Records from operating a customer call center or service center providing services to the public. Services may address a wide variety of topics such as understanding agency mission-specific functions or how to resolve technical difficulties with external-facing systems or programs. Includes:rn- incoming requests and responsesrn- trouble tickets and tracking logs rn- recordings of call center phone conversations with customers used for quality control and customer service trainingrn- system data, including customer ticket numbers and visit tracking rn- evaluations and feedback about customer servicesrn- information about customer services, such as “Frequently Asked Questions” (FAQs) and user guidesrn- reports generated from customer management datarn- complaints and commendation records; customer feedback and satisfaction surveys, including survey instruments, data, background materials, and reports.

NOTE: The 311 dataset is currently showing incorrect values in the "Agency Name" column. Please use the "Agency" column in the interim while this is being resolved.

All 311 Service Requests from 2010 to present. This information is automatically updated daily.

Data represents feedback on learning environment from families. Aids in facilitating the understanding of families perceptions of students, teachers, environment of their school. The survey is aligned to the DOE's framework for great schools. It is designed to collect important information about each schools ability to support success.

Success.ai’s Governmental and Congressional Data with Contact Data for Government Professionals Worldwide provides businesses, organizations, and institutions with verified contact information for key decision-makers in public sector roles. Sourced from over 170 million verified professional profiles, this dataset includes work emails, direct phone numbers, and LinkedIn profiles for government officials, administrators, policy advisors, and other influential leaders. Whether you’re targeting local municipalities, national agencies, or international government bodies, Success.ai delivers accurate, up-to-date data to help you engage effectively with public sector stakeholders.

Why Choose Success.ai’s Government Professionals Data?

1. Comprehensive Contact Information
2. Access verified work emails, phone numbers, and LinkedIn profiles of government professionals worldwide.

3. AI-driven validation ensures 99% accuracy, giving you confidence in the reliability and precision of the data.

4. Global Reach Across Public Sectors

5. Includes profiles of elected officials, policy advisors, department heads, procurement managers, and regulatory authorities.

6. Covers regions such as North America, Europe, Asia-Pacific, South America, and the Middle East, enabling true global engagement.

7. Continuously Updated Datasets

8. Real-time updates ensure your outreach remains timely, relevant, and aligned with current roles and responsibilities.

9. Ethical and Compliant

10. Adheres to GDPR, CCPA, and other global data privacy regulations, ensuring ethical, lawful use of all contact data.

Data Highlights:

• 170M+ Verified Professional Profiles: Includes government decision-makers and influential public sector leaders worldwide.
• 50M Work Emails: AI-validated for accuracy and easy communication.
• 30M Company (Agency/Institution) Profiles: Offers insights into various government departments, agencies, and organizations.
• 700M Global Professional Profiles: Enriched datasets to support a wide range of outreach and strategic initiatives.

Key Features of the Dataset:

1. Government Decision-Maker Profiles
2. Identify and connect with officials responsible for policy-making, budget approvals, program implementation, and public procurement.

3. Engage with professionals who influence legislation, infrastructure projects, and community development initiatives.

4. Advanced Filters for Precision Targeting

5. Filter by geographic jurisdiction, agency type, policy focus, job title, and more to reach the right government professionals.

6. Tailor your campaigns to align with specific public interests, regulatory frameworks, or service areas.

7. AI-Driven Enrichment

8. Profiles are enriched with actionable data, providing deeper insights that help you tailor your messaging and improve engagement success rates.

Strategic Use Cases:

1. Policy and Advocacy Outreach
2. Reach policymakers, advisors, and regulators to advocate for policy changes, present research findings, or share best practices.

3. Engage with officials who have the authority to influence regulations and legislative outcomes.

4. Procurement and Vendor Relations

5. Connect with procurement managers and government buyers seeking solutions, products, or services.

6. Present technology, infrastructure, or consulting offerings to decision-makers managing public tenders and supplier relationships.

7. Public-Private Partnerships

8. Identify and connect with key stakeholders involved in PPP initiatives, infrastructure projects, and long-term strategic collaborations.

9. Expand your network within government circles to foster joint ventures and co-development opportunities.

10. Market Research and Strategic Planning

11. Utilize government contact data for in-depth market research, stakeholder analysis, and feasibility assessments.

12. Gather insights from regulators, policy experts, and department heads to inform business strategies.

Why Choose Success.ai?

1. Best Price Guarantee

2. Access premium-quality verified data at competitive prices, ensuring you achieve the best value for your outreach efforts.

