Information Series NESDIS DSMR-00146 Version 1.0

Data Stewardship Maturity Report for NOS Hydrographic Surveys Collection

1. Introduction

1.1 Purpose

The purpose of this document is to describe the results of stewardship maturity assessment for NOAA Climate Data Record for Mean Layer Temperature (Upper Troposphere & Lower Stratosphere from UCAR, Version 2, utilizing the Scientific Data Stewardship Maturity Matrix or DSMM [Peng, et al, 2016]. DSMM defines levels of stewardship maturity stages for Preservability, Accessibility, Usability, Production Sustainability, Data Quality Assurance, Data Quality Control/Monitoring, Data Quality Assessment, Transparency/Traceability, and Data Integrity key components. Each of these components is ranked from ‘Ad hoc’ to ‘Optimal’ (see Appendix I). This report is based on evaluation performed by NOAA OneStop metadata specialists working with Subject Matter Experts and utilizing the DSMM template [Peng, 2016].

1.2 Scope

Assessing stewardship maturity - the current state of how datasets are documented, preserved, stewarded, and made accessible publicly, is a critical step towards meeting U.S. federal regulations, organizational requirements, and user needs [Peng et al., 2016]. The goal of this document is to provide consistent and transparent stewardship maturity information to data users and decision-makers.

1.3 Dataset Abstract

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) has the statutory mandate to collect hydrographic data in support of nautical chart compilation for safe navigation and to provide background data for engineers, scientific, and other commercial and industrial activities. Hydrographic survey data primarily consist of water depths, but may also include features (e.g. rocks, wrecks), navigation aids, shoreline identification, and bottom type information. NOAA is responsible for archiving and distributing the source data as described in this metadata record. Survey types are B: Hydrographic EEZ Surveys; D: Discovery Surveys; H: Hydrographic Surveys; F: Field Edit Surveys; W: Non-NOS Hydrographic Surveys.
1.4 Document Maintenance

This document is generated and maintained by NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information. More on policy is available at https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/.

