I chose to look at the Balance of All City Funds dataset. The data types are funds, covering all funds for the city of Los Angeles, including general funds, reserve funds, and budget stabilization funds. A record in this data set includes information about the type of fund, its worth, department, its purpose, uses, and source of funding are among some of the information gathered about each fund in the database. The ontology of the database is based on the value of the fund and type.
The ontology would make the most sense to a city council worker. Overall, it highlights the most important information about a fund that someone looking for funding, i.e. a council member, would need to benefit the city of Los Angeles. Any volunteers or other members of the LA community looking to receive funding would also find this database beneficial.
Even though the total amount of funding is extremely large, when looking closely at the data it is easy to identify that many of the funds have no money in them. The contact information, both phone number and email, are available for more information that is not given in the data. The biggest piece that is missing from the data is how someone else could get access to each fund. Only the current use I stated, not how it could be used in the future. Luckily, since there is contact information and past information about the funds, various other ways of accessing this information is possible.
If I were to start a data collection of the funds in this database, I would start with the view of the consumer. The name of the fund would be first, but after that I would focus on collecting more information on the other uses of the funds, not only the current use for them. Collecting information about a broader topic of uses would be more beneficial to a consumer trying to apply for a fund, than the current focus on information useful to political figures.