3. Seamless Integration

4. Integrate verified government contact data into your CRM or marketing platforms via APIs or customizable downloads, streamlining your data management.

5. Data Accuracy with AI Validation

6. Count on 99% accuracy to inform your decision-making and improve the effectiveness of each interaction.

7. Customizable and Scalable Solutions

8. Tailor datasets to specific government tiers, agency types, or policy areas to meet unique organizational requirements.

APIs for Enhanced Functionality:

1. Data Enrichment API

2. Enhance your existing records with verified government contact data, refining targeting and personalization efforts.

3. Lead Generation API

4. Automate lead generation, ensuring efficient scaling of your outreach and saving time a...

Graph and download economic data for Government current expenditures: Federal: General public service: Interest payments (G160441A027NBEA) from 1959 to 2023 about public, payments, expenditures, federal, government, services, interest, GDP, and USA.

Important Note: This item is in mature support as of September 2023 and will be retired in December 2025. A new version of this item is available for your use. Esri recommends updating your maps and apps to use the new version.The USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States (PAD-US) is the official inventory of public parks and other protected open space. The spatial data in PAD-US represents public lands held in trust by thousands of national, state and regional/local governments, as well as non-profit conservation organizations.This map displays locations from the PAD-US version 3.0 symbolized with the Public Access field. This map includes two filtered and renamed copies of a view layer at scales of 1:1,000,000 and larger and a vector tile layer at scales smaller than 1:1,000,000. Two layers were used to create the different symbology of marine and terrestrial areas.PAD-US is published by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) Science Analytics and Synthesis (SAS), Gap Analysis Project (GAP). GAP produces data and tools that help meet critical national challenges such as biodiversity conservation, recreation, public health, climate change adaptation, and infrastructure investment. See the GAP webpage for more information about GAP and other GAP data including species and land cover.This map is part of the ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World. The Living Atlas provides an easy way to explore many other beautiful and authoritative maps on hundreds of topics.

The data are designed for strategic analyses at a national or regional scale which require spatially explicit information regarding the extent, distribution, and prevalence of the ownership types represented. The data are not recommended for tactical analyses on a sub-regional scale, or for informing local management decisions. Furthermore, map accuracies vary considerably and thus the utility of these data can vary geographically under different ownership patterns.

support associations

Over the summer of 2013, the Cabinet Office started to develop the processes to support the maintenance of a dynamic NII. We can now launch a first iteration which will be the basis for user feedback and the identification of additional datasets. The processes for defining the NII can be broadly outlined as follows: a) Identifying and maintaining an inventory of data held by government; b) Prioritising data to be included in the NII; and c) Supporting organisations to release data, where possible. The Cabinet Office has developed an over-arching framework for the NII to be used as a “thinking tool” in engaging with the NII. Without this framework it will be hard to communicate the function and benefits of the NII. The framework combines a high-level categorisation of government data and characteristics of different types of data to provide a framework for the processes and identify early candidates for inclusion in the NII. The data themes in the framework for the NII relate primarily to characteristics of the organisation which hold the data and also reflect the high level categories of data in the G8 Open Data Charter. Transparency was one of the key three priorities of the recent G8, chaired by the UK where all G8 Leaders signed up to a set of principles specified in an Open Data Charter. G8 members identified 14 high-value areas, jointly regarded as data that will help unlock the economic potential of open data, support and encourage innovation, and provide greater accountability to improve our democracies. The UK has aligned these categories to inform the creation of its NII. Datasets listed against Transport and Infrastructure include datasets owned and held by government agencies, ALBs and the wider transport industry, reflecting the organisation of information in the sector. Overlaying these data themes, we have analysed user feedback, ODUG benefits cases, applications and services which successfully use government data, and expert feedback to develop 4 primary uses of data. These are: a) Location: Geospatial data which can inform mapping and planning. b) Performance and Delivery: Data which shows how effectively public bodies and services are fulfilling their public tasks and the delivery of policy. c) Fiscal: Government spend, procurement and contractual data as well as data about the financial management of public sector activities. This also includes data that government holds about companies which may be of value to users. d) Operational: Data about the operational structure, placement of public service delivery points and the nature of the resources available within each of them.

