ESIP Community Report: 2025 July Meeting

ESIP Community Report: 2025 July Meeting October 29, 2025 Executive Summary The 2025 ESIP July Meeting, themed “Innovation to Impact,ˮ brought together 249 participants 40% virtual, 86 first-timers) for plenaries, 46 community-led sessions, and networking events. Post-meeting survey responses showed high overall satisfaction, with networking, idea exchange, and professional development as the primary motivations. Virtual participation worked well for content access but had limited networking opportunities. Key recommendations include clearer session tracks and descriptions, stronger support for virtual engagement (dedicated facilitators, cameras, and tool training), expanded networking opportunities (including mentor–mentee programs), and exploring hub-and-spoke models to broaden participation. Overall, the meeting was seen as a valuable use of time, with clear pathways for enhancing accessibility, community building, and hybrid participation in future events. Introduction About ESIP Community Reports ESIP is a home for Earth science data professionals. As a nonprofit funded by cooperative agreements with NASA, NOAA, and USGS, we bring together interdisciplinary collaborations to share technical knowledge and engage with data users. Community reports are published to respond to community needs, ensure organizational transparency, and to raise awareness on topics relevant to our partners and community members. In some cases, a synthesis report will be published to examine trends in community activities over time. This report summarizes findings from our 2025 ESIP July Meeting post-meeting survey. JUL25 Meeting Overview ESIP Meetings cover current trends, problems, and emerging issues in Earth science data and information. Over the four days of each event, ESIP brings together stakeholders from government agencies, industry, and academic research institutions for a mix of plenary talks, breakout sessions, poster presentations, technical workshops, networking, and special events. Breakout sessions are led by community members and feature a broad range of Earth science topics related to the annual theme. The 2025 ESIP July Meeting took place in Seattle, Washington and online from July 2225. The theme was “Innovation to Impact,ˮ and a description was included on the ESIP website: We aim to have immediate impact in the ESIP community by unlocking solutions for our fellow data professionals. And we hope for impact in broader communities: To forge innovations that help scientists explore new and more complex questions and to connect with communities and individuals who need data, especially when they weigh critical decisions. A willingness to learn prompts questions that encourage us to expand our collective knowledge. Those include: ● Who are the end users? Where in the process can they help us innovate? ● How does Earth science data empower communities? ● What fields are evolving? Where is innovation happening? ● How does our work need to demonstrate real value? How do we better explain that value? Approach ESIP meetings are known for their level of engagement compared to other science-focused events. Ensuring engaging sessions is done with intention. A blog post, published in 2022, offers tips for organizing an engaging session. This year, as in previous years, we also provided the following support for session hosts: a session 2 design workshop, office hours with staff, and 11 meetings with a session design consultant (i.e., Charley Haley from Way Foragers). We also leverage a number of different tools to promote collaboration and to engage virtual participants. These include the use of Sched for managing registrations and for hosting our online agenda and session descriptions. Sched is integrated with QiqoChat for access to the interactive virtual portions of the sessions. Slido is set up for session hosts wanting access to Q&A, polling, and ranking tools. Miro boards are meant to provide workshopping resources (e.g., flip charts, sticky notes) in a virtual space. Google Suite is used for sharing files and for collaborative note-taking. Our ESIP Figshare repository assigns persistent identifiers for archiving meeting content so it can be effectively accessed and shared. Following each meeting, a survey is sent out to all attendees to gather feedback on their experience and recommendations for improvements. Staff and Community Fellows also meet to reflect on how the meeting ran and how it can run more smoothly to improve the participant experience. Findings We had 249 total attendees 40% virtual), including 86 first-time attendees. The meeting featured 3 plenary sessions, 46 community-led breakout sessions and workshops (reference Appendix). These sessions featured more than one hundred people who served as either organizers or speakers. We had 46 attendees respond to the survey, an 18% response rate: 76% attended in-person, 22% virtually, and 2% a mix of both in-person and virtual attendance. Attendee Motivations The primary reasons for attending the meeting included networking 78%, idea exchange 76%, serving as a session convener or presenter 59%, professional development 52%, and seeking collaborators 48%. Seeking funding opportunities 20% and business development 11% were less cited as reasons for attending. General Participant Experience We did analysis to look at the general experience across all attendees. We found overall satisfaction from respondents, with 100% agreeing that the meeting was a valuable use of their time Table 1. Only a small percentage 10% disagreed with the statement “the meeting provided effective information and/or resources that will help me on the job.ˮ This may be partially explained by the comment: “ESIP has traditionally been at the forefront of technological advancements. While Cloud and AI remained strong themes this 3 year, I didn't observe any major new technology developments or emerging trend-setting innovations. That said, my perspective may be limited, as I wasn't able to attend many of the tech-focused sessions. The reduced presence of technologists may have also played a role.ˮ Table 1. Percentage of respondents agreeing, disagreeing, or neutral to the following statements. Non-applicable responses were removed from the analysis. Statement Agree Neutral Disagree The 2025 July ESIP Meeting was a valuable use of my time. 100% - - I had sufficient opportunity to network with others. 