COMMITTEES   |   Enterprise Architecture and Governance Committee

About the Committee

The NASCIO Enterprise Architecture program was developed to enable the mission of state and local government. Government must continually reinvent itself to remain relevant by effectively and efficiently providing services to the citizens of this country. The path to this continual transformation must embrace leadership, management, coordination, communication and technology throughout government. Enterprise architecture is the discipline to appropriately define and leverage these capabilities within the complexities of government.

Committee Roster

Co-Chair: Dugan Petty, State of Oregon

Co-Chair: Greg Wass, State of Illinois

Kevin Acker, State of Wisconsin Steve Ambrosini, IJIS Institute Tom Baden, State of Minnesota David Ballard, Qwest John Bastin, HP Chris Bennett, District of Columbia Ellen Bluestone Reilly, iLinc Communications Ronald S Bolin, State of West Virginia Donita Brown, State of Tennessee Scott Came, SEARCH Micheline Casey, State of Colorado Greg Cheetham, Intel Paul Christman, Quest Software Anthony Collins, State of Delaware John Copple, Sanborn Rob Culp, IBM Shell Culp, State of California Pat Cummens, ESRI Matthew D'Alessandro, Motorola John Dolejsi, CA Technologies Jim Dotson, Fred Duball, HP Ric Dugger, State of Florida Brad Dupuy, HP John Ellison, Mr. Scot R Ellsworth, State of Michigan Lauren Farese, Oracle USA Inc Michael Fenton, State of North Carolina Bill Ferguson, State of Colorado Graeme Finley, Grant Thornton LLP Tim Finnegan, SAS Institute Eileen Fitzsimmons, State of New York Jeremy Forman, Oracle USA Inc Tracy Guerin, State of Washington Jason Gunnoe, State of Tennessee Michael Hammel, Commonwealth of Virginia Matt Harcourt, LexisNexis Viann Hardy, MAXIMUS Inc Robert Hellstern, State of Iowa Deborah Henderson, DAMA International Mary Hill-Hartman, IBM Nadine Hoffman, Commonwealth of Virginia Michael N Hogarth, ESI International Samuel Holcman, Enterprise Architecture Center Of Excellence Doug Holt, State of Texas Charlene Huggard, State of New York Randy Hughes, State of Utah Christopher Ipsen, State of Nevada Cliff Koch, Novell Inc David N Kroening, State of New York Jim Lacson, Government of Guam

Charles Leadbetter, Berry Dunn McNeil & Parker Leah Lewis, State of Colorado Daniele Loffreda, Fujitsu Network Communications Catherine Lumsden, SAP Public Services Lee Macklin, State of California Alisanne Maffei, State of Nevada Steve Matthews, HP Mark McChesney, Commonwealth of Kentucky Laurel McMillan, State of Washington Kristen Miller, Deloitte Consulting LLP Jim Mills, State of South Carolina Mary Mondragon, Avaya Inc Kathy Moore, State of West Virginia Kathy Moore, State of West Virginia Michael K Morey, State of Vermont John Morgan, Lee Mosbrucker, State of California Colin Nurse, Microsoft David O'Berry, State of South Carolina Jeanne Owings, Crowe Horwath LLP Paul Patterson, State of Texas Bethann Pepoli, EMC Corporation Judson Person, State of Minnesota Holli Ploog, CGI Technologies & Solutions Inc Scott Pollack, Deloitte Consulting LLP Sharon Poulalion, State of South Carolina John Punzak, Red Hat Scott Riordan, State of Oregon Christina Rogers, State of California Bill Roth, State of Kansas Dave Sagisser, State of Minnesota Russ Saito, State of Hawaii JD Sherry, NIC Rico Singleton, State of New York Sandy L. Smith, State of Nevada Knute Steel, BDNA Christopher Sullivan, Teradata Jeff Swank, Glenn Thomas, Commonwealth of Kentucky Ron Thomas, State of Missouri Tony Tortorice, State of Washington Christopher Traver, US Department of Justice Troy Travis, Chuck Tyger, Carlos Valarezo, Symantec Ted Van Ryn, Fujitsu Network Communications Tom Walters, Commonwealth of Kentucky Thomas Warner, CA Technologies Dan Widner, Commonwealth of Virginia Robert D Woolley, State of Utah Richard Young, Microsoft

Committee Publications

• Publications Archive

DO YOU THINK? OR DO YOU KNOW? Improving State Government Operations Through Business Analytics
February 2010
Business analytics provides an evidence-based approach for decision making. With the current emphasis on transparency and visibility into the operations of government, government leaders need to anticipate more questions and evaluation related to not only what decisions are being made, but also what rationale was applied in making those decisions. As stated in this issue brief, intuition alone is not adequate for evaluating alternatives and making decisions. Effective implementation of a business analytics capability will promote an enterprise-wide culture of fact-based decision making. State government is encouraged to seriously look at business analytics as a means for fully understanding current circumstances and make predictions about the future. The predictive nature is particularly important as we continue to face ongoing fiscal challenges and increasing demand for state government services.

Data Governance Part III: Frameworks – Structure for Organizing Complexity
May 2009
This issue brief presents the concept of frameworks that describes what constitutes a data governance program, with a focus on frameworks from the Data Management Association (DAMA), the Data Governance Institute (DGI), and IBM. Use of frameworks can assist state government in planning and executing on an effective data governance initiative. They assist in achieving completeness in a program. In any subject or discipline frameworks and maturity models assist in describing the scope – both breadth and depth – of an initiative. This holds true as well for data, information and knowledge management.

