SOA in E-Gov Conference Interoperability ClearingHouse Leveraging ICH’s Architecture Assurance Method in Healthcare Informatics John Weiler, [email protected]

SOA in E-Gov Conference

Interoperability ClearingHouse

Leveraging ICH’s Architecture Assurance Method in Healthcare Informatics

John Weiler, [email protected] Director, Interoperability ClearinghouseVice Chair, IT-Acquisition Advisory Council703 768 0400 www.ICHnet.org

A SOA Governance Roadmap for Establishing a DoD/VA

Virtual Lifetime Electronic Record


Briefing agenda

Introduction of Interoperability Clearinghouse (ICH) Public/Private Partnership

DoD/VA Health Record Interoperability Challenge and CSFs

Overview of Three Stage Architecture Assurance Method (AAM)

How the AAM enables compliance, governance and source selection

How DoD/VA achieve its interoperability objectives and time lines

Backup Slides: SOA Acquisition Supply Chain

Backup Slides: AAM Case Studies and Past Performance


ICH ICH CharterA public/private non-profit research institute

to advance standardized architecture methods

that assure successful acquisition of interoperable

information solutions aligned with business outcomes

in a timely, inclusive, and conflict free environment

Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen Cartwright: "It takes longer to charter a new (IT program) start than the lifecycle of the s/w package. We have a mind set that some how whatever we field has to be perfect so we spend a life of an applications utility testing it to make sure its invulnerable.... Looking for the perfect solutions is a recipe for irrelevance an we are proving that over and over and over again.”


ICH’s Public Service Value PropositionAssuring IT Acquisition Lifecycle Decision Making

1. Trusted Advisor: IT-Acquisition Advisory Council (IT-AAC) provides government and industry with an elastic, conflict free, research coop and knowledge exchange that empowers sound decision making by leveraging the collective knowledge and expertise of many communities of practice, innovators, standards bodies and academia.

2. Decision Analytics: Architecture Assurance Method (AAM) provides a repeatable, measurable, Services Oriented Assessment framework that transparently aligns and validates critical business processes with interoperable IT solutions.

3. Solution Assessment: Solution Architecture Integration Lab (SAIL) provides a “virtual lab” that repurposed existing implementation and testing results into canonical form. Based on real world implementations/testing derived from enterprise users, suppliers and innovators.

Mitre Assessment of ICH: “... the concept of the Interoperability Clearinghouse is sound and vital. Its developing role as an honest broker of all interoperability technologies, no matter what the source, is especially needed. Such efforts should be supported by any organization that wants to stop putting all of its money into maintaining archaic software and obtuse data formats, and instead start focusing on bottom-line issues of productivity and cost-effective use of information technology.”

SOA in E-Gov Conference 5

Six CSFs for DoD/VA Process TransformWeapons Systems Style Processes doesn’t work for IT or SOA

To establish an interoperable electronic healthcare record “that spans full life of Service Members and Veterans”, DoD/VA leadership must address six critical success factors;

1. Establish common requirements and capability development methods that remove ambiguity and over specification. Consider adoption of BTA Capability Assessment Method refinement.

2. Revamp current Architecture Governance and Solution Engineering processes that drive a technology neutral SOA paradigm in automating Business Process and Infrastructure Capabilities. This requires access to commercial expertise and best practices.

3. Adopt SOA enabled methods that drive Reusable & Standardized Solution Architectures, Performance Metrics and Assessment Results. Reuse can significantly reduce cost, risk and cycle times.

4. Adopt a standardized data interoperability framework the establishes a common vocabulary and standards of practice established within a true public/private partnership.

5. Leverage public/private partnership structure and Solution Architecture Working Group approach that will establish standards of practice for community adoption and criteria for assessing the business fit of COTS, GOTS and Open Source Solutions.

6. Establish collaborative mechanisms by which practitioners, non-traditional suppliers, innovators, standards bodies and communities of practice can participate.