90% 7% 3% The annual theme, 'Innovation to Impact' is relevant to me. 84% 13% 3% The meeting presented many concepts that are new to me. 85% 13% 3% The meeting provided effective information and/or resources that will help me on the job. 90% - 10% I would recommend ESIP Meetings to my colleagues. 97% 3% - We also examined satisfaction with some of the activities and special sessions that happened throughout the week. More than 80% of respondents were satisfied with those listed Table 2. There was some dissatisfaction with the FUNding Friday poster making reception 8% and the research showcase 4%; Table 2, but no comments indicated why there was dissatisfaction or what could be done to improve the experience. Table 2. Percentage of total respondents satisfied, dissatisfied or neutral to the quality of the following sessions and activities in order of greatest satisfaction. Non-applicable responses were removed from the analysis. Session / Activity Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied FUNding Friday 95% 5% - Annual Business Meeting and Strategy Session 95% 5% - 4 Unconference 86% 14% - FUNding Friday Poster Making Reception 84% 8% 8% Research Showcase 83% 13% 4% Dine Around Dinners 82% 18% - When asked about meeting preference, a plurality of respondents indicated that their preference is to attend one in-person meeting a year 38%, followed by a mix of in-person and virtual attendance based on schedule and location 34% while others were uncertain considering current federal limitations 13%. There was less interest in attending two in-person meetings a year 9% and attending all meetings virtually 3%. In-Person vs Virtual Experience The July ESIP meeting is primarily focused on the in-person experience. For this reason ESIP does not advertise it as a hybrid event. However, we do want to offer the option to participate virtually for those who cannot attend in-person. As much as possible we want to ensure the participant experience is great for everyone, no matter how they choose to participate. Overall, it seems the experience was similar for both groups Table 3. We did not offer a formal virtual-only networking event, and there was some dissatisfaction with the lack of opportunity to network in the virtual space 17%; Table 3. This discrepancy was especially highlighted in those agreeing with there being enough opportunities to network in person versus virtually 96% to 67%; Table 3. Table 3. Percentage of respondents agreeing, disagreeing, or neutral to the following statements as in-person I or virtual V participants. Non-applicable responses were removed from the analysis, and neutral responses are not displayed. Statement Agree I,V Disagree I,V The 2025 July ESIP Meeting was a valuable use of my time. 100%, 100% - I had sufficient opportunity to network with others. 96%, 67% 0%, 17% The annual theme, 'Innovation to Impact' is relevant to me. 83%, 88% 0%, 13% The meeting presented many concepts that are new to me. 84%, 88% 4%, 0% 5 The meeting provided effective information and/or resources that will help me on the job. 86%, 100% - I would recommend ESIP Meetings to my colleagues. 96%, 100% - When in-person respondents N23 were asked about their experience with the inclusion of virtual participants, 65% responded that virtual participants somewhat enhanced sessions and the meeting experience while 17% responded that virtual participants greatly enhanced sessions and the meeting experience. Thirteen percent felt that virtual participation was sometimes beneficial and sometimes detracted, and only 4.3% felt virtual participants somewhat detracted from the meeting. Once respondent noted: “Impressed with the information organization. Easy to navigate. When there were hiccups it was a calm and collected problem solving that moved forward and didn't seem to disrupt the conversations. The communication to participants was clear and accessible.ˮ Virtual respondents N8 were also asked to rate their experience by sharing their level of agreement with a series of statements Table 4. There was 100% agreement with all but one statement (i.e., the overall meeting experience was on par with ESIPʼs fully virtual conference), which included one neutral response Table 4. Table 4. Percentage of virtual respondents N8 agreeing, disagreeing, or neutral to the following statements regarding their meeting experience. Statement Agree Neutral Disagree I was able to access the July ESIP Meeting content that was of interest to me. 100% - - I felt connected to the in-room sessions and audience. 100% - - The online experience was positive. 100% - - The meeting technology met my needs. 100% - - The overall meeting experience was on par with ESIP's fully virtual conferences. 86% 14% - 6 Out of the total 31 respondents, 65% felt that the meeting met their expectations for connecting the online and in-person experiences; 32% ranked it good, while only 4% ranked it fair. Even with the high level of agreement, there were indications for areas of improvement. One respondent noted: “Some sessions did better than others at checking for comments in the chat and hands up for virtual participants in Zoom.ˮ First-Time Attendee Experience The ESIP community always tries to support those who are attending an ESIP meeting for the first time. Therefore, we wanted to examine the experience of first-time attendees to identify opportunities to improve their experience. When examining the experience statements for first time attendee respondents only, we found mostly agreement with the statements listed Table 5. Those who responded neutral were those first time attendees who attended in person. Table 5. Percentage of first-time attendee respondents N8 agreeing, disagreeing, or neutral to the following statements. Non-applicable responses were removed from the analysis. Statement Agree Neutral Disagree The 2025 July ESIP Meeting was a valuable use of my time. 100% - - I had sufficient opportunity to network with others. 87% 13% - The annual theme, 'Innovation to Impact' is relevant to me. 87% 13% - The meeting presented many concepts that are new to me. 87% 13% - The meeting provided effective information and/or resources that will help me on the job. 75% 25% - I would recommend ESIP Meetings to my colleagues. 