Supplemental ea segment architecture analysis
This presentation is the property of its rightful owner.
Sponsored Links
1 / 12

Supplemental EA Segment Architecture Analysis PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 80 Views
  • Uploaded on
  • Presentation posted in: General

Supplemental EA Segment Architecture Analysis. June 21, 2007. Suggested Response to New Exhibit 300 Question. Exhibit 300: Q F3. Is this investment identified in a completed (contains a target architecture) and approved segment architecture? Yes No

Download Presentation

Supplemental EA Segment Architecture Analysis

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Presentation Transcript


Supplemental ea segment architecture analysis

Supplemental EA Segment Architecture Analysis

June 21, 2007


Suggested response to new exhibit 300 question

Suggested Response to New Exhibit 300 Question

Exhibit 300:

  • Q F3. Is this investment identified in a completed (contains a target architecture) and approved segment architecture? Yes No

    a. If “yes,” provide the name of the segment architecture.

  • ASSESSMENT:

  • Land Quality Management is the only completed and approved segment architecture

  • RECOMMENDATION FOR EPA RESPONSE:

  • SDMS, eManifest, and CERCLIS answer ‘Yes’

  • All other investments answer ‘No’


Suggested response to new exhibit 53 question

Suggested Response to New Exhibit 53 Question

Exhibit 53:

  • Segment Architecture represents the status of the investment's alignment to the agencies segment architecture process. The following options are available:

    (1) - This investment is identified as supporting an approved, complete segment architecture

    (2) - This investment is part of an incomplete or in-process segment architecture

    (3) - This investment is part of a planned, but yet to be initiated, segmentarchitecture

  • ASSESSMENT:

  • Only Land Quality Management investments identified as “supporting anapproved segment” (Tier 1)

  • RECOMMENDATION ON EPA RESPONSE:

  • The 8 segments documenting baseline architectures are “Incomplete or in-process segments” (Tier 2)

  • All other investments are ‘yet to be initiatedsegments” (Tier 3)


By 2009 it portfolio ea compliance review

BY 2009 IT Portfolio EA Compliance Review

  • Compliance criteria the same as BY 2008 for most investments (blue text)

  • Second tier solution architecture requirements (green text) for:

  • CPIC Major investments in Planning/Development(several have been waived due to nature of investment)

  • Enterprise Tools investments

  • ‘Significant’ CPIC Lites in Planning/Development


Solution architecture criteria

Solution Architecture Criteria

  • Why

    • Criteria focuses the investment’s contribution to the overall portfolio

      • How well does the investment further the progress of the EPA portfolio by using common tools or being a foundation for other investments to be implemented?

      • How well does the investment further Information Management goals, address mission performance gaps, and strengthen business processes?

      • What enterprise data does the investment supply or share across the agency or with EPA’s partners?

  • What’s Involved

    • Criteria requests 4 investment models:

      • Performance ‘Connecting the Dots’

      • High-Level Business Process

      • Conceptual Data Model

      • System Interface Diagram

    • Compliance is achieved by submitting diagrams by July 31, 2007

  • EA Team Support

    • Instructions and samples included in the updated 2007 Architecture Development Standards and Guidance document

    • Training and mentoring available at NDU the week of June 25


Investments with second tier solution architecture requirements

Investments with Second Tier Solution Architecture Requirements


Portfolio response to 53

Portfolio Response to 53

  • X investments are categorized as part of an approved Segment (Tier 1):

    • eManifest, CERCLIS, SDMS, SEMS, ICTS, RCRAInfo, etc [list to be completed]

  • Y investments are categorized as part of an incomplete or in-process segment (Tier 2):

    • OW: STORET, SDWIS, Beaches, etc [list to be completed]

  • Remaining Z investments categorized as part of a planned but yet to be initiated segment (Tier 3)


Planned dme expenditures arrayed by segments

Planned DME Expenditures Arrayed by Segments


Supplemental ea segment architecture analysis

PART Analysis


Selecting candidate segment architectures structured analysis approach

Selecting Candidate Segment ArchitecturesStructured Analysis Approach

  • Candidate segment architectures are identified through a structured analysis approach which is based on various considerations:

    • Strategic Considerations – EPA Administrator priorities, EPA Strategic Plan, other Federal requirements (eGov, PMA, etc.), and information interoperability needs

    • Performance Impact Considerations – Performance needs (e.g., through PAR and PART evaluations) and planned development/modernization/enhancement expenditures

    • Governance Considerations – “Willingness” and “Readiness” of potential segments: the maturity of their governance organizations to “own/lead” a segment architecture initiatives, and their readiness for enterprise tools/services usage and standardization

  • The IIS selects Segment Architectures for Agency Priority support each Fiscal Year


Proposed segment ranking using structured analysis

Proposed Segment Ranking Using Structured Analysis


Potential segment architecture development prioritization sequencing

Potential Segment Architecture Development Prioritization & Sequencing

  • The selection and sequencing of segment architecture efforts varies based on the Agency’s Priority for the desired business impact of the IT Portfolio. Some examples of sequencing based on priority are:

    • Strategic Priority (Security & Emergency Response)

      • FY08: Water Quality Management – critical Homeland Security initiative

      • FY09: Emergency Management – to implement lessons learned from Katrina

      • FY10: Air Quality Management – to promote air pollution reductions

    • Investment Cost Priority (Planned DME Costs)

      • FY08: Geospatial – $119.7M life cycle DME planned (BY08 +)

      • FY09: Enforcement & Compliance – $112.8M life cycle DME planned (BY08 +)

      • FY10: IT Management – $66.8M life cycle DME planned (BY08 +)

    • Performance Impact Priority (PART Reviews)

      • FY08: Substance Management – 1 Ineffective, 1 Results Not Demonstrated (of 7)

      • FY09: Research & Science – 1 Ineffective, 1 Results Not Demonstrated (of 11)

      • FY10: Air Quality Management – 1 Ineffective (of 7)

NOTE: It is unknown at this time how many segments per year OMB will expect EPA to complete, use, and show evidence of performance results


  • Login