Collaboratory is a software product developed and maintained by HandsOn Connect Cloud Solutions. It is intended to help higher education institutions accurately and comprehensively track their relationships with the community through engagement and service activities. Institutions that use Collaboratory are given the option to opt-in to a data sharing initiative at the time of onboarding, which grants us permission to de-identify their data and make it publicly available for research purposes. HandsOn Connect is committed to making Collaboratory data accessible to scholars for research, toward the goal of advancing the field of community engagement and social impact.Collaboratory is not a survey, but is instead a dynamic software tool designed to facilitate comprehensive, longitudinal data collection on community engagement and public service activities conducted by faculty, staff, and students in higher education. We provide a standard questionnaire that was developed by Collaboratory’s co-founders (Janke, Medlin, and Holland) in the Institute for Community and Economic Engagement at UNC Greensboro, which continues to be closely monitored and adapted by staff at HandsOn Connect and academic colleagues. It includes descriptive characteristics (what, where, when, with whom, to what end) of activities and invites participants to periodically update their information in accordance with activity progress over time. Examples of individual questions include the focus areas addressed, populations served, on- and off-campus collaborators, connections to teaching and research, and location information, among others.The Collaboratory dataset contains data from 37 institutions beginning in March 2016and continues to grow as more institutions adopt Collaboratory and continue to expand its use. The data represent over 3,600 published activities (and additional associated content) across our user base.Please cite this data as:Medlin, Kristin and Seto, Matthew. Dataset on Higher Education Community Engagement and Public Service Activities, 2016-2021. Collaboratory [producer], 2021. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2021-11-01. https://doi.org/10.3886/E136322V1When you cite this data, please also include: Janke, E., Medlin, K., & Holland, B. (2021, November 9). To What End? Ten Years of Collaboratory. https://doi.org/10.31219/osf.io/a27nb

Graph and download economic data for Data Processing and Other Purchased Computer Services for Support Activities for Transportation, All Establishments, Employer Firms (DISCONTINUED) (EXPDPSEF488ALLEST) from 2012 to 2017 about support activities, employer firms, computers, processed, purchase, establishments, transportation, expenditures, services, and USA.

Objective. Support for gay rights has increased in the publics of many countries over recent decades, but the scholarship on the topic has been hindered by the limited available data on these trends in public opinion. The goal of the Support for Gay Rights (SGR) dataset is to overcome this problem. Method. The SGR dataset is constructed by combining a comprehensive collection of survey data with a latent-variable model to provide annual time-series estimates of public support for gay rights across 118 countries and over as many as 51 years that are comparable across space and time. Results. We show these data perform well in validation tests and demonstrate their potential by replicating the influential but recently questioned finding of Andersen and Fetner (2008) that more income inequality yields less tolerant and supportive attitudes toward gay people. Conclusion. We anticipate that the SGR data will become a crucial source for cross-national, cross-regional, and longitudinal research that improves our understanding of the sources and consequences of public support for gay rights.

Maryland's Open Data Program provides transparency so that businesses, residents, visitors, and civil servants can use state data to aid in decision making. The transparency of data helps improve accountability, as data owners share the responsibility for ensuring that data is accurate, up-to-date and available to the public. Each January, the Council on Open Data makes it's Annual Open Data Report available to the public. Please explore the annual reports below to see how Maryland continues to support Open Data.

2017 NYC School Survey teacher data for all schools; To understand the perceptions of families, students, and teachers regarding their school. School leaders use feedback from the survey to reflect and make improvements to schools and programs. Also, results from the survey used to help measure school quality. Each year, all parents, teachers, and students in grades 6-12 take the NYC School Survey. The survey is aligned to the DOE's Framework for Great Schools. It is designed to collect important information about each school's ability to support student success.

