There are several maturity models related to data quality out there. I have found a good collection in this document from NASCIO.
I guess the mother of all maturity models is the Capability Maturity Model (CMM). This model is related to software development.
There is also a parody model for that called the Capability Immaturity Model (CIMM). Inspired by an article yesterday by Jill Dyché on Information Management called Anti-Predictions for 2011 I have found that the CIMM model is easily adapted to a data quality immaturity model with levels from zero to minus three as this:
0 : Negligent
The organization pays lip service, often with excessive fanfare, to implementing data quality processes, but lacks the will to carry through the necessary effort. Whereas level 1 assumes eventual success in producing and measuring quality data, level 0 organizations generally fail to have any idea about the actual horrible quality of the data assets.
-1 : Obstructive
Processes, however inappropriate and ineffective, are implemented with rigor and tend to obstruct work. Adherence to process is the measure of success in a level -1 organization. Any actual creation of quality data is incidental. The quality of any data is not assessed, presumably on the assumption that if the proper process was followed, high quality data is guaranteed.
-2 : Contemptuous
While processes exist, they are routinely ignored by the staff and those charged with overseeing the processes are regarded with hostility. Measurements are fudged to make the organization look good.
-3 : Undermining
Not content with faking their own performance, undermining departments within the organization routinely work to downplay and sabotage the efforts of rival departments. This is worst where company policy causes departments to compete for scarce resources, which are allocated to the loudest advocates.