Each dataset provides monthly data at the national level of Social Security Retirement Insurance applications filed via the Internet, and Social Security Retirement Insurance applications submitted via telephone, in person through a local SSA field office, or by mail that could be filed via the Internet. Percentage of online applications is derived by dividing the number of retirement insurance applications filed via the Internet by the total number of retirement insurance applications that could be filed via the Internet.

This statistic displays the findings of a survey on the impact of online data collection by government agencies on residents' trust in the European Union (EU-28) in March 2015. During the survey, it was found that 11 percent of respondents reported that such data collection by government agencies had a positive impact on their trust in how their online personal data is used.

The data asset provides a link to all Change of Address Applications filed via the Internet datasets. Each dataset provides monthly volumes at the national level from federal fiscal year 2008 on for Internet Change of Address. The dataset includes only Internet Change of Address transactions. It should be noted that, in addition to using our online Change of Address application, the public might change an address by calling our 800 number, visiting a field office, or mailing us the request. This dataset pertains only to the online alternative.

An April 2023 survey of Americans found that around 47 percent of the respondents believed the government tracked their online behavior daily. A further 46 percent thought companies did the same. Approximately three in ten respondents thought their data was being tracked weekly.

Progress Needed on Identifying Expenditures, Building and Utilizing a Data Infrastructure, and Reducing Duplicative Efforts The federal government collects, maintains, and uses geospatial information—data linked to specific geographic locations—to help support varied missions, including national security and natural resources conservation. To coordinate geospatial activities, in 1994 the President issued an executive order to develop a National Spatial Data Infrastructure—a framework for coordination that includes standards, data themes, and a clearinghouse. GAO was asked to review federal and state coordination of geospatial data. GAO’s objectives were to (1) describe the geospatial data that selected federal agencies and states use and how much is spent on geospatial data; (2) assess progress in establishing the National Spatial Data Infrastructure; and (3) determine whether selected federal agencies and states invest in duplicative geospatial data. To do so, GAO identified federal and state uses of geospatial data; evaluated available cost data from 2013 to 2015; assessed FGDC’s and selected agencies’ efforts to establish the infrastructure; and analyzed federal and state datasets to identify duplication. What GAO Found Federal agencies and state governments use a variety of geospatial datasets to support their missions. For example, after Hurricane Sandy in 2012, the Federal Emergency Management Agency used geospatial data to identify 44,000 households that were damaged and inaccessible and reported that, as a result, it was able to provide expedited assistance to area residents. Federal agencies report spending billions of dollars on geospatial investments; however, the estimates are understated because agencies do not always track geospatial investments. For example, these estimates do not include billions of dollars spent on earth-observing satellites that produce volumes of geospatial data. The Federal Geographic Data Committee (FGDC) and the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) have started an initiative to have agencies identify and report annually on geospatial-related investments as part of the fiscal year 2017 budget process. FGDC and selected federal agencies have made progress in implementing their responsibilities for the National Spatial Data Infrastructure as outlined in OMB guidance; however, critical items remain incomplete. For example, the committee established a clearinghouse for records on geospatial data, but the clearinghouse lacks an effective search capability and performance monitoring. FGDC also initiated plans and activities for coordinating with state governments on the collection of geospatial data; however, state officials GAO contacted are generally not satisfied with the committee’s efforts to coordinate with them. Among other reasons, they feel that the committee is focused on a federal perspective rather than a national one, and that state recommendations are often ignored. In addition, selected agencies have made limited progress in their own strategic planning efforts and in using the clearinghouse to register their data to ensure they do not invest in duplicative data. For example, 8 of the committee’s 32 member agencies have begun to register their data on the clearinghouse, and they have registered 59 percent of the geospatial data they deemed critical. Part of the reason that agencies are not fulfilling their responsibilities is that OMB has not made it a priority to oversee these efforts. Until OMB ensures that FGDC and federal agencies fully implement their responsibilities, the vision of improving the coordination of geospatial information and reducing duplicative investments will not be fully realized. OMB guidance calls for agencies to eliminate duplication, avoid redundant expenditures, and improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the sharing and dissemination of geospatial data. However, some data are collected multiple times by federal, state, and local entities, resulting in duplication in effort and resources. A new initiative to create a national address database could potentially result in significant savings for federal, state, and local governments. However, agencies face challenges in effectively coordinating address data collection efforts, including statutory restrictions on sharing certain federal address data. Until there is effective coordination across the National Spatial Data Infrastructure, there will continue to be duplicative efforts to obtain and maintain these data at every level of government.https://www.gao.gov/assets/d15193.pdfWhat GAO Recommends GAO suggests that Congress consider assessing statutory limitations on address data to foster progress toward a national address database. GAO also recommends that OMB improve its oversight of FGDC and federal agency initiatives, and that FGDC and selected agencies fully implement initiatives. The agencies generally agreed with the recommendations and identified plans to implement them.

