Return to Homepage


Home   |   Site Map   |   Privacy   |   Contact Us   |   RSS YouTube Twitter Linked In Facebook NASCIO Community
committees
Email This Page     |     Print This Page     |    
Comments?     |     Share This Link

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.

Staff contact: Eric Sweden
Phone: (859) 514-9189
E-mail: esweden@NASCIO.org

Committee Roster

Co-Chair:
Tony Encinias, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania
  Co-Chair:
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
Tim Bass,
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
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
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
Kirk Fielder, Gantech Inc
Graeme Finley, Grant Thornton LLP
Eileen Fitzsimmons, State of New York
Andy Ford, NIC
Steve Fowler, State of Colorado
Rick Freedman, Brocade
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.
Mitch Herckis, NASCIO
Mary Hill-Hartman, IBM
Nadine Hoffman, Commonwealth of Virginia
Michael 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
Charles Knapp Leadbetter, III, BerryDunn
Leah Lewis, Cisco Systems Inc.
Sue Ann Lipinski, Advocate Solutions, LLC
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
Jessica Mueller, NASCIO
David O'Berry, McAfee
Paulina Orlikowski, HP
Robert Otterberg, HP
Andris Ozols, State of Michigan
Dan Paolini, State of New Jersey
Meghan Penning, NASCIO
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
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
Herb Thomas Thompson, State of Wisconsin
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
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
Rajesh Zade, MAXIMUS
Marlyn Zelkowitz, SAP Public Services
Gregory Zink, State of New York

Committee Publications

States and Open Data: From Museum to Marketplace - What's Next

States and Open Data: From Museum to Marketplace - What's Next
May 2014

NASCIO takes a look at what has occurred across the states since NASCIO’s first report on open data published in 2009. This latest report examines progress in open data across state and local government. Open data initiatives are advancing at all levels of government in the United States and globally. States and local governments have partnered with industry to create innovative capabilities in delivering data to consumers. Those consumers include citizens, business, non-profit organization and government. The report also presents recommendations for continuing to advance state government open data initiatives and begin moving to a next level of maturity.


Destination: Advancing Enterprise Portfolio Management – First Stop: Issues Management

Destination: Advancing Enterprise Portfolio Management – First Stop: Issues Management
December 2013

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?

What Makes Collaborative Initiatives Work?
October 2012

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?

Why Should Government Join Up? Why now? What do we gain?
September 2012

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

Is Big Data a Big Deal for State Governments? The Big Data Revolution – Impacts for State Government – Timing is Everything
August 2012

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 III – Recommendations for Mitigating Risks: Jurisdictional, Contracting and Service Levels

Capitals in the Clouds Part III – Recommendations for Mitigating Risks: Jurisdictional, Contracting and Service Levels
December 2011

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

Capitals in the Clouds - The Case for Cloud Computing in State Government Part II: Challenges and Opportunities to Get Your Data Right
October 2011

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

Capitals in the Clouds - The Case for Cloud Computing in State Government Part I: Definitions and Principles
June 2011

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

A Call to Action: Information Exchange Strategies for Effective State Government
April 2011

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 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

Enterprise Architecture Related Resources:


Strategic Partners:


Enterprise Architecture Related Websites:


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.

.

States Run on IT Newsbrief Subscriptions On The Fence: IT Implications of the Health Benefit Exchanges