1. Architecture Federation Update Ms. Takai DOD CIO 6 February 2012
1 7/19/2018 JWMA_Architecture_Federation_1_5_2011.ppt

2. Intent
Purpose
Establish an architecture federation supporting enterprise wide architecture data sharing and reuse enabling architectural analysis in order to focus resource investment on specific capability gaps required to procedurally and technically implement IT Enterprise solutions while meeting prioritized Warfighter requirements.
Method
Create and execute a POA&M outlining specific activities with definitive suspense's utilizing a “crawl, walk, run” approach facilitating IT Enterprise business model solutions using FMN as a “pacing item.”
Endstate
An executable DOD pathway to IT Enterprise solutions enabling secure data and information exchange horizontally and vertically across all mission areas, EIE and JIE (GIG).
Federation of WMA architectures will support achievement of IT Efficiencies
Architecture Federation is not a technical problem. The technical capabilities to share and federate information exist. Early federation demonstrations show high return on investment.
Roles, Responsibilities, and Relationships need to be defined to support effective collaboration and a pattern of trust needs to be established!
Resources are limited, so application of resources needs to be focused on activities that move us towards our objectives. Architects are still developing in proprietary environments that are not designed to support DoD Strategies for architecture information sharing and federation. We have foundational processes for getting data, just a matter of applying resources.
Leadership support is crucial to success. Unfortunately shortfalls in resources to support (with no mandate) means that federation is not a priority. We are overcoming some of this constraint by virtual collaboration and teaming, keeping all development information in an environment which partners can access an reuse as time and resources become available (Softwareforge)
Resources to support the federation effort were scaled under DoD efficiencies, but expectations and scope of work remain unchanged. Foundational Capability can be deployed in as little as one year, but current scaling has impacted significantly and shifted timeline far right (3-5 years at current resource level, based on current scope)
Expectation Management is critical. The project has had some very critical, beneficial, and important successes that have significant potential for cost-savings, improved interoperability, and support for critical DoD –Wide decision making processes, but implementation will take time within current resource constraints. Even a small investment now can have significant return on investment in the short term (i.e. adding one additional web developer and one data support person could reduce development time by 30-40%).

3. The Joint Warfighting Mission Area
The Architecture Federation effort enables the foundational capability to federate architecture DATA by:
Enabling discovery, accessibility and reuse of Joint Reference Architectures for all capability development and acquisition activities
Exposure and reuse of JCIDS Architecture data to support AoA and DCR analysis and solution development
Mission Thread and Architectural analysis informs cost, schedule, and performance trade off decisions relative to operational risk determination and mitigation decisions
Leverage Component willingness to share approved integrated architecture products
Solution Architectures
Dept of Air Force
COCOMS
DISA
DLA
NSA
NRO
NGA
DIA
Other
Army
DON
Air Force
Tech Stds
DISR
Arch Guidance
DODAF
Reference
Models
OMB FEA
Laws, Regs, and Policy
Laws
Regs
Policy
Tools
DITPR
DARS
Business
Warfighting
Intelligence
Enterprise Information Environment
Want to emphasize the importance of the data behind the architecture artifacts- and the access to the authoritative data through the federation. Current JCIDS manual and the CJCSI F (submitted for approval and signature), in support of the NR KPP certification process, requires user representatives/program managers to submit the link where the architecture is registered or repository access versus incorporating the architecture products in the document.  Promotes reuse, cost savings and access for cross program analysis the other (for example CAPE) can use. Our key priorities for FY-12 fall into two basic categories, Joint Operational Reference Architecture (J-ORA) and Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS) support.
J-ORA's are important elements because they lay the framework under which capabilities are designed to meet warfighting operational requirements.  Our effort will continure to expand on our capability to make architectures discoverable, available, traceable and reusable using the DoDAF MetaModel as a Physical Exchange Standard whenever possible.  This includes processes and procedures for federation up to the DoD Enterprise Architecture, across to other Joint ORA's, and down to solution architectures.
JCIDS support is critical to ensure that integration and interoperability needs are being met through properly designed architectures for the entire DOTMLPF spectrum of analysis.  Significant analysis is conducted based on these architectures and we need to posture our effort to be able to improve our assessment and analysis capability through the rapid availability of architecture products and the associated data elements. 
Architecture Federation aligns to the IT Effectiveness effort and DoD EA Guidance and Vision

4. Architectural Analysis Example
Analysis of JTRS GMR JCIDS documents and Information Support Plans (ISPs) indicated concerns with lack of technical standards, joint common systems functions, and dated capabilities
C2 On-the-Move (C2OTM) Reference Architecture identified capabilities, services, and standards for JTRS GMR
Tactical Information Classification Security (TICS) Solution Architectures and analysis (JROCM ) provided Information Exchanges and Systems Data Throughput used for JTRS GMR analysis
RESULT: AT&L cancels JTRS GMR in favor of NDI solution
Architectures leveraged for Nunn-McCurdy Breach Analysis on JTRS GMR
Federation supported the JTRS-GMR analysis by utilizing federation processes and tools for rapid discovery of architecture products across multiple repositories (Joint Architecture Repository, Army’s CADIE, Navy’s NARs, KM-DS)
Architectural analysis identified operational risks and performance tradeoffs
Discussions ultimately focused at enhancing joint and coalition interoperability