Terms of UseData Limitations and DisclaimerThe user’s use of and/or reliance on the information contained in the Document shall be at the user’s own risk and expense. MassDEP disclaims any responsibility for any loss or harm that may result to the user of this data or to any other person due to the user’s use of the Document.This is an ongoing data development project. Attempts have been made to contact all PWS systems, but not all have responded with information on their service area. MassDEP will continue to collect and verify this information. Some PWS service areas included in this datalayer have not been verified by the PWS or the municipality involved, but since many of those areas are based on information published online by the municipality, the PWS, or in a publicly available report, they are included in the estimated PWS service area datalayer.Please note: All PWS service area delineations are estimates for broad planning purposes and should only be used as a guide. The data is not appropriate for site-specific or parcel-specific analysis. Not all properties within a PWS service area are necessarily served by the system, and some properties outside the mapped service areas could be served by the PWS – please contact the relevant PWS. Not all service areas have been confirmed by the systems.Please use the following citation to reference these data:MassDEP, Water Utility Resilience Program. 2025. Community and Non-Transient Non-Community Public Water System Service Area (PubV2025_3).IMPORTANT NOTICE: This MassDEP Estimated Water Service datalayer may not be complete, may contain errors, omissions, and other inaccuracies and the data are subject to change. This version is published through MassGIS. We want to learn about the data uses. If you use this dataset, please notify staff in the Water Utility Resilience Program (WURP@mass.gov).This GIS datalayer represents approximate service areas for Public Water Systems (PWS) in Massachusetts. In 2017, as part of its “Enhancing Resilience and Emergency Preparedness of Water Utilities through Improved Mapping” (Critical Infrastructure Mapping Project ), the MassDEP Water Utility Resilience Program (WURP) began to uniformly map drinking water service areas throughout Massachusetts using information collected from various sources. Along with confirming existing public water system (PWS) service area information, the project collected and verified estimated service area delineations for PWSs not previously delineated and will continue to update the information contained in the datalayers. As of the date of publication, WURP has delineated Community (COM) and Non-Transient Non-Community (NTNC) service areas. Transient non-community (TNCs) are not part of this mapping project.Layers and Tables:The MassDEP Estimated Public Water System Service Area data comprises two polygon feature classes and a supporting table. Some data fields are populated from the MassDEP Drinking Water Program’s Water Quality Testing System (WQTS) and Annual Statistical Reports (ASR).The Community Water Service Areas feature class (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_COMM_POLY) includes polygon features that represent the approximate service areas for PWS classified as Community systems.The NTNC Water Service Areas feature class (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_NTNC_POLY) includes polygon features that represent the approximate service areas for PWS classified as Non-Transient Non-Community systems.The Unlocated Sites List table (PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_USL) contains a list of known, unmapped active Community and NTNC PWS services areas at the time of publication.ProductionData UniversePublic Water Systems in Massachusetts are permitted and regulated through the MassDEP Drinking Water Program. The WURP has mapped service areas for all active and inactive municipal and non-municipal Community PWSs in MassDEP’s Water Quality Testing Database (WQTS). Community PWS refers to a public water system that serves at least 15 service connections used by year-round residents or regularly serves at least 25 year-round residents.All active and inactive NTNC PWS were also mapped using information contained in WQTS. An NTNC or Non-transient Non-community Water System refers to a public water system that is not a community water system and that has at least 15 service connections or regularly serves at least 25 of the same persons or more approximately four or more hours per day, four or more days per week, more than six months or 180 days per year, such as a workplace providing water to its employees.These data may include declassified PWSs. Staff will work to rectify the status/water services to properties previously served by declassified PWSs and remove or incorporate these service areas as needed.Maps of service areas for these systems were collected from various online and MassDEP sources to create service areas digitally in GIS. Every PWS is assigned a unique PWSID