87% 13% - As we did for other segments of respondents, we also examined satisfaction with some of the activities and special sessions that happened throughout the week for first time 7 attendees. More than 87% of respondents were satisfied with all but two of the activities and special sessions listed Table 6. Table 6. Percentage of first time attendee respondents N8 satisfied, dissatisfied or neutral to the quality of the following sessions and activities in order of greatest satisfaction. Non-applicable responses were removed from the analysis. Session / Activity Satisfied Neutral Dissatisfied FUNding Friday 100% - - Annual Business Meeting and Strategy Session 100% - - Unconference 87% 13% - FUNding Friday Poster Making Reception 100% - - Research Showcase 100% - - Dine Around Dinners 87% 13% - We compiled some comments from first-time attendees. All were positive although one respondent mentioned that the meeting was not a good fit for them professionally. “Great first ESIP meeting. Excited to have found this community and will put next years meeting on my calendar asap.ˮ “This was my first ESIP meeting, so I canʼt compare it to other ESIP events. But I can say that it exceeds my experience participating virtually in other meetings. Thanks for making this an option, especially since it seems itʼs going to increasingly be the only avenue for participation for many of us.ˮ “Great organization, and excellent speakers. I felt welcome as a teacher from the beginning to the end.ˮ “This meeting is far from my area of expertise, I was looking for bridging from the [field] science, therefore I gave neutral to some questions - it was not relevant to me.ˮ Recommendations for Improvement Throughout the survey, respondents provided a number of recommendations within specific areas for improving the meeting in future years. Those recommendations included: 8 Program Structure and Content ● Organize sessions around tracks or themes to make it easier for participants to navigate. ● Improve session descriptions (plenary and concurrent) so attendees, especially virtual ones, can better decide what to attend. ● Reduce overlap in sessions and encourage collaboration between groups proposing similar topics. ● Include more biological data sessions alongside existing Earth science topics. ● Consider pairing convenings (e.g., winter meeting) with a big unifying theme that the community addresses collectively rather than primarily project updates. Hybrid & Virtual Participation ● Appoint a dedicated organizer to support online participants. ● Add a camera view of presenters and audience to enhance the virtual experience. ● Connect session hosts with Community Fellows ahead of time for planning and facilitation. ● Provide clearer guidance and support for tools like Miro boards to reduce confusion for session leads. Networking and Community Building ● Create mentor–mentee pairings for new attendees and students, based on registration data. ● Host more structured networking activities (e.g., mixer tables by random characteristic with prompts). ● Offer early-career networking sessions. ● Provide sign-ups for local events (e.g., baseball game, aquarium) similar to dine-around dinners. ● Ensure break spaces allow for comfortable, small-group conversations without excess noise. Sponsorship and Partnerships ● Add a sponsor showcase plenary to increase sponsor visibility. ● Actively engage external partners SeaGrant, LandGrant, SunGrant programs; local industry in host city). Logistics and Location ● Consider more affordable and less traditional venues (including rural locations). ● Avoid hot locations for meetings. ● Expand the hub-and-spoke decentralized meeting model, with local hub leaders for coordination. 9 benefit from each othersʼ work in building and implementing assessment frameworks. For example, the DataONE MetaDIG framework assesses dataset FAIR checks across the 63 members of the network, and is extending its work into both general and discipline-specific data quality checks. Similarly, programs like NOAAʼs GOMO Argo project, NCEI, and other examples like GoFAIR have developed approaches to automated quality assessment that could inform our discussions. Team Work Makes the Dream Work: Tales from Enterprise Product Planning and Implementation Jess Welch; Kristen Egan This session would invite teams to present/discuss their perspectives and lessons learned from building new products or major features for an enterprise where there are many stakeholders and teams involved. For example, I'm on a team working towards building a new ingest and archive system for NASA Earth. I would talk about our approach to requirements gathering, what has gone well, and what hasn't. It would be a tactful, but honest take on what a team can face with such an endeavor. The desired outcome for the session is to bring folks together over shared experiences, (hopefully) discuss positive outcomes, and provide suggestions for better team work or path to success. Principles for the development and curation of semantic resources in Earth science Marshall Ma; John Graybeal; Brandon Whitehead In the past years, the Earth science communities, including ESIP, have seen the come and go of many semantic initiatives and resources. Some of them, although generated impressive impact for a certain period of time, became hard to trace when their financial support ended and the research team dissolved. For this session we aim to have a brainstorm on the challenges and opportunities, and hopefully we can generate a list of principles or even a white paper on the best practices of curating semantic resources for Earth science. Designing data services for people Kate Wing; Kit Lewers The most effective and high-impact data services and products are designed with the end user in mind. How can you start thinking like a designer from the beginning of a project? Come join us for a quick course in human-centered design and user research. Weʼll practice some of the basic methods used by groups like the USDS/18F, IDEO, and Stanfordʼs d.school. There will be sticky notes and art supplies and How Might We questions. Bring your favorite exercises to share with the group. Leave with a better sense of how you can make sure what you create gets (re)used. 16 Foundational to Emerging