2. Results

The data stewardship maturity assessment information is summarized in Table 1. Each component is displayed along with its corresponding score in a color-coded table.
<table>
  <tr>
    <th colspan="2">Table 2. Dataset and Data Stewardship Maturity Assessment Metadata</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>Dataset Title</th>
    <td>NOS Hydrographic Surveys Collection</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>Dataset Information URL</th>
    <td>https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/metadata/geoportal/rest/metadata/item/gov.noaa.ngdc%3ANOS_Hydrographic_Survey_Collection/html</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>Data Provider POC (Name; Email; Affiliation)</th>
    <td>Logan Dodson, hydro.info@noaa.gov, NOAA Corps</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>Dataset POC (Name; Email; Affiliation)</th>
    <td>Logan Dodson, hydro.info@noaa.gov, NOAA Corps</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>SMM Version (Document ID and Version Number)</th>
    <td>NCDC-CICS-SMM_0001_Rev.1 12/09/2014</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>SMM POC (Name; E-mail; Affiliation)</th>
    <td>Ge Peng, ge.peng@uah.edu, University of Alabama-Huntsville</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>SMM Template Version (Document ID and Version Numbers)</th>
    <td>NCDC-CICS-SMM_0001_Rev.1 v4.0 06/23/2015</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>SMM Template POC</th>
    <td>Ge Peng, ge.peng@uah.edu, University of Alabama-Huntsville</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>SMM Assessment Version (v<nn>r<mm>, e.g., v01r00)</th>
    <td>v01r03</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>SMM Assessment Date (MM/DD/YYYY)</th>
    <td>08/19/2016</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>SMM Assessment POC (Name; E-mail; Affiliation)</th>
    <td>Robert P. Partee II, robert.partee@noaa.gov, NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>Stewardship Maturity Ratings (each key component) (kc1/kc2/kc3/kc4/kc5/kc6/kc7/kc8/kc9)</th>
    <td>5 / 3.5 / 5 / 5 / 3 / 3.5 / 3.5 / 2.25 / 4.5</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>SMM Original Assessment Date (MM/DD/YYYY)</th>
    <td>08/15/2016</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>SMM Original Assessment POC (Name; E-mail; Affiliation)</th>
    <td>Robert P. Partee II; robert.partee@noaa.gov; NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>SMM Last Modified Date (MM/DD/YYYY)</th>
    <td>11/19/2021</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>SMM Last Modification POC (Name; E-mail; Affiliation)</th>
    <td>Lori Hager, lori.hager@noaa.gov, CASE Consultants International</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>SMM Modified Date (MM/DD/YYYY)</th>
    <td>08/19/2016</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>SMM Modification POC (Name; E-mail; Affiliation)</th>
    <td>Robert P. Partee II; robert.partee@noaa.gov; NOAA National Centers for Environmental Information (NCEI)</td>
  </tr>
</table>
<table>
  <tr>
    <th>DSMM Key Component</th>
    <th>Stewardship Maturity Rating, Justification, and Comments</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><b>Preservability</b></td>
    <td>
      Level 5<br>
      • Archived by NCEI which is a NOAA designated archive compliant to NARA standards.<br>
      • Metadata following ISO 19115-2.<br>
      • Compliant to OAIS RM.<br>
      • Internal audits performed.<br>
      • Plans to update metadata to ISO 19115-1 at a later date and will be a pilot dataset for the OneStop initiative.<br>
      • Multiple access points provide several layers of redundancy.<br>
      Comments:
    </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><b>Accessibility</b></td>
    <td>
      Level 3.5<br>
      • Publicly available with direct file download: https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/maps/bathymetry/<br>
      • https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/hydro-survey-search/<br>
      • Collection and granule searchable via Hydrographic Survey Database Query: https://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/hydro-survey-search/<br>
      • New technology for OneStop search and discovery planned (i.e. ElasticSearch, HyRaix Servers, etc). This part of the OCS Hydrographic Survey data group that will be OneStop ready.<br>
      Comments:<br>
      Hydrographic Survey Data does not qualify for enhanced data server performance. Dissemination reports are not available.
    </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><b>Usability</b></td>
    <td>
      Level 5<br>
      • OCS community standard is GEODAS_H93, GEODAS_XYZ, GEODAS_A93, and XML.<br>
      • Data visualization capability:<br>
      • https://www.ncei.noaa.gov/maps/bathymetry/<br>
      • NOS Field Procedures Manual includes error estimates and is available online at https://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/publications/docs/standards-and-requirements/fpm/field_procedures_manual_2020.pdf<br>
      • Product and product algorithms. Links to manuals as well as other documentation available at Office of Coast Survey landing page under “Survey & Wrecks” tab: https://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/data/hydrographic-survey-data.html<br>