5. Aggressively Attack and Execute!!!
Way Ahead
Achieve success through phased development and iterative “wins” with WMA and FMN directed efforts as “pacing item”
Crawl phase: 30 Days
Analyze problem space, scope effort, create POA&M
Conduct technical assessment and feasibility
Walk phase: 90 to 120 Days
Commence WMA (FMN) and EIE architecture data sharing and integration
Capture and incorporate technical, procedural, and governance “lessons learned”
Run Phase: 150 until complete
Apply “lessons learned” through WMA (FMN) development
Horizontally and vertically share architectural data across all mission areas, the EIE and JIE (GIG)
Federation of WMA architectures will support achievement of IT Efficiencies
Architecture Federation is not a technical problem. The technical capabilities to share and federate information exist. Early federation demonstrations show high return on investment.
Roles, Responsibilities, and Relationships need to be defined to support effective collaboration and a pattern of trust needs to be established!
Resources are limited, so application of resources needs to be focused on activities that move us towards our objectives. Architects are still developing in proprietary environments that are not designed to support DoD Strategies for architecture information sharing and federation. We have foundational processes for getting data, just a matter of applying resources.
Leadership support is crucial to success. Unfortunately shortfalls in resources to support (with no mandate) means that federation is not a priority. We are overcoming some of this constraint by virtual collaboration and teaming, keeping all development information in an environment which partners can access an reuse as time and resources become available (Softwareforge)
Resources to support the federation effort were scaled under DoD efficiencies, but expectations and scope of work remain unchanged. Foundational Capability can be deployed in as little as one year, but current scaling has impacted significantly and shifted timeline far right (3-5 years at current resource level, based on current scope)
Expectation Management is critical. The project has had some very critical, beneficial, and important successes that have significant potential for cost-savings, improved interoperability, and support for critical DoD –Wide decision making processes, but implementation will take time within current resource constraints. Even a small investment now can have significant return on investment in the short term (i.e. adding one additional web developer and one data support person could reduce development time by 30-40%).
Aggressively Attack and Execute!!!

6. Summary
Architecture Federation processes directly support DoD IT Enterprise Effectiveness development by promoting reuse, cost savings, and access for portfolio and cross portfolio analysis
Federation requires DoD CIO guidance, policy, authority and enforcement
Partnering effectively uses existing, limited resources to achieve federation objectives while exploiting lessons learned and products already developed
Continued collaboration with DoD CIO critical to achieving the vision of Architecture Federation supporting the entire DoD Enterprise
Carpe Diem!

7. Backup Slides

8. Architecture Federation Resource Requirement Post-Transition Scope (WMA Only)Dec 2011
Task
FOC (1-year Timeline) Resource Required
Long Term Resource Requirement
Project Management
Project Lead/Govt Civ (Funded)  
Project Lead/Govt Civ (Funded)
Federation Methodology Development
Architect
1 FTE UFR ($180,000)
DoDAF MetaModel Data Configuration Support/Conversion of Architecture Data to support DM2 compliant web services
Web Service Development, Data, Architecture Support
2 FTE UFR ($360,000)
Standardized Portal Interface Development and Maintenance
Web/Web Service Developer
1 FTE UFR ($180,000)
Web/Web Service Maintainer1
1 FTE ($180,000)
Architecture Normalization/Exposure
Configuration Management (Funded)
1 FTE ($180, 000)
Data Support
Deployment and Maintenance of Production Environment
System Integrator (Funded)
Development Hosting for testing and evaluation
$100,000 
System Integrator (Funded)
Data Administrator _
Annual Hosting Costs (DISA DECC or other) $200,000
TOTAL
Govt Civ (Funded)
CTR FTE Funded $360,000
CTR FTE Unfunded $1,080,000
Development Hosting $100,000
CTR FTE (or Govt Civ) Unfunded $1,080,000

9. Challenges to Implementing a Federated DoD EA
Solution
Current - Duplicate & Independent Development of Operational and Capability Architecture Content by PMs
Consolidate production, provide authoritative products “up front,” and reuse
Access to data for reuse and for analysis is difficult
Develop/Implement Repository Strategy
No strategy for resourcing development of Capability architectures
Identify dedicated resources and leverage proven technologies, methodologies, & processes to speed production
No agreed content for Capability Architectures
Agreed DoD /Joint definition of content
DoD Architecture Policy Refinement (DoDD 8210 in-progress, other policies need to be evaluated/updated)
Federation Governance and Strategy Updated
Lack of Community of Interest/Practice (COI/COP) vocabularies
Require DoD Foundational Architecture Vocabulary, COI/COP Vocabularies, and Vocabulary registration
Architectures must have a common core of DoD information
Common Vocabulary is essential
Progress on Policy will help