Cloud-Native Technology Part 1 Rich Signell; Brianna Pagán; Max Jones; Aimee Barciauskas; Eli Holmes; Joseph Kennedy; Lindsey Nield; Tasha Snow As cloud technologies evolve, the Earth science community must balance capacity building for foundational tooling with investing in whatʼs new. New technologies are often considered risky as they may be unstable and untested, but their potential is too great to ignore. This two-part session will include presentations in part 1 and a working session in part 2. Part 1 presentations will introduce attendees to both established tools and practices (e.g., Xarray, Dask, Jupyter) and newer methods which have transformative potential (e.g., Jupyter-GIS, Icechunk). Making AI Actionable: Transforming Earth Science through Generative AI, Street View Imagery, and Machine Learning Ziheng Sun; Qian Huang; Hanlin Zhou; Tao Hu This session highlights cutting-edge applications of AI and ML designed to deliver actionable insights and practical solutions in Earth Science. Speakers will present diverse approaches, including the development of a generative AI-driven dashboard that provides real-time flooding analysis in Central Appalachia, employing GeoAI to assess environmental perceptions using street view imagery, and synthesizing recent advancements from the ESIP Machine Learning Cluster's research initiatives. Attendees will gain a deeper understanding of how advanced AI methodologies can be effectively implemented to address complex environmental challenges, support decision-making processes, and improve community resilience. Current and emerging spatial search technology Ryan Abbott In this session, weʼll look at how spatial search works today and why weʼre hunting for new solutions. Weʼll run through some simple ideas for handling bigger, more complex location data. And weʼll call out the main hurdles—dealing with huge data volumes, handling extra dimensions like height or time, and getting different tools to work smoothly together. A Decade of Enabling FAIR in Earth and Environmental Science Scholarly Publications: Evaluating Outcomes, Planning Ahead Lesley Wyborn; Kerstin Lehnert; Shelley Stall; Danie Kinkade The Coalition for Publishing Data in the Earth and Space Sciences (http://www.copdess.org/) formed in October 2014 to provide an organizational framework for Earth and space science publishers and data facilities to jointly implement 17 and promote common policies and procedures for the publication and citation of data across Earth Science journals Lehnert et al., 2016. In 2016 the FAIR principles were released Wilkinson et al., 2016, and in 2017, COPDESS, AGU, ESIP, RDA and other partners started a project to Enable FAIR Data across the Earth and space sciences funded by a grant from the Laura and John Arnold Foundation. The goal of the project was to align publishers and repositories in following best practices to enable FAIR data and to create workflows so that researchers will have a simplified, common experience when submitting their paper to any leading Earth and space science journal. The final conclusions of the project were published in 2019 Stall et al., 2019. In 2018, the COPDESS project moved to ESIP and became the COPDESS cluster. Since then, COPDESS has continued to try to foster better connections between publishers, editors, repositories and researchers. Given it is over 10 years that COPDESS started and over 5 years since the Enabling FAIR Data Project was completed, this ESIP session proposes to review how FAIR overall is being handled by publishers in the Earth, Space and Environmental Sciences. After a short introduction, open discussion will be held on the successes/limitations in the application of each of the FAIR principles. Moving forward, suggestions will be canvassed from the audience on how COPDESS can help address the limitations of the implementation of FAIR in general (e.g, Wong et al., 2024 and consider the implications of the Collaboratory for Indigenous Data Governance (n.d.) Proposed Guidelines for Indigenous Data Governance in Scholarly Publications currently in development. Discussion will consider issues such as ● What has worked, what hasn't ● Do we have all the key players we need at the table - what are the roles of repositories, publishers, editors, researchers? ● Do we need to involve the scientific societies more? ● Do we need to lower our expectations? ● Can anything be learned from trying to enable FAIR in publications that can assist the proposed Guidelines for Indigenous Data Governance in Scholarly Publications? Foundational to Emerging Cloud-Native Technology Part 2 Rich Signell; Brianna Pagán; Max Jones; Aimee Barciauskas As cloud technologies evolve, the Earth science community must balance capacity building for foundational tooling with investing in whatʼs new. New technologies are often considered risky as they may be unstable and untested, but their potential is too great to ignore. 18 This two-part session will include presentations in part 1 and a working session in part 2. Part 1 presentations will introduce attendees to both established tools and practices (e.g., Xarray, Dask, Jupyter) and newer methods which have transformative potential (e.g., Jupyter-GIS, Icechunk). The popularization of virtualization via index caching for optimized querying and subsetting will be a primary focus of the emerging technologies section. As archives of cloud data continue to grow, virtualization and smart indexing of this data will become critical to optimizing access in the IO-bound nature of data on the cloud. Part 2 will include parallel working sessions on foundational technologies and virtualization/indexing methods for participants to gain deeper understanding. Looking forward, the cloud computing cluster would like to tackle the still current challenge of migrating data to the cloud and making it accessible. During the ESIP summer meeting, we'll collect input from both data providers and users through targeted surveys documenting migration contexts, goals, challenges, solutions and usage pain points. This feedback will inform roundtable discussions and potentially a white paper examining large-scale cloud data accessibility from multiple stakeholder perspectives. Case Studies of Transitioning Datasets from Specialist to Generalist Repositories Ruth Duerr; Joseph Gum; Steve