Each dataset provides monthly data at the national level for initial Social Security Disability Insurance (SSDI) applications filed via the Internet. The dataset includes only SSDI initial receipts. SSDI initial receipt represent a worker in covered employment long enough and recently enough to be "insured", earning paid Social Security taxes. Social Security work credits are based on total yearly wages or self-employment income. The amount needed for a credit change from year to year. The number of work credits needed to qualify for disability benefits depends on age at disability onset. Generally, 40 credits are needed, 20 of which were earned in the last 10 years ending with the year of disability onset.

This statistic displays the findings of a survey on the awareness of data collection by government agencies for the purpose of national security in the European Union (EU-28) as of March 2015. During the survey, it was found that 49 percent of respondents had not heard of revelations about such data collection.

Scroll to Data and select Download to create an csv/xslx download of the data.

Technical Specifications and Instructions pertaining to the data collection are available at the following link: https://vsp.virginia.gov/sections-units-bureaus/bass/criminal-justice-information-services/uniform-crime-reporting/#LE-agency-and-vendor-information

A data collection consisting of all traffic and investigatory stops made in Virginia as aggregated by Virginia Department of State Police. https://law.lis.virginia.gov/vacode/title52/chapter6.1/

This dataset contains information on the prices and fees charged by for-hire fishing operations in the Southeastern US.

Abstract

The objective of the survey is to develop a systematic approach to study and improve public administration in Brazil. The survey aims to diagnose the needs, attitudes, motivations, organizational environments, and general practices of public servants and their organizational units. The study encompasses federal public administration employees, with a special focus on the public procurement function.

Geographic coverage

Public procurement official across the country

Analysis unit

Individual public procurement officials

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The survey targeted key agents working in the Brazilian procurement process, whose actions are fundamental in determining the efficiency of public procurement. These agents include auctioneers, procurement managers, and planning officers. We targeted procurement agents from all Brazilian federal public organizations that conducted at least one purchase between 2019 and 2023.

We used administrative data from ComprasNet, the main federal government management information system for public procurement, to identify and obtain contact information for procurement auctioneers. This system records every bid and public contract from the federal government. For each bid, it is possible to identify and track (by unique national ID) the auctioneer of the bid, and the homologator associated with it — the individual administratively responsible for approving the results of the bidding process. Given that we have access to the universe of tenders from the federal government spanning from 2019 to 2023, we are able to identify and connect, to each bid, the entire set of auctioneers over this period. We identified and obtained contact information for 11,215 auctioneers. The MGI distributed the online survey to these individuals via SouGov, an internal messaging platform used by the federal government. Information on procurement managers and planning officers is unavailable in Compras- Net, preventing us from linking these individuals to specific bids or directly obtaining their contact information. To reach these public servants, we employed an indirect and non-targeted dissemination strategy. MGI sent private messages with the link to the survey to all users of the Procurement Portal of the Federal Government (Portal de Compras do Governo Federal) — an intranet for public servants involved in public procurement. It is important to note that every individual with access to the portal, regardless of their procurement role, received an invitation to participate in the survey. Consequently, we received responses to the survey from a wide range of procurement officers, including those originally targeted as well as others not in our target population, such as contract managers and homologators, has become mandatory since 2019.