Albert Einstein: “Insanity is defined as continuing the same process over and over again and expecting different results…. You can’t solve today’s problems with the same kind of thinking that got you their in the first place."

6

Policy & Business drivers for DoD/VA SOA

Policy Drivers:

1. OMB A119, must leverage, fund, use commercial standards

2. NTTAA, requires govt to leverage standards and leverage labs, universities, non-profits. Encouraged to commercialize govt innovations in processes and technology.

3. CCA, govt must maximize the use of COTS solutions and standards over custom development

4. FAR OCI, contractor’s who develop program architecture or engineering specs may not receive award for any part of the implementation (sub/prime).

5. E-Gov Act and OMB directives require agencies work together on common infrastructure and business apps.

6. Obama Memorandum to agencies to increase collaboration with non-profits, innovative companies, communities of practice

Business Drivers:

A. Ability to discern the critical services out of requirements

B. Common DoD/VA Acquisition and Architecture Approach

C. Actionable technology performance metrics and SLAs.

D. Mechanisms for establishing a services view of emerging technology & standards that define “realm of the possible” and “risk”

E. Means of finding/validating real world commercial SOA best practices and lessons learned. No more bumper stickers

F. Clearinghouse mechanisms for sharing solution architecture artifacts that are enabled by COTS, Open Source and GOTS solutions

G. Evidenced based, fast pathed approach for quickly assessing fit, finish and interoperability of IT Service Components

Exert from EDS Business Case Analysis: “The leveraging of our efforts with other parties through the formulation of a non-profit consortium is the most cost effective and efficient way of achieving the goal of interoperability assurance among heterogeneous systems. This ICH capability will augment our capability and provide us much more information about products, standards, and viable enterprise solution sets than we could ever realize through our own internal efforts.”


ICH Method: 3 Phase Approach for Acquiring

Phase 1 – Map Requirements into Business Processes and OutcomesEXPECTED OUTCOME: Business Reference ModelThis focuses on applying Michael Porters Value Stream Analysis to tease out critical business need, processes and performance measures. Maps directly into OMB FEA-PMO and DODAF Operational Views.

Phase 2 – Align Business Outcomes with SOA Capabilities EXPECTED OUTCOME: Analysis of Alternatives, Service Component Reference Model and SLADefine both application and infrastructure service components. The IOC assessment would answer the question: Is there sufficient existing services in terms of Open Source, COTS/GOTS offerings to meet the core service capabilities DOD/VA desires in EHR? ICH would use it Capability Prioritization Product to focus on achieving mission essentials and would appropriately update the Service Level Agreements.

Phase 3 – Market AssessmentEXPECTED OUTCOME: Evaluation of Alternatives, Business Case AnalysisA Source Selection Assessment. This assessment follows the business case analysis that applies value to the products as they’ve scored against one another using a weighted analysis methodology and how they measure up against risk. In the end the selection assessment, ensures the solution enables the most capabilities desired with the least risk. Key step for supporting acquisition of Software as a Service (SaaS)

“As one of the leading advocates of open systems and interoperability, the OMG believes that the Interoperability Clearinghouse initiative will help users realize the benefits from our combined efforts”. OMG President, Bill Hoffman


Integrating and Assuring the Acquisition LifecycleRepeatable, Measurable, Sustainable

Analytical Decision SupportConsumer Report Like Results –

CAPABILITIES, AOAs, TCO

Red

uce

time

to d

eplo

y

infra

stru

ctur

e

Red

uce

infras

truc

ture

cost

Impr

ove

Rel

iabi

lity,

Ava

ilabi

lity

Sur

viva

bilit

y

(RA

S)

Wor

k w

ithin

cur

rent

Sec

urity

Man

agem

ent P

ostu

re

Pro

vide

sup

port for

AF

Use

Cas

es

Sup

port S

BC

sto

rage

strat

egy

Sup

port Inf

rast

ruct

ure

Req

uire

men

ts

Impr

oved

Man

agea

bilit

y

Pro

vide

the

sam

e us

er

expe

rienc

e (ir

resp

ectiv

e of

clie

nt; r

ich

or th

in c

lient

).