Diggs The circle of life applies to all, including repositories. Here we present case studies of three specialist repositories that have migrated datasets from their systems to a generalist repository, and their plans for continued support and curation after the migration is done. Of particular note will be the presenters talking about meeting researchers where they are and how the presenters are adding advanced curation to the typically no curation generalist repositories. Weʼll end with a Q&A session where attendees will be available to ask questions to the presenters. Measuring Impact: Success Metrics for Open Data Chris Stoner; Matt Putkoski Sharing data in the cloud lets data users spend more time on data analysis rather than data acquisition. Just putting data into the cloud isnʼt enough. In this session, the Amazon Web Services AWS Open Data team will discuss how to gather basic metrics for datasets in the Open Data program, and how to leverage them to show the value of these data to the community. Measuring the impact of open data initiatives is essential for demonstrating their value to science and innovation. This session brings together data providers and cloud technology experts to explore effective approaches for measuring open data success. Leading data providers will share best practices and lessons learned from implementing metrics programs, while the Amazon Web Services AWS Open Data team will demonstrate 19 practical methods for collecting and analyzing dataset usage in the cloud. Participants will learn how to effectively measure and communicate the value of their open data programs to stakeholders and the broader scientific community. Visions for the future of Wildfire Data Science Claire Stirm; Douglas Rao; Tim Bailey; Dave Jones We are at a unique juncture. Over the last decade we have witnessed dramatic increases in social, economic and environmental impact from wildfire. Wildfire risks are being recognized in new landscapes globally. The planning need for wildfire data science programs has grown. Meanwhile, there has been unprecedented investments in technical solutions to the wildfire crisis. Significant new capabilities are being delivered to wildfire practitioners. For instance, cloud native geospatial methods are increasingly available. Over the last six months we have experienced unprecedented disruption in the human resources systems that operate this infrastructure. Key personnel are leaving federal service. As we gather in Seattle we can expect to be approaching full national mobilization. In this session we will have the opportunity to take stock in where we are as a community of wildfire data science practitioners. This session will explore visions for future wildfire data science practices and review how our current infrastructure evolved. Earth Data Connections: Interoperable Geospatial Tools and New Technologies with a Community-Driven Approach Chris Battisto; Keenan Ganz Fostering an open-science geospatial community requires platforms for sharing new technologies, workflows, and interoperable tools. This session provides a space for geospatial scientists at all experience levels to explore these innovations, sparking collaboration and creativity. Developers will present their community-driven tools, with accessible demonstrations that offer immediate resources for attendees to engage with and inspire future collaboration. Session organizers and speakers will use pre-managed environments, such as Google Colab, to share any live coding examples, web tools, or other resources to help connect attendees with tools and data. Advancing Earth Science with Artificial Intelligence: Transforming Data into Action Debjani Singh; Clinton Stipek; Drew Snauffer; Zachary Medley The integration of Artificial Intelligence AI into earth science research is revolutionizing the way we understand, manage, and protect our natural resources. As data from sensors, satellite observations, and historical records becomes more comprehensive, AI offers a powerful pathway for converting this information into actionable insights. This session invites abstracts that explore the application of Data Science and Artificial 20 Intelligence AI in tackling a wide array of Earth science challenges. Topics of interest include, but are not limited to, climate modeling and prediction, natural hazard detection and mitigation (e.g., earthquakes, floods, wildfires), environmental monitoring, remote sensing data analysis, geospatial data integration, and ecosystem modeling. Contributions may include novel algorithms, innovative data integration techniques, real-time decision support systems, and case studies demonstrating AIʼs role in advancing earth and environmental science research. The session aims to foster interdisciplinary dialogue between data scientists, earth scientists, engineers, and policymakers to accelerate the responsible deployment of AI in earth science. Archive your first or second data set Joseph Gum; Rachael Blake; Julia Lowndes; Kate Wing; Eli Holmes This is a hands-on companion session to “Case Studies of Transitioning Datasets from Specialist to Generalist Repositoriesˮ. The vision here will be to help people figure out where and how to archive their first or second data set. For example, at NOAA Fisheries there is a list of approved data repositories that staff are encouraged to use (that we will share as we organize this session). But how? This will be a workshop-type session, BYOD “Bring your own datasetˮ! We will pick 13 repositories to intro/demo in the first part, including discussion about metadata. Then, participants will work through where and how to archive their data, with support from helpers with repository and metadata expertise. There are many questions that go along with archiving a dataset: which repository should I choose? What is metadata, and which metadata are required? What are PIDs, and why do people keep asking me for them? This hands-on workshop session invites you to BYOD “Bring your own datasetˮ, and the presenters will demo the best practices of depositing data into different repositories. We will discuss metadata and other questions, and finally participants will deposit their dataset into a repository with support from helpers and presenters with repository and metadata expertise. Earth Science data stewardship in the cloud Doug Newman; Ben Williams US agencies involved in the stewardship and management of earth science data have been migrating that data to the cloud for many years. With that experience has come a reevaluation of the risks and mitigations associated with preserving and protecting those archives. Cloud-based stewardship presents common, evolving and completely new risks when compared to an on-premises archive. But the cloud also provides new mitigations to the traditional risks associated with data stewardship. 