COMMITTEES | Enterprise Architecture and Governance Committee
About the CommitteeThe 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.
Staff contact: Eric Sweden
Phone: (859) 514-9189
Tony Encinias, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Carolyn Parnell, State of Minnesota
Jason Allison, State of Florida|
Doug Alt, State of Ohio
Steve Ambrosini, IJIS Institute
Ms. Dianna Anderson, State of Colorado
Ed Arabas, State of Oregon
Daniel Arnold, Commonwealth of Kentucky
David Ballard, CenturyLink
Dave Barber, Software AG
Dave Barber, Software AG
John Bastin, HP
Glen Bellomy, Symantec
Paul Bender, Oracle USA Inc.
Chris Bennett, District of Columbia
Rohit Bhanot, Motorola Solutions
Caroline Bigelow, State of California
Doug Bourgeois, VMware
Scott Came, SEARCH
Charles Cephas, Symantec
Victor Chakravarty, State of Maine
Greg Cheetham, Intel
Mr. Paul Christman, Dell Inc.
Matt Cillis, Splunk Inc.
Andrew Clark, State of New York
Anthony Collins, State of Delaware
Crystal Cooper, Unisys
Rob Culp, IBM
Shell Culp, State of California
Patricia Cummens, ESRI
Jeff DePasquale, Gartner Inc.
Michael Dillon, State of Colorado
Mark Dixon, IBM
Jack Doane, State of Alabama
Bryan Dreiling, State of Kansas
Ric Dugger, State of Florida
Mr. Tim Durniak, IBM
Kelley Eich, State of Colorado
Scot R Ellsworth, State of Michigan
Lauren Farese, Oracle USA Inc.
Randy Federspill, State of Delaware
Michael Fenton, State of North Carolina
Bill Ferguson, State of Colorado
Graeme Finley, Grant Thornton LLP
Eileen Fitzsimmons, State of New York
Mr. Andy Ford, NIC
Steve Fowler, State of Colorado
William French, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
Thomas Fruman, State of Georgia
Gary Garofalo, MAXIMUS
Robin Gregory, State of Michigan
Virginia Hambric, State of Michigan
Viann Hardy, MAXIMUS Inc.
Deborah Henderson, DAMA International
Mitch Herckis, NASCIO
Mary Hill-Hartman, IBM
Nadine Hoffman, Commonwealth of Virginia
Michael N Hogarth, ESI International
Chad Holmes, FireEye
Christopher Ipsen, State of Nevada
Jack Johnson, Motorola Solutions
Greg Jones, IBM
Kent E. Klitzke, HP
Raj Kollengode, State of Arizona
David N Kroening, State of New York
Mr. Charles Knapp Leadbetter, III, BerryDunn
Leah Lewis, Cisco Systems Inc.
Daniel J Lohrmann, State of Michigan
Alisanne Maffei, State of Nevada
| Dilby Malakar, DAMA International|
Chad Mathias, Gantech Inc
Mark McChesney, Commonwealth of Kentucky
Bob McDonough, State of Michigan
James McFarlane, State of Michigan
Stephen McHugh, HP
Greg McNeal, State of Maine
Sean McSpaden, State of Oregon
Tammie Means, State of West Virginia
Kristen Miller, Deloitte Consulting LLP
Jim Mills, State of South Carolina
Krishna Mohan, Commonwealth of Kentucky
Kathy Moore, State of West Virginia
Michael K Morey, State of Vermont
David O'Berry, McAfee
Paulina Orlikowski, HP
Robert Otterberg, HP
Andris Ozols, State of Michigan
Dan Paolini, State of New Jersey
Eric Perkins, Commonwealth of Virginia
Dugan Petty, Center for Digital Government
Randy Phares, Software AG
Holli Ploog, CGI Technologies & Solutions Inc.
Mary Lou Prevost, CA Technologies
John Punzak, Red Hat, Inc.
