1. IJIS, LEITSC & APCO Partnering to Build IEPDs for CADs and RMS
SUZETTE:
Chief Haslip of Blaine, Washington Police Department and also a very active member in the GJXDM community;
Heather Ruzbasan the Project Manager for LEITC a cooperative formed with leaders from IACP, Noble, PERF, and NSA; and
I Suzette McLeod the Program Manager from the IJIS Institute who is the voice of public safety and justice industry
will be spending the next hour discussing the IJIS, LEITSC, and APCO partnership in building IEPDs for CADs and RMS.
Chief Michael Haslip, Blaine Police Dept.
Suzette McLeod, Program Mgr, IJIS Institute
Heather Ruzbasan, LEITSC PM, IACP

2. Today’s Session: The Partnership & Governance Structure The Process
Enabling quality a reasonable cost
The Process
Forming a team and building IEPDs
The Results
Supporting key CAD and RMS exchanges
What We Learned
And…mistakes you can avoid
SUZETTE: We will spend time talking about four key topics;
The Partnership which was critical to producing a quality product on this project, but must also serve as a model for future projects since funding is become more scarce will be reviewed by Heather Ruzbasan.
The Process which will review
The Results where Chief Haslip will review the exchanges we’ve documented and how that will affect the law enforcement personnel we support
And Some Lessons-Learned will be shared by this panel where we will also address any questions

3. Partnership for this Project
BJA Sponsored Our Effort
LEITSC defined need for IEPs in recent CAD & RMS Functional Specifications & law enforcement SMEs
APCO supplied Project 36 documentation & Monitoring Station SMEs
HEATHER:
The Bureau of Justice Assistance (within DOJ’s OJP) enabled this work through their ongoing leadership and specific funding’
LEITSC (a body comprised of IACP, NSA, NOBLE, and PERF) involvement was a natural progression of their work on the newly release CAD and RMS Functional Specifications;
APCO (an association of more than 16k public safety communication members) became involved with IJIS when they decided to adopt the GJXDM in the joint continuation of Project 36; and
The IJIS Institute, a non-profit organization representing more than 163 justice industry firms, coordinated and managed the IEPD Development work
IJIS Institute provided IEPD development management and industry SMEs

4. The Future Requires We;
Build perpetual partnerships with other associations and agencies
Recognize competencies and expertise of “partners”
Leverage existing infrastructure of “partners”
Share, share, and share information, work products, and time.
HEATHER:
With shrinking budgets and higher expectations of grant dollar effectiveness, we MUST partner more. Just as the IJIS Institute took firms who are competitors and helped them find common interests for collaboration; practitioners and associations working toward information sharing must do the same.
Building enduring partnerships that recognize the core competencies and expertise of sister agencies and associations is important to making things happen better, faster, and cheaper.
Using the infrastructure that exists in sister agencies and associations can also help reduce funding needs while elevating our service levels
Lastly, remembering that our collective work products and time can help us all raise the bar will push us into the next level of information sharing.

5. Governance Model Authoritative Owners Steering Committee Working teams
IJIS Staff
IJIS Contracted IEPD Experts
HEATHER:
A healthy and productive partnership requires a clear and mutually acceptable governance structure; the IJIS Institute, LEITSC, and APCO created just such a structure with;
Definition of “Authoritative Owners”. This is critical since projects have an end-date and project teams disperse. This means organizations like LEITSC and APCO must take long-term custodial ownership of the artifacts built.
Second…a multi-disciplined Steering Committee was created with LEITSC, APCO, and IJIS representation.
Next, that Steering Committee appointed three working teams (Alerts, CAD, and RMS) which were comprised of balanced representation of industry and practitioner experts.
Lastly, the IJIS Instituted provided project management staff and IEPD development contractors who filled the void presented by use of volunteer working team members. This is critical since volunteers must go back to their day jobs.