21 Additionally, the sheer scale of our archives present new problems to long-term archival. As stewards of this data it is the various agencies' responsibility to maintain and protect those archives now and into the future. How will the cloud help us in this regard? Council of Data Facilities: AI-readiness, Funding and Support, and CDFʼs Future Nick Jarboe; Karen Stocks; Viswanath Nandigam The Council of Data Facilities serves as a community focus for data repositories to share knowledge, work on topics of common concern, and speak with a united voice to external communities. This session, open to all, will cover three topics: 1 AI-readiness and data facilities: status, needs, and opportunities. As AI is broadly revolutionizing how science and research are done, it is also bringing new expectations for data repositories to supply AI-ready data. As data facilities, what are the challenges this poses, what are the resources that are available, what are the gaps, and what do we need to move forward? An effort to develop a community roadmap article on data facility AI-readiness will be presented, and members will be invited to give feedback and participate in an open discussion of common challenges, interests and collaborative opportunities. 2 Data facilities in a chaotic environment. Given the unprecedented shifts in funding and agency priorities around data curation, how do we as a community organize to support each other and advocate for the critical work we do? This section will discuss the human side of communication and support, and will coordinate with the separate sessions on data replication across repositories and the repository crisis scorecard. 3 Future Goals and Directions. As data facility needs and interests evolve, and as stressors add demands on our limited time, how can the CDF best organize to serve its community, and to communicate to critical external communities. This will include a brief overview of its original mission and role, and a community “open mikeˮ time for your thoughts on what the CDF can do for you. Communicating Across the GEOBIO divide: Gathering Requirements, Use Cases, and Pain Points at the Intersection of Geoscience and Public Health Maria Shatz; Anne Thessen This session will be discussion focused. Our goal is to gather requirements, use cases, and pain points from two perspectives: 1 ESIPers who suspect they have health-relevant data, but are unsure how to make it available to health researchers, and 2 ESIPers who would like to use health data in their own research. Creating a DMP resource for the ESIP community 22 Elisha Wood-Charlson; Bolívar Aponte; Joseph Gum; Rachael Blake; Carolina Berys-Gonzalez The Data Stewardship Committee and the Marine Data Cluster created a DMP-focused working group after the January ESIP virtual meeting to explore and prototype a DMP resource for the ESIP community. This session will review the plan and progress of that working group effort, but the majority of the session will be devoted to exploring, providing feedback, and helping refine the ESIP Community DMP resource on GitHub. ESDIS Standards Coordination Office - Newly Adopted Standard Beth Huffer; Steve Olding; Ed Armstrong; Nathan Pollock; Marseille Bunk ESCO will review newly adopted standards, with a particular focus on data processing levels and variable-level metadata. More Support with Less Effort Ge Peng; Stephanie Wingo; Sara Lubkin; Lindsay Parker; Jennifer Brennan In an era of decreasing budgets, data repositories must do more with less. Repositories seek new approaches to provide the same or greater level of service LOS for their data holdings while using resources more efficiently (a same or smaller level of effort, LOE. We will discuss needs and percolate ideas centered on the application of practical, robust, and concise communication methods to socialize updated requirements, guidance, or other process-oriented information to key stakeholders throughout the data lifecycle. While the concept of improved communication and socialization spans many areas, the session will focus on the example of conveying updated data product production guidance to data producers. Various formal requirements and informal guidance documents exist across NASA and other repositories for precisely this purpose. However, lengthy descriptions and technical jargon often make it impractical for data producers to peruse such documents, and it is not uncommon for misunderstandings to cause data publication delays. In this interactive session, the NASA ESDIS User and Mission Support Office EUMSO lead engagement specialist will give an overview of several tools and techniques for conveying technical-oriented requirements in a digestible, practicable manner. We will then explore highlights of a current guidance document, as an example, and facilitate a small group activity in which participants will brainstorm the best ways to socialize the guidance using a variety of techniques. Overall, the session will equip participants with skills and new ideas to improve stakeholdersʼ practical understanding and implementation of requirements, with a renewed focus on internal process consistency, where possible. 