Your SlideShare is downloading. ×
Slide 1 - DOI: BLM: National Home Page
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×

Thanks for flagging this SlideShare!

Oops! An error has occurred.

×

Introducing the official SlideShare app

Stunning, full-screen experience for iPhone and Android

Text the download link to your phone

Standard text messaging rates apply

Slide 1 - DOI: BLM: National Home Page

616
views

Published on


0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total Views
616
On Slideshare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
0
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
6
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

Report content
Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
No notes for slide
  • In July, Ronnie requested a guide be created for all BLM employees that captures helpful information associated with the rising costs of email
  • Quotes were obtained for hardcopies: Estimates for printing a 5x7" full color bound guide (using Kinkos): Quicker process 2,500 copies $9.50/ea Total: $27,714 5,000 copies $9.50/ea Total: $47,420 Estimates for printing a 5x7" full color bound guide (using an offset printer): Longer process 2,500 copies $3.50/ea Total: $8,750 5,000 copies $2.50/ea Total: $12,500 Estimate to print a 8 1/2x11", 2-sided, full-color, coated, desk reference guide: 10,000 - 15,000 copies .50 cents/ea Total: $5,000 - $7,500 SMEs were ZANTAC (Philip Walsh) and Sharepoint (Igor) and Lotus (Laura/Les) Also contacted Ron Tucker for access to his new email training website and obtained some information from there
  • Introduction to be on her pain points about email costs and possibily address the possibility of going to Exchange – this will set off the introduction nicely. Electronic distribution advantages include: Information can be maintained current at all times (even if we move to Windows Exchange); and it would hold down the printing expense Hardcopy requires more review time (hardcopy has to be perfect prior to final print) In place of a hardcopy bound guide, employees would receive a snappy laminated email Quick Reference page that they can hang up in their offices This guide would serve as a quick reference (i.e., spotlighting email efficiencies and how tos) and would point to the online guide Less money ($27-$48K for 2,500-5,000 hardcopies vs. 50¢ for a each quick reference page distributed) Final review authority would to confirm the information is accurate and covers all that is important about email volume.
  • <click to #1> Here are the actions we took – these should look familiar from the last meeting along with System Health which was added by the Board to our proposed methodology. Action #1 was to align the systems within a line of business, which we did in concert with WO-200. We reused this alignment to position the systems for the WO-200 end-user survey that we conducted with WO-830. <click #2> Next we assessed the alignment of the systems to the WO-200 mission and priorities, and we did so <click to #6> using an assessment from the user survey and other factors for the health of each system. A lesson learned here was that we were unable to obtain a definitive list of mission priorities from WO-200, so we used user survey questions to assess end user’s opinions of how systems aligned, as well as assessments of data alignment and technology alignment with DOI and BLM directions. <click #3>Next in Action #3, we looked at system functionality duplications and overlaps. The ultimate purpose of systems is to automate the management of important data for the business users of the system to accomplish mission goals, so the approach we used to complete Action #3 was to assess the level of critical data duplication and overlap. You’ll see those results throughout the presentations today. <click #4>For Action #4, we looked at the IT infrastructure that supports the WO-200 investments to determine what savings could be obtained by efficiencies there. To do so, we interviewed Subject Matter Experts for each system to understand critical system infrastructure components, and then did an overlap analysis to produce recommendations. <click #5>Lastly, we analyzed all the information we collected to develop recommendations for the Board to consider to move the Directorate forward. <click to next slide>
  • … covers grouping of the WO-200 IT National Investments into Lines of Business starts to show the extensive collection of information for these systems. Once again, the BEA team worked with Wo-200 to define these groupings. Shown in the oval named Range/Vegetation are seven WO-200 National Investments that collectively have range and vegetation management responsibilities. These systems gather range and vegetation information and treatments, provide for management of range authorization information, and will better manage weed infestation treatments and fire treatments for burned areas. Two systems are well-established deployed systems (RAS and RIPS), while two are in proof-of-concept and development stages (ES&R and Weeds). IDS is a database of monitoring information that is in data preservation mode, while RIS is waiting to transition to newer technology and interfaces. Neither is currently in use. Native Seed Network is deployed, but is an external system in which WO-200 invests – it is managed outside of WO-200. <click> Next, in the upper right, is a Forestry Line of Business that contains two systems that deal with forest inventory and timber sales (FORVIS and TSIS). Both are well-established systems that have radically different internal structures. <click> Under the Planning and Socioeconomics Line of Business are ePlanning version 1 and 2, and the Economic Profile System. ePlanning version 1 is currently in limited production to be succeeded by ePlanning version 2 which is in procurement. Economic Profile system is a WO-200 external investment with the Sonoran Institute that is managed externally to the BLM. <click> The Recreation Line of Business contains the Recreation Management Information System which is currently being rehosted to align with the BLM technology direction and the Accessibility Data Management System, which is a DOI-mandated system to track recreation accessibility throughout the DOI – it also is managed outside the BLM. <click> Lastly the nationally centralized replacement state geospatial infrastructure is shown in the middle as E-GIS. It is intended to supply BLM-specific geospatial layers such as allotments to these and other systems. So these are the National WO-200 investments that we examined during the baseline. But where do these systems fit in the chain of information that makes the WO-200 directorate tick? The next slide discusses them in the context of a business model for the WO-200 directorate called the Information Value Chain .. <click>