6. Clear Goals & Objectives
Provide for LEITSC, APCO, BJA, & public safety community publication of IEP reference documents that support the top ten public safety data exchanges
HEATHER:
A solid partnership also requires very clear, mutually endorsed set of goals and objectives. These were flushed out during the kickoff meeting and regularly referred to in subsequent meetings where scope or intent was questioned.
[read goal]

7. Appointed Practitioners
Lt. Dave Mulholland
US Park Police
Chief Michael Haslip
Blaine Police Department
Chief Gary Vest
Powell Police Department
Jim Slater, CIO
Massachusetts Public Safety
Dina Jones
Story County, IA
Dan Murray
Arlington Police Department
Jim Cox
Port Orange Public Safety
Stephen Wisely
Onondaga
Alan Komenski
Bellevue Police Department
Bill Cade
APCO
Martin Moody
Heather Ruzbasan
LEITSC
Mat Snyder
IACP
Tom Steele, CIO
Delaware DHS
HEATHER:
LEITSC and APCO went to their membership to appoint a diverse family of practitioners.

8. Selected Industry Firms
Asynchrony Solutions
MTG Mgt Consultants
Advanced Justice Sys
Spillman Technologies
Visionair Inc.
PAVIC Marketing
TriTech Software Sys
Intergraph Corporation
Enforsys, Inc.
Cisco Systems, Inc.
Sungard HTE/OSSI
Bask Enterprises
URL Integration
Vector Security
Fire Monitoring Technologies
Microkey
Dice Corporation
GE Monitoring Systems
HEATHER:
The IJIS Institute then pulled from its membership to appoint technology experts in the area of CAD, RMS, and Monitoring stations. As you can see there were MANY key firms directly involved in the creation of our work, but note these firms are representing 163 total IJIS Institute firms.
IJIS Institute is the “Voice of Industry”
with 163 Member Firms

9. Today’s Session: The Partnership The Process The Results
Enabling quality a reasonable cost
The Process
Forming a team and building IEPDs
The Results
Supporting key CAD and RMS exchanges
What We Learned
And…mistakes you can avoid
SUZETTE:
Now I want to take a few minutes to walk through our IEPD development process. Just in case some of you think developing IEPDs may involve handling explosive devices, I will first define IEPD.

10. What is an IEPD? IEP GJXDM XML
An IEP Document is a package of exchange artifacts that serve as reference materials. The package includes GJXDM-conformant model schemas used “as is” or extended to meet individual jurisdictional requirements and it also includes associated documentation that help implementers understand the information exchange.
IEP
The Global JXDM approach is to construct and utilize exchange packets (IEPs or GIEPs) with GJXDM components anytime data is shared between systems, agencies, and juristictions.
GJXDM
XML descriptions (tags) are not pre-defined so the Global Justice XML Data Model was created to assist in defining national tags for justice related information exchanges.
XML
XML stands for EXtensible Markup Language and is much like HTML. While HTML was designed to assist in defining how data looks or is displayed, however, XML was designed to describe data.
SUZETTE:
IEPD stands for Information Exchange Packet Document. It is built upon XML. XML stands for Extensible Markup Language which is similar to HTML (the language that supports displaying web pages). While HTML uses tags before and after text to indicate how that text should be displayed (bold, centered, flashing, etc…) XML places tags before and after text to indicate what that text is.
But XML has its limitations in that it allows use to use any tag or word to describe the data. This means I could call something a car, you call it an automobile, and someone else a get-away-vehicle. So we realized we needed a way to constrain XML for use in the justice community.
Hence came the Global Justice XML Data Model (GJXDM). This is the justice and public safety communities way of defining house everyone should define the data so our systems are speaking the same language. But the GJXDM is huge; a monster. Which makes sense given the breadth of the justice and public safety community and focus.
So the concept of Information Exchange Packages (or Packet/Payloads) was introduced. This involves taking the huge, monster, GJXDM and cutting out the pieces relevant to an exchanges particular uses. For instance one would not generally need a docket number for an exchange designed to share early incident information. So this allows implementers to take bit size pieces of the GJXDM for their work.
But we want to make sure we are helping the implementers as much as possible to grow adoption and ease usage so IEPDs (Information Exchange Package Documents) were invented which provides implementers with tools that can be used and reused in their development work.