Data Governance Part II: Maturity Models – A Path to Progress
March 2009
Data governance maturity models provide a foundational reference for understanding data governance and for understanding the journey that must be anticipated and planned for achieving effective governance of data, information and knowledge assets. This report continues to build on the concepts presented in Data Governance Part I. It presents a portfolio of data governance maturity models.

Governance of Geospatial Resources: “Where’s the Data? Show Me” - Maximizing the Investment in State Geospatial Resources
July 2008
Geospatial resources refer to a whole discipline around managing data with a spatial orientation or component to support better decision making. Geospatial resources include a field of knowledge, people, policies, processes, standards, and technology that are not only necessary for everyday decision making but also critical for continuity of operations and disaster recovery. A new emphasis on location aware is evidenced further as State CIOs named “GIS” on their Top Ten list of Priority Technologies for 2008. Geospatial resources are so ubiquitous anymore that state government as well as citizens and industry think “where?” regarding almost every issue. This issue brief explores government’s demand for geospatial resources and offers recommendations and calls to action for the state Chief Information Officer to meet that demand.

Data Governance - Managing Information As An Enterprise Asset: Part I - An Introduction
April 2008
Data governance entails a universe of concepts, principles, and tools intended to enable appropriate management and use of the state’s investment in information.  Part I on data governance presents an introduction that describes the basic concepts.  Governance, and particularly data governance, is an evolutionary process.  It begins with an understanding of the current investment and then manages that investment toward greater value for the state.

IT Governance and Business Outcomes – A Shared Responsibility between IT and Business Leadership
March 2008
IT Governance is all about ensuring that state government is effectively using information technology in all government lines of business. This requires that the decision rights for IT investments and deployment are properly shared between the business and IT functions within state government. This issue brief provides an introduction to this very broad topic.

Electronic Records Management and Digital Preservation: Protecting the Knowledge Assets of the State Government Enterprise
Part III: Management Leads and Technology Follows – But Collaboration is King!
October 2007
This research brief concludes the current NASCIO series on the subject of electronic records management and digital preservation. This subject area is very broad and has multiple dimensions, perspectives and challenges for the state IT community. The objective for the series is to highlight some of the key issues and make relevant recommendations to the state CIO. Ultimately, electronic records management and digital preservation must be a shared responsibility with understanding and support from the state CIO. Everyone within state government must play their part in managing the digital assets of the state.

Electronic Records Management and Digital Preservation: Protecting the Knowledge Assets of the State Government Enterprise
PART II: Economic, Legal, and Organizational Issues
July 2007
NASCIO continues its series on electronic records management and digital preservation with Part II which focuses on economic, legal, and organizational issues and recommended actions for State CIOs.  Part II builds on the theme that the state CIO and the state enterprise architect will need to view electronic records management and digital preservation as disciplines that comprise an enterprise architecture domain.  Partnering with the state’s archivists, librarians, and records managers to fully leverage their expertise will help ensure the state’s knowledge assets are managed for value with a long term view.  eDiscovery and offshoring present significant challenges to the state enterprise.  CIOs will need to build their awareness of these subject areas and author necessary compliance and risk management strategies.

Electronic Records Management and Digital Preservation: Protecting the Knowledge Assets of the State Government Enterprise
PART I: Background, Principles and Action for State CIOs
May 2007
Electronic records management and digital preservation are necessary disciplines for managing the knowledge assets of the enterprise. Attention to these disciplines must be part of every IT investment decision. The lifecycle of "born digital" is presented with emphasis on the decision making process at each major phase. The series will present the current issues and recommendations for action. This first release in this series deals with the principles of records management, and highlights the most significant challenges facing the states.

Enterprise Architecture Video Library

NASCIO’s architecture videos are intended to serve as a resource for CIOs, architects and other IT experts in their efforts to present a compelling message describing the value of enterprise architecture. They may also be used in new employee orientation and the introduction of enterprise architecture concepts to policy makers, government staff, and potentially the public. This four volume set includes two videos previously released by NASCIO. Two additional videos were produced that direct the message of enterprise architecture toward policy makers and technical professionals, respectively. The complete video series provide a library of messages that can be selected based on the audience and intent of the presenter. Funding for the project was provided by a grant from the U.S. Department of Justice, the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs.

In Hot Pursuit: Achieving Interoperability Through XML
October 2004
CD version is higher quality than the streaming version.

Digital Government
January 2004

Architecture: A Blueprint for Better Government
January 2004

Enterprise Architecture – Government Leader Perspective
January 2004

Enterprise Architecture – Information Technology Professional Perspective
January 2004

Related Resources:

• Performance Measurement for Justice Information System Projects
  A practical guide for establishing performance measure for information sharing projects
• NASCIO Catalog for Information Exchanges
• Justice Information Sharing Resource Directory - An on-line directory of tools that support the development, design, and implementation of strategies to improve justice information sharing. (April 2005)
• Global Justice Reference Architecture (JRA) for Service Oriented Architecture
• The NIEM exchange development methodology – National Information Exchange Model
  
  • Online NIEM Implementer’s Course
  • Download Course Module slides

Strategic Partners:

• U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance & Global
  
  
• Center for Technology in Government
  • Sharing Justice Information: A Capability Assessment Toolkit
  • Capability Assessment Toolkit Online Tool
• SEARCH: The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics
  • The Justice Information Exchange Model Tool
• The IJIS Institute

Enterprise Architecture Related Websites:

• The Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments (IFEAD)
• The Zachman Institute for Framework Advancement
• Data Management International
  
  • The Data Management Body of Knowledge (DMBOK)
  
  
• The FEAC Institute
• The Data Administration Newsletter

This information was prepared under the leadership, guidance, and funding of the Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, in collaboration with NASCIO. The opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this document are those of the authors and do not necessarily represent the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.