ESMF Governance Cecelia DeLuca NOAA CIRES / NESII April 7, 2017 EMC Governance SIP Hurricane Irene/NASA GOES-13 satellite image/August 26, 2011

ESMF Governance Structure Key Strategies Relevance

Governance Evolution Multi-agency governance was introduced around 2005, at the end of the first ESMF funding cycle, when the project moved from NASA sponsorship to multi-agency sponsorship Key concepts about governance were drawn from ECMWF, the Met Office, and CESM – codes with multiple components, multiple applications, and large user bases The specific governance structure was based on an analysis of functions that needed to be provided The structure was presented in a Project Plan (bodies, relationships, term of reference, etc.), see https://earthsystemcog.org/site_media/projects/esmf/paper_1004_projectplan.pdf The governance has continued to evolve with the project

Governance Structure Executive Management Working Project semi-annual – multi-year Governance Structure Interagency WG (sponsors) Stakeholder definition Programmatic assessment & feedback Executive board appointments Executive Board (customer organization leads) Strategic direction Organizational structure CRB appointments From the ESMF Project Plan appoints Features: Recognition of executive and working levels and differences in timescales Mechanism for changing the project structure (Exec Board) Mechanisms for focused code development and ongoing requirements/feedback Mechanism for development prioritization (Change Review Board) Mechanisms for process improvement, long-term development and quick reactions to code problems Mechanism to address agency coordination that is outside of project scope reports appoints Working Project ESPC Content Standards Committee Conventions and guidelines for documentation, testing, etc. Change Review Board (customer app leads) Development priorities Release review & approval functionality requests implementation schedule resource constraints Joint Specification Team (open membership) Requirements definition Design, code, and other reviews External code contributions Core Team Software project management Software development Testing & maintenance Code distribution & user support Training Collaboration environment and communication/messaging collaborative design and testing daily – semi-annual

Project Governance and Community Coordination When a project relies on community codes, both are needed NOAA and other agencies rely on a growing number of external model component codes The ESMF team was charged with implementing and supporting coupled modeling systems at multiple agencies using ESMF/NUOPC compliant codes (the Earth System Prediction Suite, Theurich et al. 2016) Working with these external codes is manageable when the following exists: Accessible model component repositories with clear policies Verification tests for model components and their associated caps (standard interfaces) Standard model component interfaces including where to get them, and which model component versions have been tested with them Documentation (technical, scientific, etc.) for each of the model components Community guidelines are needed for repositories, tests, documentation, etc. ESPC was helpful to the ESMF project in setting guidelines across the community and agencies – difficult for a single agency to play this role

ESMF Key Strategies From the ESMF Project Plan Recognition that the key relationship in the ESMF Project is between the ESMF product and the customer and that the practical goal of the ESMF effort is to enhance the capabilities of a limited set of working research and operational codes. This recognition encourages the formulation of appropriate test and validation strategies, milestones, and success metrics. A close and continuous relationship between the developers of the software and users of the software, encompassing requirements management, interface specification, short and long-term reviews, and evaluation. A close relationship ensures that the product delivered is the product needed. A core development and support team under direct line management. We have found that a dedicated Core Team promotes responsive, high quality development and support, and provides necessary assimilation services for code contributions from other sources. Clear, consensually decided upon mechanisms for setting implementation priorities and for making technical decisions. These mechanisms are required in order to avoid perceptions of unfairness, and to keep development moving along a focused and timely path. Maintenance of an openly accessible web-based collaboration environment that provides comprehensive and pertinent information, including metrics, task lists, documents, regression test results, links to common repositories, and more. The communication infrastructure and frequent regular telecons, community meetings, and a network of informal cross-collaborator communications are the lifeblood of the project.

Relevance to NOAA Unified Modeling There is a central set of functions that governance needs to provide that is common across many projects, including ESMF and NOAA Unified Modeling – some key capabilities for EMC: Integrated decision making - There is a need for a representative steering body that makes decisions across Unified Modeling System applications, and mediates conflicting needs across those applications. Communications – There is a need for a web environment that incorporates both inward and outward views – inward to address the need for extensive communication related to development, and outward to express leadership messaging including values, mission, plans, paths for engagement, etc. Process improvement path – There is a need for a role or body and a process that can review recommendations, accept/reject/change them, report on the results, document new policies in a way that is organized and findable, and implement those policies. Link to community coordination mechanism in governance – not as immediately obvious as above, but will probably become more so over time.