Diana Quintero, State of Michigan
Safouen Rabah, Socrata
Scott Riordan, State of Oregon
Van Ristau, DLT Solutions Inc
Doug Robinson, NASCIO
Christina Rogers, State of California
Jim Rose, State of Indiana
Neil Ross, Microsoft
Jim Salb, State of Delaware
Lauren Sallata, Xerox
Kyle Schafer, Advocate Solutions, LLC
Ellena Schoop, State of Minnesota
Constance Scott, Commonwealth of Virginia
Scott Serich, IJIS Institute
Eric Simon, HP
Ms. Amy M Smith, HP
Mr. Len Smith, State of Connecticut
Eric Sweden, NASCIO
David Taylor, Software AG
Glenn Thomas, Commonwealth of Kentucky
Ron Thomas, State of Missouri
Lisa Thompson, NASCIO
Craig Thurmond, Grant Thornton LLP
Ulrich Tibaut Houzanme, State of Indiana
Christopher Traver, US Department of Justice
Christopher Traver, US Department of Justice
Mitch Urbanczyk, Motorola Solutions
Mr. Scott Utley, State of Arkansas
Carlos Valarezo, Symantec
John Vittner, State of Connecticut
Tom Walters, Commonwealth of Kentucky
Meredith Ward, NASCIO
Paul Warren Douglas, State of Washington
Greg Wass, State of Illinois
Mr. Milton Nye Weatherhead, III, NetApp
Samantha Wenger, NASCIO
Dan Widner, Commonwealth of Virginia
Ed Wiebe, State of California
Robert D Woolley, State of Utah
Jay Wyant, State of Minnesota
Richard Young, Microsoft
Marlyn Zelkowitz, SAP Public Services
Gregory Zink, State of New York
Destination: Advancing Enterprise Portfolio Management – First Stop: Issues Management
State CIOs are managing a growing and diverse set of investments, services and collaborative arrangements. Enterprise portfolio management (EPM) is a discipline that provides the tools and best practices necessary for doing this proactively and successfully. EPM provides a view into the enterprise – not only projects, but also services, operations, programs and resources. EPM essentially turns enterprise architecture into action. EPM involves many portfolios. The first portfolio that drives the others is the portfolio of issues that identifies, scores and prioritizes the very issues we’re trying to solve through projects, programs, management initiatives and operations.
What Makes Collaborative Initiatives Work?
Collaboration is a major part of the solution to sustaining and thriving government organizations and services. But it has to be done correctly so it is effective, can sustain through the life of the initiative’s intent, and can adapt with changing environmental circumstances. No matter what service area, mode of delivery, management area, or technology, collaborative arrangements should be considered as an alternative that may deliver the most effective outcomes.
NASCIO is actively investigating existing collaboratives in order to promote collaborative arrangements across government and to uncover operating discipline and best practices that make for successful collaboratives.These best practices support strategy, governance, program and project management, organization, operations and effective application of technology.Collectively these best practices are imbedded in the enterprise architecture of successful collaboratives.
Why Should Government Join Up? Why now? What do we gain?
Maintaining and increasing government service delivery in the current economic circumstances is nearing the impossible. What is the answer? Part of the answer is the formation of collaborative relationships across agencies and jurisdictions to share and in some circumstances consolidate investments. State and local governments can not afford to go it alone. Through collaborative governance structures, jurisdictions can pool funding, increase buying power, remove or reduce redundant investments in technology and actually make significant gains in the quality of service.
Is Big Data a Big Deal for State Governments? The Big Data Revolution – Impacts for State Government – Timing is Everything
The volume and velocity of data creation is at all time high – and is accelerating. State government is a veritable data engine creating vast amounts of data from a vast number of sources. That data is being used to comply with regulations; uncover fraud, waste and abuse; and ultimately improve the lives of citizens. The sky is the limit in terms future data generation based on the growth in mobile applications, sensors, cloud services and the growing public private partnerships that must be monitored for performance and service levels, according to NASCIO’s latest in its series of issue briefs on analytics - “Is Big Data a Big Deal?”
In this issue brief, the universe of “big data” will be explored in order to:
- Create a foundation preliminary to further description and exploration in future briefs, conference sessions and innovations forums.
- Set common characteristics of big data versus simply lots of data.
- Emphasize the necessity of data governance and data management within a broader state government enterprise architecture.
- Present some early recommendations for state government regarding big data.