23 As data stewardship professionals, we must evolve to support a higher LOS with a refined LOE. Working towards AI-readiness Checklist 2.0 Douglas Rao The Data Readiness Cluster is working towards the next version of the ESIP AI-readiness checklist to help both data producers and data users to assess the usability of open environmental data for AI applications. The cluster identified three major areas for improved based on pilot programs with World Data System, UK Met Office, and other community members' feedback. This working session will focus on collaboration towards the next version of the AI-readiness checklist. The three topics that will be included in the working session include: ● Develop primers to help users to understand the questions being asked in the checklist and how to answer these questions. ● Integrate the feedback from early adopters to improve the checklist by clarifying questions and adding additional information to support data integration. ● Develop a collection of assessment results from early-adopters. What role should civil society play in climate and environmental data stewardship? Gregory Maurer; Gabe Watson; Naomi Yoder; Christopher Cane; Gretchen Gehrke; Katie Hoeberling The American climate and environmental data landscape is changing rapidly. The responsibility for data collection, processing, maintenance, and dissemination may need to shift substantially onto civil society. This session is an interactive workshop that explores the question: What role could and should civil society play in American climate and environmental data over the coming decade? This session will include brief presentation about civil society data stewardship, but the majority of the session will focus on breakout group discussions about the opportunities, needs, challenges, and limitations of civil society performing key data stewardship functions (collection, processing, maintenance, dissemination, and others) across several different types of data: atmospheric and marine climate data, conservation data, toxic chemicals release and exposure data, and regulatory compliance data. We will come together at the close of the session to share about the possibilities and pitfalls we see in civil society taking on new roles in different kinds of data stewardship. Community-derived validation suites for schema.org Dataset interoperability Colin Smith; Ian Nesbitt; Matt Jones; Chantelle Verhey; Zach Boquet 24 Schema.org metadata has become an important, interoperable thread linking repositories across the Earth sciences. The Science-on-schema.org SOSO guidelines provide ESIP-wide recommendations for how data providers should structure and provide Dataset metadata in unambiguous and consistent ways with schema.org. Nevertheless, the community would benefit from improved tooling and a shared understanding of what it means to be compliant with SOSO guidelines, and which fields are required and optional for various downstream metadata use cases. Towards that end, this will be a working session of the SOSO cluster focused on community agreement on validation rules and approaches for Science-on-Schema.org Dataset records. We are looking for useful use cases and applications from data aggregators (e.g., DataONE, Google, Ocean Info Hub), as well as from data facilities like repositories, and other researcher-driven validation needs. The session will focus on the following activities: 1. Quick overview of use cases for SOSO validation requirements, and how they might vary across different use cases and applications 2. Brainstorm, review, and revise a set of proposed validation rules for different SOSO use cases 3. Discuss and decide which validation rules are required and recommended for each of several use cases (possibly in breakout groups if the group is large) 4. Discussion of next steps to formalize and release as a product HDF5 2.0 Cloud Optimized from the Start Aleksandar Jelenak HDF5 has quietly enabled breakthroughs across geosciences for over two decades. From NASA satellite missions to climate and weather modeling (as netCDF4 backend) it has helped scientists to manage, share, and make sense of complex data seamlessly across various computing platforms. This session will present enhancements slated for the upcoming release 2.0 of the HDF5 library: new datatypes for ML/AI applications and complex numbers, new default settings when accessing cloud optimized HDF5 files, and easier use of advanced compression methods. The topics covered will also include latest features and improvements for accessing: 1 NASA's EOSDIS HDF5/netCDF4, HDFEOS5, and HDF4 data via OPeNDAP DMR web service in the AWS cloud; 2 cloud native HDF5/JSON-based format HSDS using Python. Improving Data Impact through Governance and Stewardship Activities Ge Peng; Douglas Rao; Sara Lubkin; Nancy Ritchey; Emanuel Söding This session will explore how connecting data governance and stewardship efforts across organizations can enhance data interoperability and maximize impact. Participants will discuss data governance efforts around PIDs, file formats, metadata, vocabularies, semantics – all critical artifacts that support data interoperability. 25 To address this, the Hub and Spoke model is being explored as a promising alternative. This approach blends in-person, hybrid, and online formats by creating regional hubs where participants can gather locally to engage in discussions, workshops, and networking, while still connecting globally through digital platforms. See e.g., The Future of Meetings: https://thefutureofmeetings.wordpress.com) While alternative modes of participation are not equivalent to being there in person, they are far from worthless. With thoughtful design and investment, they can offer real value, especially when they include opportunities for interaction, collaboration, and community engagement. This session invites us to think creatively about the future of ESIP meetings. By embracing innovative participation models like Hub and Spoke, we can make conferences more accessible, inclusive, and sustainable. The goal is not to replace in-person meetings, but to enhance the overall experience by offering meaningful alternatives that broaden participation and reduce environmental impact. Research Data Management Systems RDMS A hands-on session on how to replicate data across similar systems Joseph Gum; Carolina Berys-Gonzalez; Matt Jones; Karl Benedict; Mathew Biddle Research data management systems RDMS are software systems like any other, and are subject to the same best practices as other software, including backup/replication and test your backups regularly. For RDMS the core goal is to preserve all datasets, all metadata and data, any backups should preserve this in a fashion that can be ingested by the same RDMS that created the backup or an instance of the RDMS somewhere else. As the saying goes, you are only as good as your last tested backup. Testing the ability of other repositories