      • Hydrographic Survey Database Query allows for aggregated downloads (NEXT).<br>
      • The digital curation/stewardship is ranked in addition to the business and user needs of the dataset in this ranking report: https://communities.geoplatform.gov/ngda-portfolio/wp-content/uploads/2015/2015_Reports/NGDAID_45_Dataset_Report_20151231_NOS_Hydrographic_Surveys_Collection.pdf<br>
      Comments:
    </td>
  </tr>
</table>
<table>
  <tr>
    <th>DSMM Key Component</th>
    <th>Stewardship Maturity Rating, Justification, and Comments</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><b>Production Sustainability</b></td>
    <td>Level 5<br>
      • Long-term institutional commitment in place as evidenced by the 200+ years as an institution.<br>
      • There is commitment nationally and internationally from research community and demand is high for navigational products and services that ensure safe and efficient maritime commerce on America's oceans and coastal waters, and in the Great Lakes.<br>
      • The Coast Survey Development Laboratory explores, develops, and transitions emerging technologies and techniques of charting, hydrographic, and oceanographic systems used by the Coast Survey and safe and efficient marine navigation and healthy and sustainable coastal environment.<br>
      Comments:
    </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><b>Data Quality Assurance</b></td>
    <td>Level 3<br>
      • The data are considered raw and have not been subjected to NOAA's quality control or quality assurance procedures (Note: due to longevity of the the dataset, data from the past was not treated the same)<br>
      • The data has gone through a survey acceptance review (SAR) that makes sure the data meets the NOS Hydrographic Survey Specifications and Deliverables which are based on the International Hydrographic Organization (IHO) Standards for Hydrographic Surveys. The process is outlined in Chapter 5 of the Field Procedures Manual https://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/publications/standards-and-requirements.html<br>
      Comments:<br>
      No master reference data available. No data quality assurance information in the metadata. External review panel of experts in hydrographic surveying, vessel pilotage, port administration, tides and currents, coastal zone management, geodesy, recreational boating, marine transportation, and academia assist in improving NOAA's strategic plan to improve the nations' marine transportation system and NOAA's plans to support commerce with world-class products and services that will help ensure safe, efficient and environmentally sound marine transportation.DQA procedure is monitored and reported by Hydro Hot List Monitoring (See page 86 of the Field Procedures Manual: https://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/publications/docs/standards-and-requirements/fpm/field_procedures_manual_2020.pdf
    </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><b>Data Quality Control/ Monitoring</b></td>
    <td>Level 3.5<br>
      • Anomaly detection procedure is documented or outlined in this Field Procedures Manual: https://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/publications/docs/standards-and-requirements/fpm/field_procedures_manual_2020.pdf<br>
      • DQ control and monitoring procedures documented and available online. Check the documentation tab of the metadata landing page here: http://www.ngdc.noaa.gov/metadata/published/NOAA/NESDIS/NGDC/Collection/iso/xml/NOS_Hydrographic_Survey_Collection.xml<br>
      Comments:
    </td>
  </tr>
</table>
<table>
  <tr>
    <th>DSMM Key Component</th>
    <th>Stewardship Maturity Rating, Justification, and Comments</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><b>Data Quality Assessment</b></td>
    <td>Level 3.5<br>
      • Algorithm theoretical bases, research product, operational product, and quality metadata assessed<br>
      Comments:<br>
      No data quality information in the metadata record.
    </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><b>Transparency / Traceability</b></td>
    <td>Level 2.25<br>
      • Product information available in literature: https://nauticalcharts.noaa.gov/publications/docs/standards-and-requirements/specs/HSSD_2021.pdf<br>
      • Unique Object Identifier assigned: 8da482a1-9e29-4b3e-a801-ff8cf87a9136<br>
      • ATBD and source code online (Although not available locally)<br>
      • Dataset configuration managed.<br>
      Comments:<br>
      No DOI for the collection.
    </td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><b>Data Integrity</b></td>
    <td>Level 4.5<br>
      • A checksum is ran on every file to ensure that it is complete before it is archived.<br>
      • NCEI data integrity is verified at ingest.<br>
      • Conforms to data integrity technology standards.<br>
      • Data integrity is monitored at ingest and if it fails then NCEI teams are automatically notified.<br>
      • Data authenticity verifiable by requesting the nautical charts from<br>
      Comments:<br>
      Checksum is not verified when the user downloads the data.
    </td>
  </tr>
</table>
3. Acknowledgment