11. What is Meant by “REUSE”?
SUZETTE:
So why bother with all this…why not let the developers do their own thing without having to fool with what everyone else has done? Well, let’s imagine for a moment that we have six different systems or entities. They could be different domains (law enforcement, prisons, courts, fire, medical, prosecutors, etc..) or different states or local jurisdictions; they could even be systems within these domains.
When two entities want to share information they must each develop a custom interface.
When another two entities wish to share data; they two must each develop a customer interface. Not inherently benefiting from the previous interface.
Then….the same duplicative work takes place for a third interchange. This continues to happen; even when those systems have already build interchanges with another system since it is likely that each used different standards.
Notice we’ve now had six development efforts; each independent of one another. Each requiring a significant level of effort and money. None benefiting from the others’ efforts.
Notice also there are still many more interfaces required to procure a full sharing environment.

12. What is Meant by “REUSE”?
GJXDM
SUZETTE:
Using the GJXDM or NIEM methodology, however, each system simply builds ONE series of interfaces. Better yet, when a new entity chooses to share data they are able to comply with the standard (and build only what is custom/unique to their domain) they will automatically be able to share with every other system with a single development effort.
True reuse. A new entity steals what has already been done and focuses it efforts only on what is unique or what is the next evolution. Now that they have time they also are likely to grow/improve on the standard thus immediately affording that much more to all the existing interfaces.
Now of course this is at the logical layer and not physical layer and there is much more to worry about then defining tags for the payload; but IEPDs at least provide developers with the benefit of work done before them so they can worry about the next group of interface challenges.
We build on success and constantly progress our current paradigm.

13. What is in an IEPD? DOMAIN MODEL DOCUMENTATION GJXDM SCHEMAS MAPPING
INSTANCE
& STYLE-SHEET
SUZETTE:
An IEPD is made up of artifacts that assist developers in their understanding and implementation of local IEPs. First, a domain model is defined and documented using UML. This defines the data elements and their relationship to one another (cardinality). Next a GJXDM Mapping document is included which is typically an MS Excel spreadsheet that maps the domain model data elements to the GJXDM with element name, description, GJXDM name, and GJXDM path and namespace. Next it includes the atual XML schemas. These typically consist of a document schema, constraints schemas, and extension schemas. Next, to validate the prior artifacts, it is prudent to create and include at least one XML Instance and Style-Sheet. This is where the schemas become “real” to the end-user. Lastly, documentation is included which defines the project members, key assumptions, exchanges supports, etc to provide context to an implementer who was not involved in the IEPD creation process.
SCHEMAS

14. Artifacts & Deliverables
Built IEPDs
CAD
Specs
RMS
Modeling
Tool
Other
IEPs
GJXDM
Mapping
Tool
GJXDM
Subschema
Generator
Forms or
Screens
All IEP
Artifacts
Exchange
Inception
Domain
Modeling
Standards
Mapping
Schema
Building
Test via
Validating
Packaging
& Posting
Use Case
Model
Exchange
UML
Domain
Model
GJXDM
Mapping
List of
Extended
Elements
XML
Document
Schemas
Constraint
Extension
XML
Instance
Sample
Style Sheet
Support
Doc
Clearing
House
Posting
Artifacts & Deliverables
SUZETTE:
Since we’re talking about the creation and evolution of standards, it only makes sense that we also utilize a standard process for developing these IEPDs. Each step produces critical artifacts that are either included in the IEPD or are used to communicate requirements to others. Explain IEPD Clearinghouse and GJXDM Knowledgebase

15. Today’s Session: The Partnership & Governance Structure The Process
Enabling quality a reasonable cost
The Process
Forming a team and building IEPDs
The Results
Supporting key CAD and RMS exchanges
What We Learned
And…mistakes you can avoid
SUZETTE:
Our diverse and balanced committee went through this process and built eleven IEPDs. Chief Haslip is going to walk you through those eleven exchanges and how they would be use help law enforcement

16. CAD Team IEPD #1 Group Exchange Name Exchange Purpose CAD
Initial CFS Transfer
Eliminate re-keying of incident information for transfer between agencies or disciplines
911 Caller
Arlington PD
US Park Police
CHIEF HASLIP:
Call 911
Report Accident
Obtain Incident Info
Enter CAD Data
Contact Other Agency
Provide Incident Info
Obtain Incident Info
Enter CAD Data
Respond to Incident