  • The Information Value Chain is a simple concept that portrays information in an organization as it flows from raw data to analyzed and processed information that becomes the basis for decisions. <click> The box labeled Field Operations on this slide represents the field side of the BLM that <click> works with customer, collects raw data from the field and acts to implement plans and decisions. <click> This data feeds the <click> Planning and Decision Support half of the WO-200 directorate. <click> This other half of WO-200 processes the data coming from field collection and creates the information that informs management decisions and is used to create plans or decisions. These functions can be performed at all levels of the organization, not just at the state or WO levels. Those plans or decisions, in turn, <click> are fed back to the field for implementation and monitoring. <click> The systems that were examined in the WO-200 baseline are more field-oriented and we’ve shown them superimposed on the Field Operations side of the organization. Because these systems are generally program-focused, they do not tend to supply all the information required to make fully informed decisions. Therefore, if a broad set of information is needed for a decision, information must be combined from these systems. As we will see in the analysis that we did on the data that these systems maintain, programs are collecting some of the same information. Two systems are beginning to more fully support the organization and analysis needs on the Planning and Decision Support half of the organization , and they are the E-GIS infrastructure and ePlanning. But for the most part, the WO-200 National investments are program specific – and have evolved so from culture and funding characteristics of the BLM. We will discuss this model more in the Strategic recommendation presentation. So we know where the WO-200 systems fit in the overall information flow, but how big of a role do these investments play in the larger IT Cap of the BLM? On the next slide, you can see <click>.
  • … I’d like to show you the information that was collected in partnership with WO-200 users and project teams to perform against the Baseline Actions. As we surveyed and interviewed the users and Project Managers, we collected information in specific focus areas (shown on the left) and on the right we’ve indicated that actual data collected in those areas. <click> First, in conjunction with Bill Yeager, we interviewed the Project Managers to understand what tasks the WO-200 project teams currently perform as a project moves from concept to deployment, as well as where they would like help in the future. <click> Next as shown in the System box, we gathered information on the data needs of the projects, both from a strategic Kit Muller Information Management Priority perspective and from lower level dat acomponents themselves. Other system information collected involved information abut the users, the hardware and software used to deploy the system, and the interfaces and dependencies of the system. <click> We also looked at the financial information as mentioned earlier, and <click> lastly, the BEA, WO-200 and WO-830 collaborated on a end user survey for the national investments. This survey measured end user satisfaction with the national investments. Almost 600 users took the survey and indicated that, on average, they used two WO-200 systems. You’ll see a summary of the user survey results in the following slides that indicate …
  • … system health. Here is an example of the three perspectives that we used to quickly show system health on a convenient diagram called a radar chart. To create these charts, we measured the system health using thirteen data points on a scale of 1 to 10. 1 was the worse end of the scale and it is indicated by the red zone on the diagrams. 10 is the best possible score and is indicated by the outer edge of the diagram in the green zone. The yellow zone represents scores in the 5 to 7.5 range. Using this diagram you can quickly compare systems against each other, and can then drill down into problem areas. For instance, this example system shown scored well on Strategic Data and Impact, but not so well on other red areas. <click> Given that overview of how to read the chart, we used nine survey questions to assess the health of a systems from a Survey Perspective. Q12 measured the overall satisfaction with a system, Q9 the usability, Q7 how well the system covered mission needs, Q10 the extent to which users depended on the system to accomplish their work, Q11 the impact if the system suddenly did not exist, Q6 how broad the information collected by the system is used throughout the BLM, Q13 and 14 the training and user support provided by WO-200, and Q16 the extent to which the users felt the system needed to be updated. These are independent opinions of the state of the system in the field. <click> Next, we looked at the system from a structural perspective. This was as assessment on a scale of 1 to 10 from the BEA technology architect on how well the system aligned with BLM and DOI direction for Technology and Design. Lower scores here will generally indicate whether the technology used in the deployment of the system is out of date, and whether the design of the system no longer meets needs. <click> Lastly, we include two views of data that were collected from each project. Strategic Data covers the collection of data in Kit Muller’s Information Management Priorities, and Unique Data covers the extent to which the system maintains data that no other system is maintaining. <click> So as you can see, healthier systems cover as much red and yellow as possible – a perfect system would cover up all of the green zone. Using this quick indicator of system health, the next four slides show system health for all WO-200 national investments. <click>