Information on procurement managers and planning officers is unavailable in Compras- Net, preventing us from linking these individuals to specific bids or directly obtaining their contact information. To reach these public servants, we employed an indirect and non- targeted dissemination strategy. MGI sent private messages with the link to the survey to all users of the Procurement Portal of the Federal Government (Portal de Compras do Governo Federal)—an intranet for public servants involved in public procurement. It is important to note that every individual with access to the portal, regardless of their procurement role, received an invitation to participate in the survey. Consequently, we received responses to the survey from a wide range of procurement officers, including those originally targeted as well as others not in our target population, such as contract managers and homologators.

Mode of data collection

Internet [int]

Research instrument

The survey consists of eight modules, along with an additional section including socioeconomic and demographic questions. 1. Respondents’ trajectory in the public sector, and measures tenure, experience with procurement, and task-time allocation. 2. Motivation for their job, perceptions about task significance, and motivation with public service in general. 3. Job satisfaction, including with salary, manager and peers. 4. Personality traits (Big-5) and risk-taking behaviors. 5. Perception of procurement performance as important for advancing their careers in the public sector. 6. "Red tape" (perceptions and experience with rules). 7. Procurement practices at organizational level. 8. Respondents’ perceptions of their influence on procurement outcomes, including the prices paid and the quality of products purchased.

Questionnaires in Portuguese (original language) and English are provided as attachments.

Cleaning operations

The data has been processed to remove any identifying information, including names and email voluntary informed by respondents. We have also recoded the variable for purchasing unit to only identify those with at least 10 respondents; the remaining are pooled as "other".

The full sample in this catalog contains 1,334 respondents and include a subsample of late respondents not used in the report attached. Observations used in the report are coded as "1" in the variable "Wave".

The Water Quality Portal (WQP) is a cooperative service sponsored by the United States Geological Survey (USGS), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the National Water Quality Monitoring Council (NWQMC). It serves data collected by over 400 state, federal, tribal, and local agencies. Water quality data can be downloaded in Excel, CSV, TSV, and KML formats. Fourteen site types are found in the WQP: aggregate groundwater use, aggregate surface water use, atmosphere, estuary, facility, glacier, lake, land, ocean, spring, stream, subsurface, well, and wetland. Water quality characteristic groups include physical conditions, chemical and bacteriological water analyses, chemical analyses of fish tissue, taxon abundance data, toxicity data, habitat assessment scores, and biological index scores, among others. Within these groups, thousands of water quality variables registered in the EPA Substance Registry Service (https://iaspub.epa.gov/sor_internet/registry/substreg/home/overview/home.do) and the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (https://www.itis.gov/) are represented. Across all site types, physical characteristics (e.g., temperature and water level) are the most common water quality result type in the system. The Water Quality Exchange data model (WQX; http://www.exchangenetwork.net/data-exchange/wqx/), initially developed by the Environmental Information Exchange Network, was adapted by EPA to support submission of water quality records to the EPA STORET Data Warehouse [USEPA, 2016], and has subsequently become the standard data model for the WQP. Contributing organizations: ACWI The Advisory Committee on Water Information (ACWI) represents the interests of water information users and professionals in advising the federal government on federal water information programs and their effectiveness in meeting the nation's water information needs. ARS The Agricultural Research Service (ARS) is the U.S. Department of Agriculture's chief in-house scientific research agency, whose job is finding solutions to agricultural problems that affect Americans every day, from field to table. ARS conducts research to develop and transfer solutions to agricultural problems of high national priority and provide information access and dissemination to, among other topics, enhance the natural resource base and the environment. Water quality data from STEWARDS, the primary database for the USDA/ARS Conservation Effects Assessment Project (CEAP) are ingested into WQP via a web service. EPA The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) gathers and distributes water quality monitoring data collected by states, tribes, watershed groups, other federal agencies, volunteer groups, and universities through the Water Quality Exchange framework in the STORET Warehouse. NWQMC The National Water Quality Monitoring Council (NWQMC) provides a national forum for coordination of comparable and scientifically defensible methods and strategies to improve water quality monitoring, assessment, and reporting. It also promotes partnerships to foster collaboration, advance the science, and improve management within all elements of the water quality monitoring community. USGS The United States Geological Survey (USGS) investigates the occurrence, quantity, quality, distribution, and movement of surface waters and ground waters and disseminates the data to the public, state, and local governments, public and private utilities, and other federal agencies involved with managing the United States' water resources. Resources in this dataset:Resource Title: Website Pointer for Water Quality Portal. File Name: Web Page, url: https://www.waterqualitydata.us/ The Water Quality Portal (WQP) is a cooperative service sponsored by the United States Geological Survey (USGS), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and the National Water Quality Monitoring Council (NWQMC). It serves data collected by over 400 state, federal, tribal, and local agencies. Links to Download Data, User Guide, Contributing Organizations, National coverage by state.