by MassDEP that incorporates the municipal ID of the municipality it serves (or the largest municipality it serves if it serves multiple municipalities). Some municipalities contain more than one PWS, but each PWS has a unique PWSID. The Estimated PWS Service Area datalayer, therefore, contains polygons with a unique PWSID for each PWS service area.A service area for a community PWS may serve all of one municipality (e.g. Watertown Water Department), multiple municipalities (e.g. Abington-Rockland Joint Water Works), all or portions of two or more municipalities (e.g. Provincetown Water Dept which serves all of Provincetown and a portion of Truro), or a portion of a municipality (e.g. Hyannis Water System, which is one of four PWSs in the town of Barnstable).Some service areas have not been mapped but their general location is represented by a small circle which serves as a placeholder. The location of these circles are estimates based on the general location of the source wells or the general estimated location of the service area - these do not represent the actual service area.Service areas were mapped initially from 2017 to 2022 and reflect varying years for which service is implemented for that service area boundary. WURP maintains the dataset quarterly with annual data updates; however, the dataset may not include all current active PWSs. A list of unmapped PWS systems is included in the USL table PWS_WATER_SERVICE_AREA_USL available for download with the dataset. Some PWSs that are not mapped may have come online after this iteration of the mapping project; these will be reconciled and mapped during the next phase of the WURP project. PWS IDs that represent regional or joint boards with (e.g. Tri Town Water Board, Randolph/Holbrook Water Board, Upper Cape Regional Water Cooperative) will not be mapped because their individual municipal service areas are included in this datalayer.PWSs that do not have corresponding sources, may be part of consecutive systems, may have been incorporated into another PWSs, reclassified as a different type of PWS, or otherwise taken offline. PWSs that have been incorporated, reclassified, or taken offline will be reconciled during the next data update.Methodologies and Data SourcesSeveral methodologies were used to create service area boundaries using various sources, including data received from the systems in response to requests for information from the MassDEP WURP project, information on file at MassDEP, and service area maps found online at municipal and PWS websites. When provided with water line data rather than generalized areas, 300-foot buffers were created around the water lines to denote service areas and then edited to incorporate generalizations. Some municipalities submitted parcel data or address information to be used in delineating service areas.Verification ProcessSmall-scale PDF file maps with roads and other infrastructure were sent to every PWS for corrections or verifications. For small systems, such as a condominium complex or residential school, the relevant parcels were often used as the basis for the delineated service area. In towns where 97% or more of their population is served by the PWS and no other service area delineation was available, the town boundary was used as the service area boundary. Some towns responded to the request for information or verification of service areas by stating that the town boundary should be used since all or nearly all of the municipality is served by the PWS.Sources of information for estimated drinking water service areasThe following information was used to develop estimated drinking water service areas:EOEEA Water Assets Project (2005) water lines (these were buffered to create service areas)Horsely Witten Report 2008Municipal Master Plans, Open Space Plans, Facilities Plans, Water Supply System Webpages, reports and online interactive mapsGIS data received from PWSDetailed infrastructure mapping completed through the MassDEP WURP Critical Infrastructure InitiativeIn the absence of other service area information, for municipalities served by a town-wide water system serving at least 97% of the population, the municipality’s boundary was used. Determinations of which municipalities are 97% or more served by the PWS were made based on the Percent Water Service Map created in 2018 by MassDEP based on various sources of information including but not limited to:The Winter population served submitted by the PWS in the ASR submittalThe number of services from WQTS as a percent of developed parcelsTaken directly from a Master Plan, Water Department Website, Open Space Plan, etc. found onlineCalculated using information from the town on the population servedMassDEP staff estimateHorsely Witten Report 2008Calculation based on Water System Areas Mapped through MassDEP WURP Critical Infrastructure Initiative, 2017-2022Information found in publicly available PWS planning documents submitted to MassDEP or as part of infrastructure planningMaintenanceThe