  • As a visual aid, I will introduce these recommendations using a “magic quadrant” diagram as shown here. This diagram shows the relative strength of the recommendations from two perspectives: The X-Axis shows the relative business priority alignment of a recommendation, while the Y-Axis shows the relative benefit or value of the recommendation. The star in the upper right hand corner indicates that recommendations in this “magic” quadrant are likely aligned with business priorities AND have a high benefit or value. Recommendations in this quadrant should be considered for implementation before any of the other three quadrants. In addition, each recommendation will be represented by a numbered circle. We will detail the opportunities in priority order. The placement of the recommendations on this chart are estimated by the Enterprise Architecture team – as mentioned before, we did not have a definitive source for specific WO-200 priorities, so the “mileage may vary” if the team has not chosen the correct priorities. <click> In the table on the right are shown the opportunities for Investment and possible Savings that have ended up in the “magic quadrant”. The first is described here. <click> Second is a longer term investment opportunity for new capability in range and vegetation systems… <click> Three describes suggestions for alignment with the IRM strategic plan. <click> Four suggests an expanded role for E-GIS <click> Fifth is a work force planning recommendation <click> Sixth looks at financial and external strategic factors <click> Seven indicates that minimal infrastructure savings are possible. As I mentioned, we will cover each of these in detail in the following presentations. I’d like to reiterate where we would like to go from here on the next slide … <click>
  • … I’d like to show you the information that was collected in partnership with WO-300 users and project teams to perform against the Baseline Actions. As we surveyed and interviewed the users and Project Managers, we collected information in specific focus areas (shown on the left) and on the right we’ve indicated that actual data collected in those areas. <click> First, in conjunction with Bill Yeager, we interviewed the Project Managers to understand what tasks the WO-300 project teams currently perform as a project moves from concept to deployment, as well as where they would like help in the future. <click> Next as shown in the System box, we gathered information on the data needs of the projects, both from a strategic Kit Muller Information Management Priority perspective and from lower level dat acomponents themselves. Other system information collected involved information abut the users, the hardware and software used to deploy the system, and the interfaces and dependencies of the system. <click> We also looked at the financial information as mentioned earlier, and <click> lastly, the BEA, WO-300 and WO-830 collaborated on a end user survey for the national investments. This survey measured end user satisfaction with the national investments. Almost 600 users took the survey and indicated that, on average, they used two WO-300 systems. You’ll see a summary of the user survey results in the following slides that indicate …
  • <click to #1> Here are the actions we took – these should look familiar from the last meeting along with System Health which was added by the Board to our proposed methodology. Action #1 was to align the systems within a line of business, which we did in concert with WO-300. We reused this alignment to position the systems for the WO-300 end-user survey that we conducted with WO-830. <click #2> Next we assessed the alignment of the systems to the WO-300 mission and priorities, and we did so <click to #6> using an assessment from the user survey and other factors for the health of each system. A lesson learned here was that we were unable to obtain a definitive list of mission priorities from WO-300, so we used user survey questions to assess end user’s opinions of how systems aligned, as well as assessments of data alignment and technology alignment with DOI and BLM directions. <click #3>Next in Action #3, we looked at system functionality duplications and overlaps. The ultimate purpose of systems is to automate the management of important data for the business users of the system to accomplish mission goals, so the approach we used to complete Action #3 was to assess the level of critical data duplication and overlap. You’ll see those results throughout the presentations today. <click #4>For Action #4, we looked at the IT infrastructure that supports the WO-300 investments to determine what savings could be obtained by efficiencies there. To do so, we interviewed Subject Matter Experts for each system to understand critical system infrastructure components, and then did an overlap analysis to produce recommendations. <click #5>Lastly, we analyzed all the information we collected to develop recommendations for the Board to consider to move the Directorate forward. <click to next slide>