Sco

re

Value Factors 15% 15% 5% 5% 5% 13% 13% 15% 15%

Softgrid 1.67 3.00 3.40 1.50 0.73 1.40 1.00 1.56 1.00 1.67Ardent 2.33 3.15 3.40 3.00 1.53 1.40 1.33 2.11 2.00 2.23ClearCube 1.67 2.23 1.30 2.50 2.07 1.40 2.00 2.78 4.00 2.48Wyse 1.00 1.92 1.30 1.50 2.80 1.00 2.33 4.22 5.00 2.67 CCI/HP 1.67 2.23 1.30 2.50 2.07 1.40 2.00 2.78 4.00 2.83Citrix 1.00 1.92 1.30 1.50 2.80 1.00 2.33 4.22 5.00 3.03

ICH/AAM Tools: - How To Manuals- Stake Holder Training- Solution Architecture Working Groups- Mentoring and Outreach- Domain Expertise


AAM Models: A SOA enabled Decision FrameworkValidates and aligns business drivers with proven interoperable IT Services

Phase 1: Business Process:• Determination• Prioritization• Validation

Phase 3:Technology Assessment:• Selection• Certification• Interop• Openness

Phase 2:Service Component • Feasibility• Architecture• SLAs

Govt CxOsIntegrators

Vendors/ISVsSDOs/Labs/Universities

Align Proven Capabilities w/ business needs

Model New Solution

Solution Architecture Validation

and Demonstrations

ValueCoalitionAnalysis

SolutionPatterns

VettedSolution

Architecture

KnowledgeExchange

Prioritized BusinessRequirements

Y

N

N

Y

Validated PastPerformance

NormalizedBusiness Models

Solution SetEvidenced-BasedAssessment

NormalizedService Components

Analysis of Alternatives

Solution Exist?

Service OrientedSpecs and SLAs

COTS ComparativeAnalysis, Evidence

Business Requirements,

Policy, &Guidance

Validated Blue Prints &Build of Materials

Stake Holders


ICH’s Architecture Assurance MethodA services oriented approach for architecture alignment

BRMTechnicalReferenceModel & Metrics

Application Layer 2

Common InfrastructureLayer M

BRMServiceComponentModels & SLAs

Appl Service Components Layer 1

InfrastructureService ComponentsLayer N

BRMBusinessProcess & Data Models

Core Business Mission Objectives

BusinessProcesses &Infrastructure

SA

IL S

olu

tion

Fra

mew

ork

s

Alig

ns w

ith

bu

sin

ess n

eed

s

Bu

sin

ess D

riven

Top

Dow

n

Associated MetricsReference Models

Performance Metrics

Efficiency

Interoperability, Fit, Finish

Services Component Specifications

Security Profiles

Common EvaluationCriteria

Secure Solutions

Technology & Standards Profiles

Requirements &Capability Gaps


AAM Process – Compliant with Reg’s & StatutesA step by step approach for assuring implementation success


AAM Informs and Assures “Common Services & EHR” Enabling Governance Model and Actionable Architecture

• Requirement Justification - Collaborative– Jointly Define Other Common Services Needed– Define Common Services with Other Agencies– Determine Next Set of Common Services for

DevelopmentOther Government

AgenciesBeneficiary / Stakeholder

Managed Care / Fee Private Providers

DoD VACommon Services

DoD Unique Data Ex: Enrollment, Operational/Theater Information

VA Unique DataEx: Extended Care Data, Veteran/Dependent Benefits

Army

Navy

Marine Corps

Air Force

JOINT

Health | Benefits | Personnel

Virtual Lifetime Electronic Record

VHA

NCA

VBA

Identity Management

Self-Service Logon

Compensation

Benefits & Eligibility

Education

Portable Order Entry

Single Sign-OnPharmacy*

Consults

Lab*

Radiology*

Service History

Other Uniformed Services

• Solution Architecture Working-groups– Governance Readiness Assessment– Prioritization Analysis– Requirements Agreement

