The primary characteristics of these communities are long-standing institutional relationships, shared mission, and identity. In each, most if not all of the organizations involved in data acquisition, use, and access activities have a formal or legal relationship, often based in statutes. They also work in the same policy domain, such as health, public safety, etc., which results in shared understanding of their overall mission and professional identity. The USDA community has roots and relationships going back over a century, as well as many professional and educational linkages. The FDIC deals primarily with the banking community and is closely related to it legally and professionally. The New York State agencies are tightly coupled with the public safety and public health communities respectively, and so forth. These are long-term, interdependent relationships. The kinds of information involved may be highly varied, but the conceptual and institutional frames are very similar within a community.

As a result of this pattern, some of the problems faced by other groups are less severe. Metadata and standards issues are generally less serious than with other groups, due in part to the legal frameworks available to support standards and consistencies, though they are far from fully effective. The focus on a more-or-less common mission means that the overall variety in types of information to be dealt with is less than elsewhere. Less variety in the nature of the data means fewer formats to deal with. The members of such a community are more likely to share the same assumptions about priorities and overall goals as well.

The relatively hierarchical structure and legal status of the relationships in such a community can be troublesome as well. Because the relationships and practices are often embedded in a policy and legal framework, change can be difficult and resources scarce. Government agencies must deal with annual budget cycles that inhibit long-term planning. For this group, their information activities are performed in the service of specific policy objectives. Providing information access is a means to an end for the repository, not an end in itself. Therefore, information services often must compete for resources with other programs and priorities. And unanticipated changes in policies and political priorities can interfere with information system developments and investment. The tight relationships have both positive and negative impacts.