  • This slide describes the Blueprint creation process, which is the first phase or the Interior Enterprise Architecture Methodology for Business Transformation. It was developed by the DOI enterprise architecture team to a take a broad, highly-structured enterprise planning approach to achieving mission performance through effective IT investments. I need to emphasize that this methodology must be business-driven and not IT driven – that is why a core team of business area representatives such as yourselves is so important to the process. The methodology starts with fundamental business drivers and examines linkages between business processes to conceptualize improvements. These recommendations will be made to senior management through the DOI Investment Review Board. Five major department-led modernization blueprints were developed in FY04 for Finance, Law, Trust, Recreation, and Fire. Several bureau-led departmental efforts are now underway, including this one. The blueprint creation process is shown in the graphic. The development is a six to nine month effort to develop a modernization blueprint to recommend improvements in priority order for a business focus area. As you can see, there are six steps in the blueprint creation process. We’ll break down more specific timeframes and activities for core team members in the next two slides. <Space Bar> The graphic is now showing “What Blueprint Development Is” … <<see the slide >> The recommendations are of the “what is to be done” variety versus the “How should the changes be made” variety at a relatively high level. <Space Bar> The graphic is now showing “What Blueprint Development is NOT” … <<see the slide >> In summary, the contents of the blueprint are high-level documentation of prioritized business issues some of which may be addressed by IT automation In addition, it will contain an analysis and high-level transition plan for cross-cutting IT systems to support the business function more effectively. Lower level analysis will almost certainly need to be done following acceptance of the blueprint. For instance, in the recreation blueprint, it was recommended that the non-commercial permit issuance process be reengineered. This activity is being performed AFTER blueprint creation. Let’s look at more specific meetings, activities, deliverables and timeframes for the LUP and NEPA blueprint core team. <Space Bar>
  • This schedule shows preliminary core team responsibilities for blueprint development steps 1, 2 and 3 over the timeframe from Sept 05 to Feb 06. These are still high level and very rough. Step 1 is to Charter the core team and begin to select SMEs and stakeholders for the blueprint. <Space Bar> Step 2 is to develop a narrower scope and vision for the LUP and NEPA focus area since the focus is currently so broad. It is here where the business expertise of the Natural Resources Management Team is critical to identify and prioritize the business issues that need attention. <Space Bar> Step 3 is to analyze the business with LUP and NEPA SMEs given the narrower scope and vision. Core team members will serve as bureau or office focal points to assure their organization is fully represented. The Scope and Vision and Analyze Business steps will require the most time commitment from the core team members. We’ll discuss the final three steps on the following slide. <Space Bar>
  • This schedule shows preliminary core team responsibilities for blueprint development steps 4, 5 and 6 over the timeframe from Jan 06 to Jun 06. These are still high level and very rough. Step 4 will analyze the LUP and NEPA IT systems currently in place against the business requirements developed in previous phases. This phase will involve very little of a core member’s time but will require liaison support to bureau or office IT representatives for existing systems. <Space Bar> Step 5 is to document all that has been learned as a blueprint deliverable. The blueprint will then be presented to the IRB for approval, funding, and prioritization of investment opportunities. Core team members will need to be heavily involved in the creation of the blueprint document itself, as well as supporting the approval activity. <Space Bar> Step 6 is required to update the Enterprise Architecture repository with analysis models, transition plans, and . Core team members will validate that updates to the repository reflect the intent of the blueprint, but otherwise will have very little involvement. Following approval by the IRB, follow-on implementation activities will take place as directed by the IRB. We have discussed the purpose of this effort, the proposed organization of the development team, how the blueprint process works, and specific core member duties in the process. What are the next steps? <Space Bar>
  • BLM is developing a national strategy to manage the collection, storage, and use of data about the inter-relationship of resource conditions, resource uses, and BLM’s own activities in order to better fulfill the Bureau’s multiple use mission. Under this strategy, the Bureau intends to: enhance the efficiency and effectiveness of BLM’s assessment, inventory, and monitoring efforts. establish and use a limited number of resource indicators that are common to most or all BLM field offices, and that are comparable or identical to measures used by other government agencies and non-governmental organizations. standardize data collection, evaluation, and reporting in a way that improves the quality of the BLM’s land use planning and other management decisions, and enhances BLM’s ability to manage for multiple uses.
  • 12 members for vegetation BPR 16 members for air/water needs to be reduced Analysis of existing WO-200 system Vegetation and Monitoring Data, Spring 2006 ITIB WO200 baseline effort Review of existing processes Interpreting Indicators of Rangeland Health Measuring and Monitoring Plant Populations Handbook Air Monitoring Handbook (Draft) Riparian Area Management
  • Analyze the current workflows What works, what doesn’t, what’s missing. Develop a future process model to analyze the risks and gaps of our current state and what the business needs Develop recommendations Develop a logical data model based on the data needs of the future process model
  • A key activity of the governance task is to identify the “governing intersection points” between Business / IT needs and BEA service offerings.