This work is supported by the NOAA OneStop Project.

We thank the dataset POCs for their valuable input, as well as the collaborative efforts of the OneStop teams, especially the Metadata team. We would also like to show appreciation to Ge Peng for her contributions.

The draft of this data stewardship maturity report is systematically generated by a tool created by Kieran Hodnett and populated with the stewardship maturity assessment done by the author(s) of this report. The tool was developed based on a Word template created collaboratively by Robert Partee II, Raisa Ionin, Paul Lemieux III, Ge Peng, Don Collins, and Sonny Zinn with helpful input from the NOAA Central Library and the NCEI Communication Team.
4. References

Casey, K. (2016), The NOAA OneStop data discover and access framework project, Version:June 3, 2016. https://cdn.ioos.noaa.gov/media/2017/12/OneStop-IOOS-DMAC-03-June-2016.pdf

Peng, G. (2015) The scientific data stewardship maturity assessment model template, Version: NCDC-CICS-SMM-0001-Rev.1 v4.0 6/23/2015. doi:10.6084/m9.figshare.1211954.

Peng, G., J.L. Privette, E.J. Kearns, N.A. Ritchey, and S. Ansari (2015), A unified framework for measuring stewardship practices applied to digital environmental datasets, Data Science Journal, 13, 231-253, doi: 10.2481/dsj.14-049.

Peng, G., J. Lawrimore, V. Toner, C. Lief , R. Baldwin, N. Ritchey, D. Brinegar, and S. A. Delgreco (2016) assessing stewardship naturity of the global historical climatology network-monthly (GHCN-M) dataset: use case study and lessons learned, D-Lib Magazine, 22, doi:10.1045/november2016-peng.
Appendix I: The Scientific Data Stewardship Maturity Matrix (DSMM)

Table A1: This matrix (Version: NCDC-CICS-SMM-0001-Rev.1. 12/09/2014) describes the criterion used to evaluate data stewardship maturity for each of the nine DSMM key components [Peng et al., 2015].