Capitals in the Clouds Part IV – Cloud Security: On Mission and Means
This brief presents an emphasis on the cultural and organizational aspects of cloud computing. “Cloud services” imply shared services. When agencies come together to share such a resource there will necessarily have to be an evaluation of the variance in security policies in place in the various partner agencies. Engaging external cloud services can be quite risky if such services have not been properly vetted by state security staff. Much education, awareness, and ongoing communication will be required to ensure state government employees are fully aware of the risks of external cloud services. The imperative for states is to stay connected and maintain the dialogue, sharing intentions and solutions, as state government moves forward with adoption of cloud services. Cloud is not the only solution or avenue for sharing resources. When it is the right solution, it must be employed with proper attention to the security aspects of cloud services, particularly with external cloud services.
Capitals in the Clouds Part III – Recommendations for Mitigating Risks: Jurisdictional, Contracting and Service Levels
Cloud computing will continue to be an invaluable resource for state and local governments in their efforts to rationalize and optimize computing resources. Cloud computing should be seen as an IT innovation that can support rationalization and optimization of business services as well as IT services. Due diligence prescribes the necessity of exploring and evaluating jurisdictional issues in order to ensure long term sustainability and growing adoption of collaborative government operations in state and local government.
Capitals in the Clouds - The Case for Cloud Computing in State Government Part II:
Challenges and Opportunities to Get Your Data Right
Cloud computing brings with it opportunities, issues and risks. One major consideration that must be addressed is the management of data – governance, stewardship, consistency, ownership and security. Data is the lifeblood of state government operations and critical for service delivery. With the fiscal stress and operational pressures that are driving state and local governments toward serious consideration and adoption of cloud computing, the data must not be ignored. These pressures must be managed intelligently to avoid pushing government into a future situation that could constitute greater cost, and more difficulty in achieving interoperability of government lines of business and government jurisdictions.
Capitals in the Clouds - The Case for Cloud Computing in State Government Part I: Definitions and Principles
Cloud computing has arrived as a serious alternative for state government. There are outstanding issues that must be faced and dealt with in order to maintain the reliability, responsibility, security, privacy, and citizen-confidence in government services. Government is exploring technology and business process innovations that will make the way for government to deliver existing services more economically. Cloud computing provides a number capabilities that have the potential for enabling such innovation.
A Call to Action: Information Exchange Strategies for Effective State Government
NASCIO Recommends State Government Adopt the National Information Exchange Model (NIEM) to Enable Government Information Sharing
The National Information Exchange Model (NIEM) provides a broad range of products and capabilities for planning and implementing enterprise-wide information exchanges. Government effectiveness and citizen centric government services require effective cross line of business collaboration and communication. Use of national standards will avoid redundant investment and unnecessary variation. What is needed is a common discipline for information sharing that is employed by all government lines of business. NIEM exists as that discipline for federal, state and local government.
Enterprise Architecture Video LibraryNASCIO’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.
Enterprise Architecture Related Resources:
- Global Justice Reference Architecture (JRA) for Service Oriented Architecture
- 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)
- NASCIO Catalog for Information Exchanges
The NIEM exchange development methodology – National Information Exchange Model
Performance Measurement for Justice Information System Projects
A practical guide for establishing performance measure for information sharing projects
- Center for Technology in Government
Federation of Enterprise Architecture Professional Organizations
- The Federation of Enterprise Architecture Professional Organizations (FEAPO) is an association of professional organizations whose members have an active interest in the practice and professionalism of Enterprise Architecture. FEAPO provides a forum to facilitate collaboration and coordination of activities among Enterprise Architecture (EA) related professional organizations, to work toward a better integrated community and "one face" for the advancement of the practice and profession of Enterprise Architecture. The advent of FEAPO has been welcomed the world over because there is a strong desire among practitioners and organizations in many countries to professionalize and advance the field of enterprise architecture. The FEAPO membership list provides a comprehensive list of domestic and international organizations focused on enterprise architecture. Learn more at http://www.feapo.org/
Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative
- The IJIS Institute
- SEARCH: The National Consortium for Justice Information and Statistics
U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance
Enterprise Architecture Related Websites:
Data Management International
- The Data Administration Newsletter
- The FEAC Institute
- The Institute For Enterprise Architecture Developments (IFEAD)
- The Zachman Institute for Framework Advancement
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.