  • For the 2006 BEA Statement of Work, these “intersection points” have been identified by the following areas: Capital Planning Architectural Self - Assessments and Improvement Guidelines National Wildland Fire Enterprise Architecture Effort The BLM IT Strategic Plan The BLM CM / Waiver Processes and Policies Subsequent activities from these efforts have also included governance work with: Mitretek WO-500 Lifecycle Services Project Interagency Wildland Fire Investment Review Board Department of Interior CTO Council Current activity for these areas have been bulleted on the right
  • Transcript

    • 1. Bureau Enterprise Architecture (BEA) Activity Status Presentation for Scott MacPherson August 25, 2006
    • 2. BEA Activities for FY07
      • Business Architecture:
        • Renewable Resources and Planning (WO-200) Budget Review
        • Interior Business Architecture Team (IBAT) - Standards Working Group
        • National Monitoring Strategy
      • Data Architecture:
        • Bureau of Land Management (BLM) National Monitoring Strategy
        • National Wildland Fire Enterprise Architecture (NWFEA)
        • Emergency Stabilization & Rehabilitation (ES&R)
        • DOI Enterprise Data Architecture Support for BLM
        • Project / Blueprint Data Models
        • Information Technology Investment Board (ITIB) Systems Baseline Analysis
      • Applications Architecture and Methodology for Business Transformation (MBT):
        • Service Level Agreement (SLA)-based centralized architecture services
        • DOI Enterprise Architecture Repository (DEAR) system inventories
        • Planning and NEPA Blueprint
        • IT Baselines for the ITIB
      • Bureau Enterprise Architecture Repository
        • System Inventory
        • Certification & Accreditation (C&A) support
        • Training support
      • Technology Architecture:
        • BLM electronic Technical Reference Model (eTRM)
        • Technical Review Board (TRB)
        • Standard Operating Environment (SOE)
        • Change Review Board
      • Governance:
        • NWFEA
        • BEA Governance Integration with Change Management
        • BLM Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) Processes
      • Special Projects:
        • ES&R
      • Communications:
        • Spotlight Tidbits
        • Brochures and information sheets
        • High level presentations
        • BEA website development and maintenance
        • Education
      • Records Maintenance and Quality Assurance (QA)
        • Maintain records/deliverables and provide QA services to the team
    • 3. “ BLM Email Efficiencies Guide” Status Lowering costs associated with BLM email volume
    • 4. Background
      • Task specifics
        • Create a Lotus Notes Email Guide for BLM employees
        • 5x7 professional Hallmark-looking, full color, spiral bound guide
        • Initial 2,500 copies distributed
      • Guide objectives
        • To reduce overall volume of email BLM-wide
        • To be more efficient in using email
        • To reduce ZANTAZ costs ( the company that maintains our email as a result of a court order and on-going civil suit against the BLM )
        • To communicate email information (rules, regulations, tips, etc.) better
    • 5. Email Guide Status
      • Established working relationship with Peter Doran, Publishing, to understand requirements for final layout and printing
        • P. Doran supplied printing quotes for various forms of hardcopy printing (from $27K to $48K depending on what printing option used)
        • Suggested electronic distribution vs. hardcopy booklets
        • Suggestion that every employee receive a laminated Quick Reference page with information about email efficiencies and a link to the online guide – costing approximately 50¢ per copy
      • Book development
        • Spoke with Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) and obtained other information from BLM directives and policies
        • Book is centered around reducing volume of email and not extraneous topics like changing your password or managing your calendar
        • First draft review sent out 8/16/06; received comments back from Laura, Les and Igor and integrated comments
      • Printing method will determine book completion; setting hopes for end of September 2006
    • 6. Decisions and Needs Pending
      • Need a message from Ronnie for the introduction
      • Need a firm decision on the final product - hardcopy vs. electronic copy with a quick reference guide
        • If hardcopy: Need to finalize the content/format quickly in order to make the September deadline
      • Need to identify reviewers for final review
      • Next steps?
    • 7. IT Baselines and Planning Blueprint Overview and Status August 25, 2006
    • 8. IT Baselining Approach Methodology used to Baseline WO-200 Bureau IT Investments
      • Actions
        • #1: Align each IT system within a Line of Business
        • #2: Assess system alignment to mission and priorities
          • #2a: Assess the health of each system
        • #3: Identify system functionality duplications and overlaps
        • #4: Assess overlapping infrastructure
        • #5: Develop recommendations for moving forward
    • 9. IT Baselining Approach Extensive Data Collection for these Line of Business Systems Geographic Information Systems Enterprise-GIS Services (E-GIS) Range/Vegetation Rangeland Administration System (RAS) Rangeland Improvement Project System (RIPS) Rangeland Information System (RIS) Emergency Stabilization & Rehabilitation Proof of Concept (ES&R) Inventory Data System (IDS) Native Seed Network (NSN) Weeds Planning/Socioeconomics e-Planning version 1 e-Planning version 2 Economic Profile System (EPS) Wild Horse and Burro Wild Horse and Burro Information System (WHBIS) Wild Horse and Burro Program System (WHBPS) Recreation Recreation Management Information System (RMIS) Accessibility Data Management System (ADMS - DOI-mandated) Forestry Forest Vegetation Inventory System (FORVIS) Timber Sales Information System (TSIS)
    • 10. WO-200 Business Model How Do IT Systems fit into the Information Value Chain?