• Industry Benchmarks– Business Process Models– Evidence of working subsets– Requirements Validation

• Standards– Information Exchanges– Technologies– Cross-oganizational

• Statues and Reg’s Compliance

• Planning for IOC for Governance Implementation

SOA Implementation Approach defined with

SLAs & KPP


Predictable Outcomes from AAM Engagements Conflict free Mechanisms for SOA Common Services & Solution Assessment

A Standardized Architecture Method for:– Aligning DODAF and FEA-PMO structure

– Capturing Business Process and Information Sharing

– Driving SOA Enabled IT Acquisition Lifecycle

– Assuring Services Integration and Contractor Mgt

– Capability Prioritization w/ SLAs and metrics

Assessment Framework for:– Vetted Business Processes and Requirements

– Assessing Vendor Service Components (COTS, GOTS, Open Source)

– Discerning Technology Feasibility/Risk Assessment. Verify market ability to perform

– Establishing Enforceable Service Level Agreements

Access to Critical Expertise and Knowledge Sources: – Architecture and Acquisition Processes that work

– Healthcare Informatics Domain Expertise

– Emerging technologies, innovations and open source markets

– Industry best practices in IT Infrastructure and SOA

– Stake Holder facilitation and outreach

Biz Value to DoD/VA

Mitigate deployment risk.

AAM’s structure provide decision quality data earlier

Concentrates on Capabilities and their Importance to

Mission

Formalizes the Prioritization Process

Greater Access to Health Care Solutions

Innovative approach for assuring an Interoperable Electronic Health Record


Policy Guidance for engaging a 501C6

OMB A119 directs agencies to fund, adopt and promote standards bodies and their outputs

NTTAA directs agencies to license innovations of the market in terms of technologies and policies.

FAR 6-302 supports other than full and open competition when acquires services from a non-profit research institute and/or leverage innovative methods/technologies.

Clinger Cohen Act directs agencies to leverage industry best practices

Obama Policy Memorandum promotes greater utilization of non-profits over commercial interests to avoid potential conflicts of interest.

Reliance on Past Performance as an indicator of future success

15

Backup Slides:The value of ICH’s Public Private Partnership

Office of the Secretary of Defense, DCIO (2001) ”Since the value of the ICH to our programs increases rapidly through results sharing, we encourage the defense community and IT industry to participate directly in the public service initiative in terms of sponsorship and lessons learned"


ICH Fellowshipcommunity of interest vs conflicts of interest (COI vs COI)

John Weiler, ICH Founder and Chief ArchitectAAM, Major System, Health Care IT

Robert Babiskin, ICH Chief EngineerAAM, Major System, Health Care IT

Mike Mauro, ICH Research Fellow and Healthcare Domain ExpertMajor System, Health Care IT

Kevin Carroll, Former PEO EIS, ICH Research FellowMajor System, Acquisition

Harold Heard, Former Citi Group EVP/Chief Architect, Renown SOA ExpertSOA, Major System

Walter Kulbacki, ICH Research Fellow and Healthcare Domain ExpertMajor System, Health Care IT

Robert Berger, ICH Research Fellow and Healthcare Domain ExpertMajor System, Health Care IT Test and Evaluation

Plus a cast of thousands from ICH’s network of public/private partners representing academia, standards bodies, federal agencies and labs

17

Value Chain Benefit: Agency Leadership, Congress, GAO & OMB

Congress, Agency Leadership: COO’s, CFO’sAuditors

Provides view into agency IT planning process Establishes metrics for mission fulfillment Aligns IT Capital investment with Agency Mission Leverages industry best practices/lessons learned Gain access to industry expertise outside of

lobbying/marketing arena. Catalyst for advancing President’s Management

Agenda

PoliciesPolicies

ComplianceCompliance

18

Value Chain Benefit: Enterprise Users (CIO, CTO, Architects, PMs)