<table>
  <tr>
    <th>DSMM Component</th>
    <th>Level 1<br><i>Ad hoc</i><br>Little or no management</th>
    <th>Level 2<br><i>Minimal</i><br>Limited management</th>
    <th>Level 3<br><i>Intermediate</i><br>Defined management, partially implemented</th>
    <th>Level 4<br><i>Advanced</i><br>Well-defined management, fully implemented</th>
    <th>Level 5<br><i>Optimal</i><br>Full management, audited, measured, controlled</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><i>Preservability</i><br>(<i>The state of being preservable</i>)</td>
    <td>Any storage location<br>Data only</td>
    <td>Non-designated repository<br>Redundancy<br>Limited archiving metadata</td>
    <td>Designated archive<br>Redundancy<br>Community-standard archiving metadata<br>Conforming to limited archiving standards</td>
    <td>Level 3 +<br>Conforming to community archiving standards</td>
    <td>Level 4 +<br>Archiving process performance controlled, measured, and audited<br>Future archiving standard changes planned</td>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <td><i>Accessibility</i><br>(<i>The state of being searchable and accessible publicly</i>)</td>
    <td>Not publically available person-to-person</td>
    <td>Publically available direct file download (e.g., via anonymous FTP server)<br>Collection or dataset level searchable online</td>
    <td>Level 2 +<br>Non-standard data service<br>Limited data server performance<br>Granule/file level searchable<br>Limited search metrics</td>
    <td>Level 3 +<br>Community-standard data service<br>Enhanced data server performance<br>Conforming to community search metrics<br>Dissemination report metrics defined and implemented internally</td>
    <td>Level 4 +<br>Dissemination reports available online<br>Future technology and standard changes planned</td>
  </tr>
</table>
<table>
  <tr>
    <th>Usability<br>(The state of being easy to use)</th>
    <th>Extensive product-specific knowledge required<br>No documentation online</th>
    <th>Non-standard data format<br>Limited documentation (e.g., user’s guide online)</th>
    <th>Community standard-based interoperable format & metadata<br>Documentation (e.g. source code, product algorithm document, processing or/and data flow diagram) online</th>
    <th>Level 3 +<br>Basic capability (e.g., subsetting, aggregating) & data characterization overall/global, e.g., climatology, error estimates) available online</th>
    <th>Level 4 +<br>Enhanced online capability (e.g., visualization, multiple data formats)<br>Community metrics of data characterization (regional/cell) online<br>External ranking</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>Production Sustainability<br>(The state of data production being sustainable and extendable)</th>
    <th>Ad Hoc or Not applicable<br>To obligation or deliverable requirement</th>
    <th>Short-term Individual PI’s commitment (grant obligations)</th>
    <th>Medium-term Institutional commitment (contractual deliverables with specs and schedule defined)</th>
    <th>Long-term Institutional commitment<br>Product improvement process in place</th>
    <th>Level 4 +<br>National or international commitment<br>Changes for technology planned</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>Data Quality Assurance<br>(The state of data quality being assured)</th>
    <th>Data quality assurance (DQA) procedure unknown or none</th>
    <th>Ad Hoc and random<br>QA procedure not defined and documented</th>
    <th>DQA procedure defined and documented and partially implemented</th>
    <th>DQA procedure well documented, fully implemented and available online with master reference data<br>Limited data quality assurance metadata</th>
    <th>Level 4 +<br>DQA procedure monitored and reported<br>Conforming to community quality metadata & standards<br>External review</th>
  </tr>
</table>
<table>
  <tr>
    <th>Data Quality Control/ Monitoring<br><i>The state of data quality being controlled and monitored</i></th>
    <th>None or Sampling unknown or spotty<br>Analysis unknown or random in time</th>
    <th>Sampling and analysis are regular in time and space<br>Limited product-specific metrics defined & implemented</th>
    <th>Level 2 +<br>Sampling and analysis are frequent and systematic but not automatic<br>Community metrics defined and partially implemented<br>Procedure documented and available online</th>
    <th>Level 3 +<br>Anomaly detection procedure well-documented and fully implemented using community metrics, automatic, tracked and reported<br>Limited quality monitoring metadata</th>
    <th>Level 4 +<br>Cross-validation of temporal & spatial characteristics<br>Physical consistency check<br>Conforming to community quality metadata & standards</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>Data Quality Assessment<br><i>(The state of data quality being assessed)</i></th>
    <th>Algorithm/ method/model<br>Theoretical basis assessed (methods and results online)</th>
    <th>Level 1 +<br>Research product assessed (methods and results online)</th>
    <th>Level 2 +<br>Operational product assessed (methods and results online)</th>
    <th>Level 3 +<br>Quality metadata assessed<br>Limited quality assessment metadata</th>
    <th>Level 4 +<br>Assessment performed on a recurring basis<br>Conforming to community quality metadata & standards<br>External ranking</th>
  </tr>
  <tr>
    <th>Transparency/ Traceability<br><i>(The state of being transparent, trackable, and traceable)</i></th>
    <th>Limited product information available<br>Person-to-person</th>
    <th>Product information available in literature</th>
    <th>Algorithm Theoretical Basis Document (ATBD) & source code online<br>Dataset configuration managed (CM)<br>Unique Object Identifier (OID) assigned (dataset, documentation, source code)<br>Data citation tracked (e.g., utilizing Digital Object Identifier</th>
    <th>Level 3 +<br>Operational Algorithm Description (OAD) online, OID assigned, and under CM</th>
    <th>Level 4 +<br>System information online<br>Complete data provenance online</th>
  </tr>
</table>
<table>
  <tr>
    <th>Data Integrity<br>(The state of data integrity being verifiable)</th>
    <th>Unknown or no data ingest integrity check</th>
    <th>Data ingest integrity verifiable (e.g., checksum technology)</th>
    <th>(DOI) system Level 2 + Data archive integrity verifiable</th>
    <th>Level 3 + Data access integrity verifiable<br>Conforming to community data integrity technology standard</th>
    <th>Level 4 +<br>Data authenticity verifiable (e.g., data signature technology)<br>Performance of data integrity check monitored and reported</th>
  </tr>
</table>