      • Organize raw data
      • Analyze data
      • Create information to inform management decisions
      • Create plans or decisions
      Planning and Decision Support Field Operations
      • Work with BLM customers
      • Collect raw data
      • Implement plans and decisions
      Feeds Guides RAS, TSIS EPS, NSN EGIS IDS, FORVIS WHBIS, WHBPS RIPS, RIS, Weeds, ES&R ePlanning V1, V2 RMIS, ADMS
    • 11. Collected Information Baseline Project Data Collection in Partnership with WO-200 Information for current and projected project IT tasks Information Management priorities Data components User information Hardware (development, staging, and production) Software (development, staging, and production) System interfaces (current and future needs) System dependencies (current and future needs) Costs tracked by PMs Costs tracked by MIS Costs projected in business cases PERFORMANCE OF IT TASKS Data Collected SYSTEM FINANCIAL USER OPINION Information Focus Areas WO-200 end user satisfaction survey
    • 12. System Health Example 3 Perspectives to Assess the Health of the WO-200 Systems Structural Perspective Technology Alignment / Design Strategy Perspective Extent of Collection of Strategic Data / Unique Data Healthier systems cover as much red and yellow as possible Survey Perspective User Survey
    • 13. WO-200 Recommendations Overview Benefit / Value Business Priority Alignment High Low Low High 5 4 2 1 7 6 3 Investment / Savings Opportunities Shared data services for treatment data. Consider longer term replacement of current range/vegetation systems. IRM Strategic Plan alignment suggestions. Expanded E-GIS data strategy. Specialized IT services. Blueprints, O&M and remaining investment suggestions. Minimal IT infrastructure savings available. 1 2 5 4 7 6 3 Highest Value, Highest Priority
    • 14. August 2006 ITIB Decision Current Status
      • Scheduling presentations to WO-200 PMs and management
      • If approved, work on high priorities begins 1QFY07
    • 15. WO-300 Information Collection Proposed Project Data Collection in Partnership with WO-300 Shared project IT tasks Information Management priorities Data components User information Hardware (development, staging, and production) Software (development, staging, and production) System interfaces (current and future needs) System dependencies (current and future needs) Costs tracked by PMs Costs tracked by MIS Costs projected in business cases IT TASKS SYSTEM FINANCIAL USER OPINION WO-300 end user satisfaction survey Data To Collect Focus Areas PM Process Diagrams / Position Description/ Org Chart Diagrams / Documentation - Data Models w/Dict. - Deployment Diagrams - Architecture Diagrams - Interface Diagrams - System Design Doc WO-300 Documentation? WO-300 Project Records Customize Survey with 300
    • 16. Proposed Approach Baseline WO-300 Bureau IT Investments–Resources and Schedule WO-200 WO-300 April - June 2 Hours per project SMEs Data Design April - June 2 Hours per project SMEs Design/Technology April - June 2 Hours per project PMs Project May-June 2 Weeks IRM Advisor User Survey Schedule Time Contact Phase Aug/October BEA / 1-2 Hours if need Doc Review/SMEs Data Design Aug/October BEA / 1-2 Hours if need Doc Review/SMEs Design/Technology Aug/October BEA / 1-2 Hours if need Doc Review/PMs Project Aug-Sept 2 Weeks IRM Advisor User Survey Schedule Time Contact Phase
    • 17. DOI IRB Blueprint Decision
    • 18. Enterprise Planning Methodology – The Methodology for Business Transformation Create the Blueprint (6-9 months) What Blueprint Development IS : What a Blueprint IS NOT :
      • A structured approach to work together  An approach that examines fundamental business drivers and linkages to develop recommendations for effective change  A six step process that determines “What” to do
      • NOT “How” recommendations should proceed  NOT a detailed business process reengineering activity
      • Developing a Blueprint is the first phase in the Interior Enterprise Architecture (IEA) Methodology for Business Transformation (MBT)
    • 19. Management Planning and NEPA Blueprint Development Timeline Nov 05 - Apr 06 Sept 05 - Nov 06 May - July 06
      • Meetings/Activities
      • Core Team Initial Mtg / Blueprint Training
      • SME and Stakeholder selection
      • Deliverables
      • Charter