On October 15, 2013, Louisville Mayor Greg Fischer announced the signing of an open data policy executive order in conjunction with his compelling talk at the 2013 Code for America Summit. In nonchalant cadence, the mayor announced his support for complete information disclosure by declaring, "It's data, man."Sunlight Foundation - New Louisville Open Data Policy Insists Open By Default is the Future Open Data Annual ReportsSection 5.A. Within one year of the effective Data of this Executive Order, and thereafter no later than September 1 of each year, the Open Data Management Team shall submit to the Mayor an annual Open Data Report.The Open Data Management team (also known as the Data Governance Team is currently led by the city's Data Officer Andrew McKinney in the Office of Civic Innovation and Technology. Previously (2014-16) it was led by the Director of IT.Full Executive OrderEXECUTIVE ORDER NO. 1, SERIES 2013AN EXECUTIVE ORDERCREATING AN OPEN DATA PLAN. WHEREAS, Metro Government is the catalyst for creating a world-class city that provides its citizens with safe and vibrant neighborhoods, great jobs, a strong system of education and innovation, and a high quality of life; andWHEREAS, it should be easy to do business with Metro Government. Online government interactions mean more convenient services for citizens and businesses and online government interactions improve the cost effectiveness and accuracy of government operations; andWHEREAS, an open government also makes certain that every aspect of the built environment also has reliable digital descriptions available to citizens and entrepreneurs for deep engagement mediated by smart devices; andWHEREAS, every citizen has the right to prompt, efficient service from Metro Government; andWHEREAS, the adoption of open standards improves transparency, access to public information and improved coordination and efficiencies among Departments and partner organizations across the public, nonprofit and private sectors; andWHEREAS, by publishing structured standardized data in machine readable formats the Louisville Metro Government seeks to encourage the local software community to develop software applications and tools to collect, organize, and share public record data in new and innovative ways; andWHEREAS, in commitment to the spirit of Open Government, Louisville Metro Government will consider public information to be open by default and will proactively publish data and data containing information, consistent with the Kentucky Open Meetings and Open Records Act; andNOW, THEREFORE, BE IT PROMULGATED BY EXECUTIVE ORDER OF THE HONORABLE GREG FISCHER, MAYOR OF LOUISVILLE/JEFFERSON COUNTY METRO GOVERNMENT AS FOLLOWS:Section 1. Definitions. As used in this Executive Order, the terms below shall have the following definitions:(A) “Open Data” means any public record as defined by the Kentucky Open Records Act, which could be made available online using Open Format data, as well as best practice Open Data structures and formats when possible. Open Data is not information that is treated exempt under KRS 61.878 by Metro Government.(B) “Open Data Report” is the annual report of the Open Data Management Team, which shall (i) summarize and comment on the state of Open Data availability in Metro Government Departments from the previous year; (ii) provide a plan for the next year to improve online public access to Open Data and maintain data quality. The Open Data Management Team shall present an initial Open Data Report to the Mayor within 180 days of this Executive Order.(C) “Open Format” is any widely accepted, nonproprietary, platform-independent, machine-readable method for formatting data, which permits automated processing of such data and is accessible to external search capabilities.(D) “Open Data Portal” means the Internet site established and maintained by or on behalf of Metro Government, located at portal.louisvilleky.gov/service/data or its successor website.(E) “Open Data Management Team” means a group consisting of representatives from each Department within Metro Government and chaired by the Chief Information Officer (CIO) that is responsible for coordinating implementation of an Open Data Policy and creating the Open Data Report.(F) “Department” means any Metro Government department, office, administrative unit, commission, board, advisory committee, or other division of Metro Government within the official jurisdiction of the executive branch.Section 2. Open Data Portal.(A) The Open Data Portal shall serve as the authoritative source for Open Data provided by Metro Government(B) Any Open Data made accessible on Metro Government’s Open Data Portal shall use an Open Format.Section 3. Open Data Management Team.(A) The Chief Information Officer (CIO) of Louisville Metro Government will work with the head of each Department to identify a Data Coordinator in each Department. Data Coordinators will serve as members of an Open Data Management Team facilitated by the CIO and Metro Technology Services. The Open Data Management Team will work to establish a robust, nationally recognized, platform that addresses digital infrastructure and Open Data.(B) The Open Data Management Team will develop an Open Data management policy that will adopt prevailing Open Format standards for Open Data, and develop agreements with regional partners to publish and maintain Open Data that is open and freely available while respecting exemptions allowed by the Kentucky Open Records Act or other federal or state law.Section 4. Department Open Data Catalogue.(A) Each Department shall be responsible for creating an Open Data catalogue, which will include comprehensive inventories of information possessed and/or managed by the Department.(B) Each Department’s Open Data catalogue will classify information holdings as currently “public” or “not yet public”; Departments will work with Metro Technology Services to develop strategies and timelines for publishing open data containing information in a way that is complete, reliable, and has a high level of detail.Section 5. Open Data Report and Policy Review.(A) Within one year of the effective date of this Executive Order, and thereafter no later than September 1 of each year, the Open Data Management Team shall submit to the Mayor an annual Open Data Report.(B) In acknowledgment that technology changes rapidly, in the future, the Open Data Policy should be reviewed and considered for revisions or additions that will continue to position Metro Government as a leader on issues of openness, efficiency, and technical best practices.Section 6. This Executive Order shall take effect as of October 11, 2013.Signed this 11th day of October, 2013, by Greg Fischer, Mayor of Louisville/Jefferson County Metro Government.GREG FISCHER, MAYOR