An April 2023 survey of Americans found that around 57 percent of the respondents were concerned about the government tracking their online behavior daily. A further 46 percent were concerned about companies tracking their online data. Approximately 34 percent of respondents were afraid of being tracked online.

The data asset provides a link to all Direct Deposit Applications filed via the Internet datasets. Each dataset provides monthly volumes at the national level from federal fiscal year 2008 on for Internet Direct Deposit applications. The dataset includes only Internet Direct Deposit transactions. It should be noted that, in addition to using our online Direct Deposit application, the public might also call our 800 number, visit a field office, or request a change of direct deposit by mail. This data set pertains only to the online alternative.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.The Opinions and Lifestyle Survey (formerly known as the ONS Opinions Survey or Omnibus) is an omnibus survey that began in 1990, collecting data on a range of subjects commissioned by both the ONS internally and external clients (limited to other government departments, charities, non-profit organisations and academia).Data are collected from one individual aged 16 or over, selected from each sampled private household. Personal data include data on the individual, their family, address, household, income and education, plus responses and opinions on a variety of subjects within commissioned modules. The questionnaire collects timely data for research and policy analysis evaluation on the social impacts of recent topics of national importance, such as the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and the cost of living, on individuals and households in Great Britain. From April 2018 to November 2019, the design of the OPN changed from face-to-face to a mixed-mode design (online first with telephone interviewing where necessary). Mixed-mode collection allows respondents to complete the survey more flexibly and provides a more cost-effective service for customers. In March 2020, the OPN was adapted to become a weekly survey used to collect data on the social impacts of the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic on the lives of people of Great Britain. These data are held in the Secure Access study, SN 8635, ONS Opinions and Lifestyle Survey, Covid-19 Module, 2020-2022: Secure Access. From August 2021, as coronavirus (COVID-19) restrictions were lifting across Great Britain, the OPN moved to fortnightly data collection, sampling around 5,000 households in each survey wave to ensure the survey remains sustainable. The OPN has since expanded to include questions on other topics of national importance, such as health and the cost of living. For more information about the survey and its methodology, see the ONS OPN Quality and Methodology Information webpage.Secure Access Opinions and Lifestyle Survey dataOther Secure Access OPN data cover modules run at various points from 1997-2019, on Census religion (SN 8078), cervical cancer screening (SN 8080), contact after separation (SN 8089), contraception (SN 8095), disability (SNs 8680 and 8096), general lifestyle (SN 8092), illness and activity (SN 8094), and non-resident parental contact (SN 8093). See Opinions and Lifestyle Survey: Secure Access for details. Main Topics:Each month's questionnaire consists of two elements: core questions, covering demographic information, are asked each month together with non-core questions that vary from month to month. The non-core questions for this month were: Internet Access (Module 330): this module of questions was asked on behalf of a number of government departments, but primarily the Office for National Statistics and the e-Envoy's Office (which is part of the Cabinet Office). These questions form an important part of the data collection strategy within government to monitor internet use, which is currently a high profile government policy. This module has been expanded to include questions from Eurostat, the European statistical agency. These additional questions were asked across the EU for a country by country comparison. The questions were asked across Europe at roughly the same time. Multi-stage stratified random sample Face-to-face interview

The Public Health Emergency (PHE) declaration for COVID-19 expired on May 11, 2023. As a result, the Aggregate Case and Death Surveillance System will be discontinued. Although these data will continue to be publicly available, this dataset will no longer be updated.

On October 20, 2022, CDC began retrieving aggregate case and death data from jurisdictional and state partners weekly instead of daily.