      • 1st Draft Blueprint (Framework – High Level Outline)
      • Communications Plan
      • Meetings/Activities
      • CoreTeam Mtg
      • Stakeholder Mtg(s) (as needed - per CMBT)
      • IRB Status
      • Nov IT Summit Status
      • Begin Strength, Weakness, Opportunity, and Threat (SWOT) Analysis
      • Deliverables
      • Business Mandates
      • Analysis Matrices (FEA / IEA Reference Models, IT Portfolio, etc)
      • Meetings/Activities
      • Core Team Mtg
      • SME Mtg(s) (as needed - per Core Team)
      • Continue Business Analysis
      • Deliverables
      • Analysis Models and Diagrams
      • Preliminary Planning Blueprint findings & recommendations
      Charter Core Team Scope and Vision Analyze Business
    • 20. Management Planning and NEPA Blueprint Development Timeline (Cont) Analyze MP/NEPA IT Systems Author Blueprint, Approval of Blueprint Update Repository May – July 06
      • Meetings/Activities
      • Core Team Mtg
      • SME Mtg(s) (as needed - per Core Team)
      • Analyze cross-department planning IT systems (IRB decision)
      • Deliverables
      • As-Is and To-Be Models
      • Systems Analysis
      Jun – Sept 06
      • Meetings/Activities
      • CMBT Mtg
      • SME Mtg(s) (per Core Team)
      • Adoption of Modernization Blueprint
      • Approval / Funding of Implementation Phase
      • Prioritize implementation opportunities within current IT Portfolio
      • Deliverables
      • Management Planning and NEPA Blueprint
      Sept - Oct FY06
      • Meetings/Activities
      • Core Team Validation
      • Deliverables
      • Repository Reports
    • 21. Business Process Re-engineering (BPR) WO-200 Budget Review and National Monitoring Strategy (NMS) August 25, 2006
    • 22. BPR Mission and Vision
      • Mission
      • To provide the support and coordination needed to facilitate the business process reengineering efforts conducted for the Bureau of Land Management
      Vision To be the premier center for Business Process Reengineering support (BPR) in the Bureau. Business managers will utilize our support for any and every situation that requires BPR.
    • 23. BPR Methodology Document Current Business Processes Evaluate Potential Improvements Document Recommended Processes and Data Requirements Develop Short- and Long- Term Recommendations Business Process Recommendations Automation Recommendations Monitor Progress Business Challenge Transition
      • ITIB evaluates technological solutions
      • Transition to CPIC Process
      • Application development requires OMB Exhibit 300
      • Implement process improvements
      • Document policy changes
      • Document/Update SOPs, BLM manuals, training guides
      • Identify and track performance measures and targets
      4 main process steps    
      • A challenge to:
      • Reduce cost…
      • Increase quality…
      • Reduce cycle time…
      • Improve customer service
    • 24. WO-200 Budget Review Project
      • Objective
        • To evaluate WO-200’s involvement in the budget development, execution, and performance process to identify time spent, interfaces, and identify potential improvements
      • Status
        • Currently conducting detailed Subject Matter Expert interviews (approximately 40 interviews conducted to date)
        • Developing initial assessment report containing initial set of findings and recommendations
      • Planned Work
        • Initial assessment to be completed by 9/30/06
        • Prioritize recommendations; date TBD
      • Contact: Antonio Harris, WO-200
    • 25. National Monitoring Strategy (NMS) Project
      • Objective
        • To develop a BLM national strategy to manage the collection, storage, and use of data so that we:
          • Enhance efficiency and effectiveness
          • Use limited number of common indicators
          • Standardize the management of data to improve the quality of management decisions
    • 26. National Monitoring Strategy Project (Cont)
      • Objective of the NMS BPR
        • To develop and document consensus on consistent methods/procedures for Assessments, Inventory and Monitoring (AIM) and to determine the monitoring data needed to support P rojects, P ermits and P lans (3 P ’s)
      • Status
        • Analysis of existing WO-200 systems and existing monitoring processes
        • Draft schedule and project teams
    • 27.