to ingest your data backups is an exercise to perform repeatedly. In this hands-on session we will present some examples of how to backup/replicate common open source RDMS, such as ERDDAP and Metacat. We may explore thoughts around automated ingest testing capabilities to allow for data facilities to test their backups on a small scale without disrupting regular activities at multiple data facilities. This is a hands-on companion session to “Data replication and repository succession: sustaining and preserving data for the long-termˮ. Turning Earth Data into Action: AI for Wildfire Risk Prediction Rocio Frej Vitalle 32 As climate change drives increasingly destructive wildfire behavior, actionable, real-time intelligence is no longer a luxury, itʼs a necessity. This session will showcase WindTL, an AI-powered wildfire modeling platform developed by SkyTL, designed to transform Earth observation data into operational insights for emergency responders, insurers, utilities, and land managers. The session will explore how WindTL blends physics-informed neural networks PINNs, machine learning, and real-time sensor fusion to predict wildfire behavior and ember spread — responsible for up to 90% of structure losses during wildfires. We'll share how WindTL operationalizes research-grade fire modeling and delivers user-friendly risk maps and simulations in minutes, even in low-connectivity environments. Weʼll also demonstrate how weʼve scaled WindTL using Google Cloud technologies, including Vertex AI and Kubernetes, to deliver national-scale impact. Real-world examples will include how WindTL accurately predicted ember crossing during the Thompson Fire, enabling faster resource deployment and protection of high-value homes. The session will conclude with a live demo of the WindTL platform, a discussion on model transparency and community trust, and a call for cross-sector collaboration to accelerate innovation in wildfire resilience. Replicating Critical Climate Data Ben Galewsky There are several efforts under way to protect and preserve replicas of important climate datasets. Let's get together to discuss the various initiatives and see how we can make this more efficient and effective. This will be an opportunity to reflect on all of the discussions held during the week. Harnessing Environmental Molecular Data for Earth Systems Discoveries Kelly Stratton; Samantha Miller; Montana Smith; Sarah Leichty As a Department of Energy, Office of Science user facility sponsored by the Biological and Environmental Research BER program, the Environmental Molecular Sciences Laboratory EMSL accelerates scientific discovery by offering innovative capabilities to researchers to understand biological and environmental processes across temporal and spatial scales. This session will provide an overview of EMSLʼs 10-year science objectives: Modeling Integration and Data Agents for Science MIDAS, the Molecular Observation Network MONet, and the Digital Phenome DigiPhen). MIDAS will be an ecosystem of artificial intelligence AIbased agents that will increase the efficiency and effectiveness of researchers in the BER mission space. MONetʼs mission is to develop a continental-scale database of standardized molecular and microstructural data to 33 advance the understanding and prediction of microbially and root-driven inputs in soil ecosystems and terrestrial aerosol processes. DigiPhen aims to develop a platform where researchers generate a variety of data that can be used to parameterize computational simulations and models to predict the phenotypes of a biological system. In addition to sharing information about available data types, this session will highlight EMSLʼs efforts to standardize metadata collection to improve data integration. To motivate discussion about research interests and needs of the ESIP community, examples of previous EMSL research as well as resources offered in the computing sciences will be provided. A portion of this session will include a Miro Board activity and discussion about common scientific areas of interest and data science challenges faced by the ESIP community and EMSL. Crossing the chasm: amplifying success stories about co-creating across institutions Jennifer Schopf; Julia Lowndes; Eli Holmes; Amy Steiker; Yuvi Panda At the May 2025 Cloud Native Geospatial Conference Lowndes gave a keynote titled “Crossing the chasm: change & resilience within organizations. Diffusion of Innovation theory in practice with NOAA Fisheries Openscapesˮ. It was about the awesome staff at NOAA Fisheries who are responsible for the stewardship of the nationʼs ocean resources and their habitat. Claiming weʼve crossed a big scary chasm is a bold claim, especially for a big goal: data modernization and workforce development across the agency. And, while the work is still hard and ongoing, this crossing is a story to celebrate. To amplify. To point and say “this is possibleˮ. To repeat/fork in new places. To join. To grow. For you, us, to do these things. This is work that has been building for decades, by many dedicated people inside and outside of NOAA Fisheries, with many different job titles and contributions. This chasm crossing is a big deal because new data workflows are more efficient and robust, but they take real time to adopt and take new skills. It is not easy in a large organization. But through steady work over the last three years, itʼs happening. We are out of the early adopter phase and into the early majority. We shared how we planned, using the Diffusion of Innovation theory by EM Rogers 1962. And then how we operationalized, using the Openscapes Flywheel Robinson & Lowndes 2022. In this session we will give an abbreviated version of this talk to set the tone for others in and across institutions to share their stories of crossing the chasm. Teacher Workshop This interactive in person and online workshop includes a plenary session and three 90 minute workshops, culminating in an opportunity to create a pitch for a mini-grant (for those present in person). All participants attending all sessions receive a certificate for 10 34 hours of professional development. In addition, youʼll have the opportunity to find out about school year implementation grants. This workshop is hosted by the Earth Science Information Partners ESIP Education Committee. 35