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: Jack Doane, State of Alabama

Co-Chair: Carolyn Parnell, State of Minnesota

Doug Alt, State of Ohio Steve Ambrosini, IJIS Institute 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 Chris Bennett, District of Columbia Rohit Bhanot, Motorola Solutions Ron Brodhead, Symantec Scott Came, SEARCH Charles Cephas, Symantec Victor Chakravarty, State of Maine Greg Cheetham, Intel Mr. Paul Christman, Quest Software Wade Clark, Motorola Solutions Anthony Collins, State of Delaware Rob Culp, IBM Shell Culp, State of California Patricia Cummens, ESRI Matt D'Alessandro, Motorola Solutions Vinay Dattu, State of Tennessee Mark Dixon, IBM John Dolejsi, SAS Institute Bryan Dreiling, State of Kansas Edward J Driesse, State of Louisiana Ric Dugger, State of Florida Brad Dupuy, HP Mr. Tim Durniak, IBM Kelley Eich, State of Colorado 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 Mr. Andy Ford, NIC Jeremy Forman, Oracle USA Inc. Steve Fowler, State of Colorado Thomas Fruman, State of Georgia Ian Grobel, Xerox Joseph W Grubbs, Commonwealth of Virginia Sherri Hammons, State of Colorado Viann Hardy, MAXIMUS Inc. Deborah Henderson, DAMA International Mitch Herckis, NASCIO Mary Hill-Hartman, IBM Richard Hillyard, Fujitsu Network Communications Nadine Hoffman, Commonwealth of Virginia Michael N Hogarth, ESI International Kennan Hogg, Software AG Randy Hughes, State of Utah Antonio "Tony" Hylton, Verizon Christopher Ipsen, State of Nevada Ashwini Jarral, IJIS Institute 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. Sue Ann Lipinski, State of West Virginia Daniele Loffreda, Fujitsu Network Communications Daniel J Lohrmann, State of Michigan Alisanne Maffei, State of Nevada

Dilby Malakar, DAMA International Mark McChesney, Commonwealth of Kentucky Bob McDonough, State of Michigan Stephen McHugh, HP Laurel McMillan, State of Washington Greg McNeal, State of Maine Tammie Means, State of West Virginia Kristen Miller, Deloitte Consulting LLP Jim Mills, State of South Carolina Linda Misegadis, Kronos Inc. Krishna Mohan, Commonwealth of Kentucky Kathy Moore, State of West Virginia Michael K Morey, State of Vermont Barry Moultrie, L-3 STRATIS David O'Berry, McAfee Paulina Orlikowski, HP Robert Otterberg, HP Jeanne Owings, Crowe Horwath LLP Andris Ozols, State of Michigan Dan Paolini, State of New Jersey Eric Perkins, Commonwealth of Virginia Randy Phares, Software AG Glenn Plomchok, Software AG Holli Ploog, CGI Technologies & Solutions Inc. Scott Pollack, Deloitte Consulting LLP Sharon Poulalion, State of South Carolina Mary Lou Prevost, CA Technologies John Punzak, Red Hat Darryl Ramsey, Juniper Networks Scott Riordan, State of Oregon Van Ristau, DLT Solutions Inc Doug Robinson, NASCIO Christina Rogers, State of California Neil Ross, Microsoft Jim Salb, State of Delaware Lauren Sallata, Xerox Dr. Jill Satran, State of Washington Dana Schafer, State of Michigan Ellena Schoop, State of Minnesota Eric Simon, HP Ms. Amy M Smith, HP Greg Smith, Kronos Inc. Mr. Len Smith, State of Connecticut Jason Snyder, Commonwealth of Massachusetts Morey Sullivan, Alexander Open Systems 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 Christopher Traver, US Department of Justice Christopher Traver, US Department of Justice Scott Utley, State of Arkansas Carlos Valarezo, Symantec Ted Van Ryn, Fujitsu Network Communications 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 Robert D Woolley, State of Utah Jay Wyant, State of Minnesota Richard Young, Microsoft Marlyn Zelkowitz, SAP Public Services

Committee Publications

• Publications Archive

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?
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
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 IV – Cloud Security: On Mission and Means
May 2012

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
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
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
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
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.

DO YOU THINK? OR DO YOU KNOW? PART II: The EA Value Chain, The Strategic Intent Domain, and Principles
September 2010
Investment in business intelligence and business analytics must be driven by enterprise strategic intent. Proper leverage of analytics should start with a clear understanding of the outcomes state government is trying to achieve. This issue brief presents the rationale for analytics using the NASCIO Enterprise Architecture Value Chain as a framework for organizing the thinking and the questions which eventually drive investment in analytics capabilities. It builds on the foundational concepts discussed in NASCIO’s first issue brief on this subject, and strongly recommends an enterprise approach. Without an enterprise approach to analytics, investment across the enterprise is un-orchestrated and uncoordinated. That creates redundant investment in tools and training, and creates barriers to cross line of business collaboration. State government can not afford redundant and disconnected investment. One of the values of enterprise architecture is the management, optimization and simplification of investment within state government. Proper investment and application of analytics is essential to deploying effective and efficient government services. Finally, the level of complexity of analytical methods and tools depends on the complexity of the decisions and the issues.

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:

• 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
  
  • Online NIEM Implementer's Course
  • Download Course Module slides
• Performance Measurement for Justice Information System Projects
  A practical guide for establishing performance measure for information sharing projects

Strategic Partners:

• Center for Technology in Government
  • Sharing Justice Information: A Capability Assessment Toolkit
• 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
  • The Justice Information Exchange Model Tool
• U.S. Department of Justice, Bureau of Justice Assistance
  

Enterprise Architecture Related Websites:

• Data Management International
  
  • The Data Management Body of Knowledge (DMBOK)
• 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.