The complete Public Service Data, Digital and Intelligence Solution. Covering every Public Service organisation, all key posts and stakeholders. Delivered live via downloads, data feeds and via reports and a mapping interface. Subscribers benefit from the work of our 15 internal researchers and guidance from a dedicated account manager as well as our proprietary and industry leading live database selection and delivery systems.

The PSX subscription gives users the entire Public Services market in a box, with data for research, direct marketing and communication, digital advertising and tender feeds as well as market intelligence in the form of specific sector reports and organisational demographics.

Jurisdictional Unit, 2022-05-21. For use with WFDSS, IFTDSS, IRWIN, and InFORM.This is a feature service which provides Identify and Copy Feature capabilities. If fast-drawing at coarse zoom levels is a requirement, consider using the tile (map) service layer located at https://nifc.maps.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=3b2c5daad00742cd9f9b676c09d03d13.OverviewThe Jurisdictional Agencies dataset is developed as a national land management geospatial layer, focused on representing wildland fire jurisdictional responsibility, for interagency wildland fire applications, including WFDSS (Wildland Fire Decision Support System), IFTDSS (Interagency Fuels Treatment Decision Support System), IRWIN (Interagency Reporting of Wildland Fire Information), and InFORM (Interagency Fire Occurrence Reporting Modules). It is intended to provide federal wildland fire jurisdictional boundaries on a national scale. The agency and unit names are an indication of the primary manager name and unit name, respectively, recognizing that:There may be multiple owner names.Jurisdiction may be held jointly by agencies at different levels of government (ie State and Local), especially on private lands, Some owner names may be blocked for security reasons.Some jurisdictions may not allow the distribution of owner names. Private ownerships are shown in this layer with JurisdictionalUnitIdentifier=null,JurisdictionalUnitAgency=null, JurisdictionalUnitKind=null, and LandownerKind="Private", LandownerCategory="Private". All land inside the US country boundary is covered by a polygon.Jurisdiction for privately owned land varies widely depending on state, county, or local laws and ordinances, fire workload, and other factors, and is not available in a national dataset in most cases.For publicly held lands the agency name is the surface managing agency, such as Bureau of Land Management, United States Forest Service, etc. The unit name refers to the descriptive name of the polygon (i.e. Northern California District, Boise National Forest, etc.).These data are used to automatically populate fields on the WFDSS Incident Information page.This data layer implements the NWCG Jurisdictional Unit Polygon Geospatial Data Layer Standard.Relevant NWCG Definitions and StandardsUnit2. A generic term that represents an organizational entity that only has meaning when it is contextualized by a descriptor, e.g. jurisdictional.Definition Extension: When referring to an organizational entity, a unit refers to the smallest area or lowest level. Higher levels of an organization (region, agency, department, etc) can be derived from a unit based on organization hierarchy.Unit, JurisdictionalThe governmental entity having overall land and resource management responsibility for a specific geographical area as provided by law.Definition Extension: 1) Ultimately responsible for the fire report to account for statistical fire occurrence; 2) Responsible for setting fire management objectives; 3) Jurisdiction cannot be re-assigned by agreement; 4) The nature and extent of the incident determines jurisdiction (for example, Wildfire vs. All Hazard); 5) Responsible for signing a Delegation of Authority to the Incident Commander.See also: Unit, Protecting; LandownerUnit IdentifierThis data standard specifies the standard format and rules for Unit Identifier, a code used within the wildland fire community to uniquely identify a particular government organizational unit.Landowner Kind & CategoryThis data standard provides a two-tier classification (kind and category) of landownership. Attribute Fields JurisdictionalAgencyKind Describes the type of unit Jurisdiction using the NWCG Landowner Kind data standard. There are two valid values: Federal, and Other. A value may not be populated for all polygons.JurisdictionalAgencyCategoryDescribes the type of unit Jurisdiction using the NWCG Landowner Category data standard. Valid values include: ANCSA, BIA, BLM, BOR, DOD, DOE, NPS, USFS, USFWS, Foreign, Tribal, City, County, OtherLoc (other local, not in the standard), State. A value may not be populated for all polygons.JurisdictionalUnitNameThe name of the Jurisdictional Unit. Where an NWCG Unit ID exists for a polygon, this is the name used in the Name field from the NWCG Unit ID database. Where no NWCG Unit ID exists, this is the “Unit Name” or other specific, descriptive unit name field from the source dataset. A value is populated for all polygons.JurisdictionalUnitIDWhere it could be determined, this is the NWCG Standard Unit Identifier (Unit ID). Where it is unknown, the value is ‘Null’. Null Unit IDs can occur because a unit may not have a Unit ID, or because one could not be reliably determined from the source data. Not every land ownership has an NWCG Unit ID. Unit ID assignment rules are available from the Unit ID standard, linked above.LandownerKindThe landowner category value associated with the polygon. May be inferred from