IT Management: CIO/CTO/CAO:

Validate and Prioritize IT Services w/ business driven metrics Identifies viable COTS/Open Source solutions, in a services

oriented context Establish Open Architectures and market readiness Model/leverage relevant industry best practices, lessons

learned Assist in “what if” Modeling and Analysis of Alternatives Provides In-Context, Just-In-Time Research Data via many

communities of practice Acquisition Strategies that have proven to deliver value and

hold suppliers accountable

Real World Real World RequirementsRequirements

Best Practices,Best Practices,Proven SolutionsProven Solutions


19

Value Chain Benefit: Solution Integrator & ConsultantsVerifying past performance and ability to deliver Open Solutions

Provides Solid Evidence for making COTS/OSS decisions Shares Integration Success Record with Agency Planning

process w/out OCI concerns ID Potential Service Component Matches Based on Prior Similar

Context Successes. ID small/innovative solution providers Provides “What If” Modeling and Analysis for component

composition Provides Design Differentiation to Enhance Value Proposition to

Customers Outsource market research to conflict free entity

Integrators



IntegrationIntegrationBest PracticesBest Practices

Re-usableRe-usableBluePrintsBluePrints

20

Value Chain Benefit: Standards Bodies, Academia and Industry GroupsAligning the theory of standards w/ market realities

SDOs, Academia & Industry Groups

Integrators

Captures Use-Cases that Support and Justify Standards Use of standards/Engineering Spec in vetting of COTS

solutions Links Pertinent Standards to Products Features/functions Provides Dynamic, but Solid Compliance Record (A119) Enable collaboration between disparate industry groups Provide IP and resources for framing complex issues.



SolutionSolutionMetricsMetrics

ResearchResearchProjectsProjects

21

Value Chain Benefit: VARs, COTS/Open Source suppliers, Component Builders, Innovative BusinessesDefining the realm of the possible

VARs, COTS Vendors, Component Builders

Small Businesses

Integrators

Provide Buyers with the Contextualized Product Information in terms of business fit, interoperability and security.

Certifies Vendor Past Performance Based on 3rd-Party Validation/History in an architecture context

Increased Buyer’s Chances for Successful Use of Vendor Product --> Successful implementation!

Generates normalized COTS solution blue prints



Normalized Spec &Normalized Spec &Customer ReferencesCustomer References

Open Market PlaceOpen Market PlaceIntegration PartnersIntegration PartnersReduced cost of saleReduced cost of sale

SDOs, Academia & Industry Groups

22

Backup Slides:

ICH Applicable Past Experience

Tasks Costs

“We have put to practice the AF Solution Assessment Process (ASAP) at the Air Force Communications Agency (AFCA) with some well documented success. It was developed with Interoperability Clearinghouse (ICH) and provides a structured and measurable IT assessment process with the agility to provide decision-quality assessments ranging from quick-looks to more in-depth capability-focused technology assessments and lightweight business case analysis.” General Mike Peterson, AF CIO


Patterns of implementation success: Repeatable, measurable, sustainable.