      • Planned Work
        • Planning session next week with leads to finalize SLA and schedule
        • Quarterly workshops
          • Vegetation 1 st workshop: October 4-6
          • Air/Water 1 st workshop: November 7-9
        • Planned completion of BPR: Spring 2007
        • Planned completion of Logical Data Model: Summer 2007
      • Contacts
        • Project Manager: Steve Tryon
        • Vegetation Leads: Jack Hamby, John Spain
        • Air/Water Leads: Angela Zahniser, Mike Eberle
      National Monitoring Strategy Project (Cont)
    • 28. Overview and Status BEA Governing Services Status August 25, 2006
    • 29. EA Governing Policy
      • An integrated governance policy is the encompassing tool which correlates business needs to IT activities and controls IT expenditures from a business perspective
      Information Technology TRM DRM BLM Business BRM SRM PRM BLM Governance Policy (Checkpoints / Controls) 
    • 30. Architectural Governance Tasks
      • Completed work with BLM CM group and BEA Technology lead examining / improving current change control / waiver processes and procedures
      • Streamline the various "points of entry”
      • Process further leveraged by the DOI CTOC
      • Providing tactical support of BLM IT Strategic Plan development efforts
      • Governance lead for project’s efforts.
        • Draft of “Program Guidelines” will be complete by September, 2006.
      • Assist in developing an Interagency Wildland Fire Investment Review Board (IWF – IRB)
        • A multi-agency review of current Capital Planning, Acquisition, C&A policies and procedures for the DOI, BLM, USDA, and Forest Service
      • Provide EA assistance for the current Mitretek WO-500 Lifecycle Services Project (currently in test case with ePlanning)
      • Engaged with IMG in re-evaluation of current Exhibit 300 submission processes / procedures
      • Developing cross CPIC / BEA educational materials / guidelines
      ENGAGED Assist the BLM with definition of a revised IT Strategic Plan . ENGAGED Assist the development of Interagency Wildland Fire NWFEA Program Governance Guidelines / Policies. ENGAGED Assist BLM efforts in design and preparation of an architecture self-assessment and improvement guide . ENGAGED Assist the BLM Configuration Manager in the development of a revised BLM Change Management Structure . ENGAGED Offer governance evaluative recommendations for CPIC items submitted through the Investment Management Group (IMG) for risk assessment and alignment to BEA and its principles.
    • 31.
        • An EA Tool for Storing BLM Systems and Investments
      DOI Enterprise Architecture Repository (DEAR) August 25, 2006
    • 32. DOI Enterprise Architecture Repository
      • DEAR changes
        • More Privacy Act information
        • Updated names, attributes, and Data Entry Wizard for C&A
      • August 31 deadline for having all BLM systems in DEAR mapped to 1 and only 1 accreditation boundary – BLM done
      • Upcoming training in Denver – September 18–20 (at BLM)
    • 33. BEA Activities for FY07
      • Business Architecture:
        • Renewable Resources and Planning (WO-200) Budget Review
        • Interior Business Architecture Team (IBAT) - Standards Working Group
        • National Monitoring Strategy
      • Data Architecture:
        • Bureau of Land Management (BLM) National Monitoring Strategy
        • National Wildland Fire Enterprise Architecture (NWFEA)
        • Emergency Stabilization & Rehabilitation (ES&R)
        • DOI Enterprise Data Architecture Support for BLM
        • Project / Blueprint Data Models
        • Information Technology Investment Board (ITIB) Systems Baseline Analysis
      • Applications Architecture and Methodology for Business Transformation (MBT):
        • Service Level Agreement (SLA)-based centralized architecture services
        • DOI Enterprise Architecture Repository (DEAR) system inventories
        • Planning and NEPA Blueprint
        • IT Baselines for the ITIB
      • Bureau Enterprise Architecture Repository
        • System Inventory
        • Certification & Accreditation (C&A) support
        • Training support
      • Technology Architecture:
        • BLM electronic Technical Reference Model (eTRM)
        • Technical Review Board (TRB)
        • Standard Operating Environment (SOE)
        • Change Review Board
      • Governance:
        • NWFEA
        • BEA Governance Integration with Change Management
        • BLM Capital Planning and Investment Control (CPIC) Processes
      • Special Projects:
        • ES&R
      • Communications:
        • Spotlight Tidbits
        • Brochures and information sheets
        • High level presentations
        • BEA website development and maintenance
        • Education
      • Records Maintenance and Quality Assurance (QA)
        • Maintain records/deliverables and provide QA services to the team
    • 34. Revision History Document Abstract Key Words: Business, Data, Applications, Technology, Business, Communications, Records/DM, Repository, Project Management Document description: Compiled BEA activity status presentation for meeting with Scott McPherson on August 25, 2006 Contract #: NBD020221 Task Numbers: 1-9 PRM, BRM, SRM, TRM, DRM 1230 BEA Architecture Area: File Code(s): Subject Function Code(s): cmpld_macpherson_brf_060825.ppt QA HKarlson 8/24/06 Final Initial document WStedman 8/23/06 Draft Filename/lineage Description of edit Author/Editor Rev. Date Doc Status