17. CAD Team IEPD #2 & 3 Group Exchange Name Exchange Purpose CAD
Resource Availability
Response
Eliminate phone calls to multiple agencies to query whether specific resources are available for release to assist in incident response
Dispatched Unit
Dispatcher
Agency 1
Answer Call
Respond to Request
CHIEF HASLIP:
Agency 2
Answer Call
Respond to Request
Request K9 Support
Update CAD
Call Agency 1
Call Agency 2
Call Agency 3
Agency 3
Answer Call
Respond to Request

18. CAD Team IEPD #4 & 5 Group Exchange Name Exchange Purpose CAD
Subscriptions
Unit Updates
Provide for regular updating of resources from partnering agencies to speed identification of available resources or facilitate sharing of resources
Field Unit
Dispatcher
Agency 1
CHIEF HASLIP:
Request K9 Support
Update CAD
Contact Partner Agency
Search Availability
Provide Availability

19. CAD Team IEPD #6 & 7 Group Exchange Name Exchange Purpose CAD
Request Resource
Respond to Resource Request
Facilitate systematic request for assistance or resource release between agencies
CHIEF HASLIP:

20. RMS Team IEPD #1 & 2 Group Exchange Name Exchange Purpose RMS
Query RMS
RMS Query Summary Response
Support external-to-RMS or cross-RMS searches based on person, location, object, or incident/offense
Record Mgt Systems
Search on Person
CHIEF HASLIP:
Search on Object
Search on Location
Search on Offense

21. CAD & RMS IEPD Group Exchange Name Exchange Purpose CAD / RMS
Exchange Name
Exchange Purpose
CAD / RMS
CAD-to-RMS
Support inter-system exchanges between CAD and RMS systems
CHIEF HASLIP:

22. Alerts Team IEPD Group Exchange Name Exchange Purpose Alerts
External Alerts
Eliminate re-keying of alarm information between monitoring stations and PSAPs
Business
Monitoring Station
911 Center/PSAP
CHIEF HASLIP:
Intrusion Alarm
Fire Alarm
Validate Alarm
Contact PSAP
Provide Alarm Info
Obtain Alarm Info
Enter CAD Incident
Dispatch Units

23. Exchanges Varied in Size
CHIEF HASLIP:
Built using GJXDM 3.0.3

24. New GJXDM Elements Still Being Identified
CHIEF HASLIP:
* Element are in local namespace but are derived from NIEM Emergency Management Domain

25. Today’s Session: The Partnership & Governance Structure The Process
Enabling quality a reasonable cost
The Process
Forming a team and building IEPDs
The Results
Supporting key CAD and RMS exchanges
What we Learned
And…mistakes you can avoid
SUZETTE:
Now we’d like to summarize some things we learned as well as some insights which “may” help you avoid learning the hard way.

26. Some Advice to Consider
Define the authoritative owner and governance structure early
Create a strawman before the first modeling meeting by doing some homework
Be open to refining your exchanges once you get the experts in the room
Make sure you have a diverse yet balanced team in the modeling sessions
Have key roles appointed to support sessions;
A facilitator with modeling expertise
A tool jockey capturing element data
A documenter who captures all the discussions, assumptions, and implementation thoughts
SUZETTE:

27. Some More Advice
Don’t overlook the need to validate the mapping after the working sessions
Start sessions by having team members share their systems, processes, etc… to bring words to life
Have an aggressive outreach and communication strategy where a diverse team shares project objectives and progress
Seek and support Pilots, HelpDesk, and TA support to validate work and share real-life success stories
Acknowledge and support varied levels of automation and exchange partner trust
SUZETTE:

28. Don’t …………….. Forget to check the IEPD Clearinghouse
Overwrite your modeling work; especially late in the day
Don’t rush the modeling; if you are struggling consider refining IEP purpose
Schedule heavy agenda items after a full day of modeling
Get hung up on implementation issues
Forget to order afternoon caffeine and snacks
SUZETTE:

29. Key References GJXDM Help-Desk IEPD Clearinghouse IJIS Institute
it.ojp.gov/gjxdm/helpdesk/
IEPD Clearinghouse
it.ojp.gov/iepd/
IJIS Institute
ijis.org
LEITSC Website
leitsc.org/
APCO
apcointl.org

30. QUESTIONS For more information contact:
Suzette McLeod at the IJIS Institute