2008 OSD BTA Capability Assessment Method development

2007 OSD BTA Clinger Cohen Act guide for CIOs

2007 Air Solution Assessment Process (ASAP) development and operational deployment.

2006 Navy CANES PMO support, architecting one of DoD’s largest SOA implementations

2005 ICH hosting of Multi-agency Institute for Information Sharing WG

2005 USMC Combat Engineer Training Business architecture supporting Thin Client and Cross Domain Solutions

2004 JFCOM Multinational Business Architecture for conducting Training Exercises

2004 DISA/Navy Program Office Multinational Information Sharing program

2003 Government Printing Office’s (GPO) Future Digital System program Capability Assessment.

2003 Department of Homeland Security Enterprise Portal Consolidation Architecture Roadmap

2002 Discovery Communications Global Multi-media Web Services Solution Architecture

2002 CIA’s Web Service/Portal Solution Assessment

2002 GSA FTS Enterprise Architecture

2000 GSA’s Financial Management Systems Solution Architecture Roadmap

2000 Commerce/NTIA, Spectrum Management Enterprise Architecture

1999 OSD Health Affairs Government Wide Patient Record, E-Healthcare Architecture Roadmap

1999 Dept of Commerce/Patent Trademark Office Mainframe to Web Services Migration Program,

1998 Drug Enforcement Agency’s (DEA) Strategic Plan and Enterprise Architecture Roadmap


Challenge: Define information sharing architecture for patient record integration

Applied ICH Architecture Immersion Program

– Developed architecture validation criteria to GCPR Program Office

– Developed product selection guidelines for Prime Contractor

– Applied ICH Architecture Assurance Method

Outcomes

– Enabled award based on unambiguous design specs

– Augmented architecture process to address legacy and COTS capabilities

– Was able to cycle through market research and analysis in a fraction of the cost and time of traditional efforts.

– Ensured viability of Solution Architecture in terms of; meeting HIPPA, security, and interoperability requirements

Case Study: World Largest Healthcare Agency OSD HA’s Government Wide e-Healthcare program

“The ICH repository data and analysis methodologies was very helpful in supporting a quick turn around for [Information Assurance] section of COTS security products. Highly detailed ICH technology domain and product evaluation data comprised over 60% of this urgently needed [architecture] report”. GCPR, Program Manager, Northrop Grumman/PRC

Past Performance


Challenge: Establish a common and repeatable AF Wide COTS assessment/acquisition process

Case Study: Streamlining the IT Acquisition processSAF XC/AQ; AF Solution Assessment Process (ASAP)

Integrated ICH Architecture Assurance Method into all major AF IT components

– Developed root cause of analysis of current weaknesses and deficiencies

– Identified and integrated both AF and industry best practices into a common framework

– Developed series of templates and input/exist criteria for each stage of the SDLC process

Outcomes

– Provided a common, enterprise wide process designed for leveraging COTS

– Augmented architecture process to address legacy and COTS capabilities

– Reduce market research and analysis in a fraction of the cost and time by leveraging existing expertise and lessons learned of the market

– Provided mechanisms for forcing adoption of 80% solution.

Past Performance

“We have put to practice the AF Solution Assessment Process (ASAP) at the Air Force Communications Agency (AFCA) with some well documented success. It was developed with Interoperability Clearinghouse (ICH) and provides a structured and measurable IT assessment process with the agility to provide decision-quality assessments ranging from quick-looks to more in-depth capability-focused technology assessments and lightweight business case analysis.” General Mike Peterson, AF CIO


Challenge: Establish a enterprise ship board infrastructure for CANES

Case Study: Validating SOA and Cross Domain SolutionsNavy PMW 160 CANES Program

Establish an actionable solution architecture that leverages SOA & COTS implementation best practices

– Provide a standardized Solution Assessment Methodology to leverage best practices and mitigate deployment risk (compliment NESI).

– Establishes a Solution Architecture standard and public/private research partnership that maximizes use of commercial trends (COTS/Open Source solutions) via an actionable Open Architecture (OA)

– Enable Capability Based Acquisitions. Reveal Gaps in both requirement and industry offerings (define realm of the possible).

– Establish SOA performance metrics and SLAs that reflect real world limitations and hold suppliers accountable.