This dataset includes the URLs that were used by the aggregate county data collection process that compiled aggregate case and death counts by county. Within this file, each of the states (plus select jurisdictions and territories) are listed along with the county web sources which were used for pulling these numbers. Some states had a single statewide source for collecting the county data, while other states and local health jurisdictions may have had standalone sources for individual counties. In the cases where both local and state web sources were listed, a composite approach was taken so that the maximum value reported for a location from either source was used. The initial raw data were sourced from these links and ingested into the CDC aggregate county dataset before being published on the COVID Data Tracker.

Global Government Open Data Management Platform Market size was valued at USD 1.75 Billion in 2024 and is projected to reach USD 3.38 Billion by 2031, growing at a CAGR of 8.54% from 2024 to 2031.

Global Government Open Data Management Platform Market Drivers

Increasing Demand for Transparency and Accountability: There is a growing public demand for transparency in government operations, which drives the adoption of open data initiatives. According to a survey by the World Bank, 85% of respondents in various countries indicated that transparency in government decisions is crucial for reducing corruption, prompting governments to implement open data platforms.

Technological Advancements: Rapid advancements in information and communication technology (ICT) facilitate the development and deployment of open data management platforms. The International Telecommunication Union (ITU) reported that global Internet penetration reached approximately 64% in 2023, enabling more citizens to access open data and engage with government services online.

Government Initiatives and Policies: Many governments are actively promoting open data through policies and initiatives. For instance, the U.S. government’s Open Data Initiative, launched in 2013, has led to the publication of over 300,000 datasets on Data.gov. Additionally, the European Union’s Open Data Directive, which aims to make public sector data available, is further encouraging governments to embrace open data practices.

Providing access to non-confidential government data to the public is one of the initiatives adopted by many governments today to embrace government transparency practices. The initiative of publishing non-confidential government data for the public to use and re-use without restrictions is known as Open Government Data (OGD). Nevertheless, after several years after its inception, the direction of OGD implementation remains uncertain. The extant literature on OGD adoption concentrates primarily on identifying factors influencing adoption decisions. Yet, studies on the underlying factors influencing OGD after the adoption phase are scarce. Based on these issues, this study investigated the post-adoption of OGD in the public sector, particularly the data provider agencies. The OGD post-adoption framework is crafted by anchoring the Technology–Organization–Environment (TOE) framework and the innovation adoption process theory. The data was collected from 266 government agencies in the Malaysian public sector. This study employed the partial least square-structural equation modeling as the statistical technique for factor analysis. The results indicate that two factors from the organizational context (top management support, organizational culture) and two from the technological context (complexity, relative advantage) have a significant contribution to the post-adoption of OGD in the public sector. The contribution of this study is threefold: theoretical, conceptual, and practical. This study contributed theoretically by introducing the post-adoption framework of OGD that comprises the acceptance, routinization, and infusion stages. As the majority of OGD adoption studies conclude their analysis at the adoption (decisions) phase, this study gives novel insight to extend the analysis into unexplored territory, specifically the post-adoption phase. Conceptually, this study presents two new factors in the environmental context to be explored in the OGD adoption study, namely, the data demand and incentives. The fact that data providers are not influenced by data requests from the agency’s external environment and incentive offerings is something that needs further investigation. In practicality, the findings of this study are anticipated to assist policymakers in strategizing for long-term OGD implementation from the data provider’s perspective. This effort is crucial to ensure that the OGD initiatives will be incorporated into the public sector’s service thrust and become one of the digital government services provided to the citizen. Methods The data was collected using a survey questionnaire as presented in the manuscript. The survey questionnaire was developed on an online survey platform. The data was processed in Microsoft Excel before converting to Comma Separated Values (CSV).

The Offshore Geologic Carbon Storage Data Collection Web Application is an interactive data collection which aggregates and disseminates publicly available data to support offshore geologic carbon storage (GCS) in the United States. This data collection can be leveraged by stakeholders to understand where GCS may be viable offshore, create GCS project analogs, and address challenges to GCS in offshore environments. Use of this tool is solely at the discretion of the user. See full Federal Disclaimer for further information (https://netl.doe.gov/home/disclaimer).

This data collection reports the distribution of federal funds of the executive branch of the federal government by agency, program, and inference spending for every county of the United States and for each city where the population exceeds 25,000. Two tables provide codes and the names associated with those codes for program, appropriation, function, agency, and geographic variables used in the data.