geo-forum
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [geo-forum] Geospatial Profile Evaluation

To: "Feinberg, Daniel, CTR, OSD-ATL" <Daniel.Feinberg.ctr@xxxxxxx>
Cc: "Cullis, Brian, Col, OSD-ATL" <Brian.Cullis@xxxxxxx>, "'ddnebert@xxxxxxxx'" <ddnebert@xxxxxxxx>, "LaBranche, David, CTR, OSD-ATL" <David.LaBranche.CTR@xxxxxxx>, 'GEA COP WG' <geo-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: Doug Nebert <ddnebert@xxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 27 Mar 2006 13:36:09 -0500
Message-id: <44283099.4030203@xxxxxxxx>
Feinberg, Daniel, CTR, OSD-ATL wrote:
> Hi Doug -
> 
> My suggestion would be to better understand the linkage and relationship 
> between the FEA Geospatial Profile and the newly-announced Geospatial 
> Line of Business (LoB) being driven by OMB. It is still unclear (to me, 
> at least) what the relationship (and potentially, overlap) is between 
> these two initiatives.
> 
> Our understanding is that FGDC is leading weekly meetings setting a 
> strategy to prepare a Geospatial LoB strategy. That strategy, after the 
> first LoB meeting last week and the OMB announcement meeting at DoI the 
> week before, is still unclear (we had a representative sit in on the 
> first Geo LoB meeting last week via telecon).
>     (01)

Here's what I understand about the LoB, mostly through the "Concept of 
Operations for Line of Business Initiatives," Version 1.0 Office of 
E-Gov and IT, OMB, March 2006 (not online yet):    (02)

1. The term "Line of Business" as applied in this context is a type of 
OMB initiative. It is *not* the same as an FEA Line of Business and is 
viewed to be broader than the scope of the BRM, for example. In 2004 OMB 
pursued three LoB initiatives to pursue "...opportunities for 
integration and consolidation..." for financial management, human 
resources management, and grants management. In 2005, and Information 
Systems Security LoB initiative was begun. This year, Geospatial is one 
of three new LoB initiatives. Of these earlier initiatives, grants 
management and information systems security do not appear as LoB in the 
FEA BRM. It would be logical that these new LoBs would get introduced 
into the standard set of 39+ LoBs in the BRM, but I have not seen this 
yet in the official FEA diagrams.    (03)

2. These, according to the egov.gov site are considered "Presidential 
Initiatives" with a background statement on concepts behind it: 
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/egov/c-6-lob.html . Each initiative has an 
executive sponsor, managing partners, vision and goals. These details 
are being developed and vetted, as we speak, by the task force for 
Geospatial. So, in essence, this appears to be a next generation of 
E-Gov initiatives that touch on the same concepts as previous ones (e.g. 
recreation.gov, grants.gov, geodata.gov) -- supporting government to 
citizen, govt to business, govt to govt, efficiency and effectiveness.    (04)

3. The Lines of Business will reference work-to-date in architecture and 
FEA and include advisors to assist in reference to the FEA. They will 
not compete with existing FEA activities. They may suggest enhancements 
to the FEA reference models. They are intended endorse and strengthen 
application of FEA Profiles, where they exist, as well as the broader FEA.    (05)

4. LoBs have a lifecycle (or lifespan) that includes phases for: 
Analysis (baseline inventory, best practices, performance goals, 
culminates in a go/no-go recommendation to OMB Deputy Director for 
Management), Definition (business case, solution alternatives, target 
architecture, possible RFI), and Action (adoption and maintenance).    (06)

My opinion: Looking for common solutions and streamlining across 
government makes a lot of sense with payroll, health records, personnel, 
IT security services, but it may not be so easy to apply this approach 
to the diffuse geospatial application domain. Whereas the Geospatial 
Profile was intended to assist agencies in aligning opportunities for 
information exchange, it appears that this LoB initiative is seeking 
savings through consolidation of a yet-to-be-defined problem space, its 
data, capabilities and services.    (07)

My understanding:    (08)

The FEA and its reference models remain as methodologies to document and 
plan business processes in agencies.    (09)

FEA Profiles supplement the FEA to promote awareness of cross-cutting 
capabilities that may not reside in only one LoB.    (010)

LoB Initiatives are topically-focused activities spearheaded by OMB to 
force accounting of (the systems and solutions behind) shared business 
activities to improve effectiveness and efficiency (consolidate and 
coordinate budgets).    (011)

I think we should continue to pursue evaluation of the FEA Geospatial 
Profile prior to a Version 2.0 release in the fall. The LoB will expect 
that the suggestions provided in the Profile are clear and actionable -- 
so we need to test them in architectural reviews and operational 
solutions. The timeframe is right, except that the LoB initiative will 
consume many individuals' attention for the next few months. Piloting 
will help us, even if performed with a  small number of partners.    (012)

Doug.
-- 
Douglas D. Nebert
Geospatial Data Clearinghouse Coordinator, Information Architect
FGDC/GSDI Secretariat   Phone: +1 703 648 4151  Fax: +1 703 648-5755    (013)

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://colab.cim3.net/forum/geo-forum/
To Post: mailto:geo-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Config: http://colab.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/geo-forum/
Community Portal: http://colab.cim3.net/
Shared Files: http://colab.cim3.net/file/work/geocop/
Community Wiki: 
http://colab.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?GeoSpatialCommunityofPractice    (014)
<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>