Outcomes of ICH engagement;– Proved out as a standardized IT Assessment & Solution Architecture process that will

mitigate deployment risk. – AAM assessment products used:

Capability Determination and Metrics Service Component Prioritization and Alignment and Feasibility/Risk Assessment

– Demonstrated the feasibility and viability of using GOTS/COTS/Open Source products within the CANES Architecture

– Demonstrated a method and a plan to: Assess SOA Service Components for CANES Assess migration to Netcentric “need-to-share” systemsProduced a large body of artifacts that are important for the architecture phase

Past Performance


Challenge: Architect an enterprise web infrastructure to enable multi-media information sharing

Applied ICH Solutions Validation Program

– Performed architecture baseline assessment

– Provided guidance and selection support for Web-app server, VPN, portal, last-mile wireless connectivity

Outcomes

– Validated requirements against marketplace offerings

– Developed contextual evaluation metrics derived from best practices

– Improved confidence in technology decisions via business driven assessment framework

– Significantly reduced time/cost/risk of global implementation

– Assured successful implementation of world wide, web based, multi-media solution by vetting interoperability issues prior to acquisition.

Case Study: Most innovative Media Company Discovery Channel’s Enterprise Multi-media Web Services Project

Past Performance


Case Study: World’s Largest Research Agency DARPA’s Information Assurance Architecture Project

Develop a method for represent EA heuristics, and use AI tools to model solution

– Developed common criteria to represent each major IT class (DB, OS, Middleware)

– Create profiles and templates that can represent complexity of market

– Apply Java Expert System Shells (JESS) to build rules based AI tool

– Take existing system specifications from DII COE to make decisions

Outcomes

– Developed approach for modeling complex solutions based on rules based engine

– Developed means of representing security attributes into a solution architecture

– Developed a tool that could do “what if analysis” on the fly based on partial and incomplete data.

– Demonstrated how component-based architectures could be applied to improve the richness of our planning and EA processes as a means of managing risk

Challenge: model and simulate information assurance and interoperability attributes

“The unique work you’ve done to frame issues about Interoperability effects on IA of systems is particularly encouraging. I believe it can contribute to ongoing work in the field of IA metrics and composition ongoing at DARPA and other agencies.” “I was pleasantly surprised at the effective and efficient use of funding I was able to invest in this effort as well as your ability to leverage other funding sources. You guys came through!” DARPA PM regarding ICH Information Assurance Modeling Project

Past Performance


Case Study: Managing Successful ERP GSA FMS Project

Challenge: making EA actionable, eliminate redundant Financial Mgt. Systems

Applied Value Chain Analysis

– Developed metrics for FMS implementation success

– Evaluated current EA products

– Developed Value Chain assessment model

– Moved EA effort into CFO office

Outcomes

– Enhanced and normalized existing EA products

– Identified key business processes required for implementation

– Enabled senior management to interact with EA process for the first time.

– Helped GSA go from “red” to “green” based on Value Chain effort

– Identified over $100 M in potential savings via ICH Value Chain Approach

OMB Report on ICH Architecture Assurance Method: The Road Map contains information on a variety of interrelated topics including, but not limited to, software and vendor performance, best practices, and lessons learned. The Road Map provides a web-based library to directly support those implementing financial management systems. The modernized program must continue to provide information and communication using current technology trends and tools.

Past Performance


Challenge: Structure requirements process to acquire a COTS based digital content mgt system

Case Study: Digitizing the Worlds Largest Printer Government Printing Office Future Digital System Project

Applied ICH Architecture Assurance Method to GPO Future Digital System

– Normalized and aligned requirements with market best practices

– Provided strategy for cutting integration cost and managing risk

– Leveraged industry best practices to avoid common failure patterns

Outcomes

– Validated requirements against marketplace offerings

– Developed contextual evaluation metrics derived from best practices

– Improved confidence in technology decisions via business driven assessment framework

– Significantly reduced time/cost/risk of acquisition process

– Guided evolution of emerging Electronic Content Management Standards that drive interoperability (iECM

Past Performance

Documents

SOA in E-Gov Conference Interoperability ClearingHouse Leveraging ICH’s Architecture Assurance Method in Healthcare Informatics John Weiler, [email protected]