jurisdictional agency, or by lack of a jurisdictional agency. A value is populated for all polygons. There are three valid values: Federal, Private, or Other.LandownerCategoryThe landowner kind value associated with the polygon. May be inferred from jurisdictional agency, or by lack of a jurisdictional agency. A value is populated for all polygons. Valid values include: ANCSA, BIA, BLM, BOR, DOD, DOE, NPS, USFS, USFWS, Foreign, Tribal, City, County, OtherLoc (other local, not in the standard), State, Private.DataSourceThe database from which the polygon originated. Be as specific as possible, identify the geodatabase name and feature class in which the polygon originated.SecondaryDataSourceIf the Data Source is an aggregation from other sources, use this field to specify the source that supplied data to the aggregation. For example, if Data Source is "PAD-US 2.1", then for a USDA Forest Service polygon, the Secondary Data Source would be "USDA FS Automated Lands Program (ALP)". For a BLM polygon in the same dataset, Secondary Source would be "Surface Management Agency (SMA)."SourceUniqueIDIdentifier (GUID or ObjectID) in the data source. Used to trace the polygon back to its authoritative source.MapMethod:Controlled vocabulary to define how the geospatial feature was derived. Map method may help define data quality. MapMethod will be Mixed Method by default for this layer as the data are from mixed sources. Valid Values include: GPS-Driven; GPS-Flight; GPS-Walked; GPS-Walked/Driven; GPS-Unknown Travel Method; Hand Sketch; Digitized-Image; DigitizedTopo; Digitized-Other; Image Interpretation; Infrared Image; Modeled; Mixed Methods; Remote Sensing Derived; Survey/GCDB/Cadastral; Vector; Phone/Tablet; OtherDateCurrentThe last edit, update, of this GIS record. Date should follow the assigned NWCG Date Time data standard, using 24 hour clock, YYYY-MM-DDhh.mm.ssZ, ISO8601 Standard.CommentsAdditional information describing the feature. GeometryIDPrimary key for linking geospatial objects with other database systems. Required for every feature. This field may be renamed for each standard to fit the feature.JurisdictionalUnitID_sansUSNWCG Unit ID with the "US" characters removed from the beginning. Provided for backwards compatibility.JoinMethodAdditional information on how the polygon was matched information in the NWCG Unit ID database.LocalNameLocalName for the polygon provided from PADUS or other source.LegendJurisdictionalAgencyJurisdictional Agency but smaller landholding agencies, or agencies of indeterminate status are grouped for more intuitive use in a map legend or summary table.LegendLandownerAgencyLandowner Agency but smaller landholding agencies, or agencies of indeterminate status are grouped for more intuitive use in a map legend or summary table.DataSourceYearYear that the source data for the polygon were acquired.Data InputThis dataset is based on an aggregation of 4 spatial data sources: Protected Areas Database US (PAD-US 2.1), data from Bureau of Indian Affairs regional offices, the BLM Alaska Fire Service/State of Alaska, and Census Block-Group Geometry. NWCG Unit ID and Agency Kind/Category data are tabular and sourced from UnitIDActive.txt, in the WFMI Unit ID application (https://wfmi.nifc.gov/unit_id/Publish.html). Areas of with unknown Landowner Kind/Category and Jurisdictional Agency Kind/Category are assigned LandownerKind and LandownerCategory values of "Private" by use of the non-water polygons from the Census Block-Group geometry.PAD-US 2.1:This dataset is based in large part on the USGS Protected Areas Database of the United States - PAD-US 2.`. PAD-US is a compilation of authoritative protected areas data between agencies and organizations that ultimately results in a comprehensive and accurate inventory of protected areas for the United States to meet a variety of needs (e.g. conservation, recreation, public health, transportation, energy siting, ecological, or watershed assessments and planning). Extensive documentation on PAD-US processes and data sources is available.How these data were aggregated:Boundaries, and their descriptors, available in spatial databases (i.e. shapefiles or geodatabase feature classes) from land management agencies are the desired and primary data sources in PAD-US. If these authoritative sources are unavailable, or the agency recommends another source, data may be incorporated by other aggregators such as non-governmental organizations. Data sources are tracked for each record in the PAD-US geodatabase (see below).BIA and Tribal Data:BIA and Tribal land management data are not available in PAD-US. As such, data were aggregated from BIA regional offices. These data date from 2012 and were substantially updated in 2022. Indian Trust Land affiliated with Tribes, Reservations, or BIA Agencies: These data are not considered the system of record and are not intended to be used as such. The Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), Branch of Wildland Fire Management (BWFM) is not the originator of these data. The

Graph and download economic data for Government consumption expenditures and gross investments: General public service (W575RC1A027NBEA) from 1959 to 2023 about public, investment, gross, consumption expenditures, consumption, government, services, GDP, and USA.

Graph and download economic data for Data Processing and Other Purchased Computer Services for Administrative and Support Services, All Establishments, Employer Firms (DISCONTINUED) (EXPDPSEF561ALLEST) from 2012 to 2017 about administrative, support activities, computers, purchase, employer firms, processed, establishments, expenditures, services, and USA.