1. Enterprise Architecture
Future of Architecture
Enterprise Architecture
Unified Profile for DoDAF and MODAF (UPDM)
Strategies, Policy, Governance, and Implementation
DoD and Federal Departments
15 July 2011
Walt Okon
Senior Architect Engineer
Architecture & Infrastructure Directorate
Office of DoD CIO

2. Secure Information Sharing
It is imperative to effectively securely exchange information among components, Federal agencies, coalition partners, foreign governments and international organizations as a critical element of our efforts to defend the nation and execute national strategy
Effectively Securely Exchange Information

3. Secure Information Sharing
The use of architecture techniques ensures alignment, clarity, and interoperability across information sharing initiatives; Information Sharing Environment (ISEs))
Architectures enable Departments and agencies to eliminate redundancies by identifying information sharing services that may be implemented and shared internal to DoD and, potentially, across the Federal Government.
Architectures Enabled

4. Secure Information Sharing
DoD is implementing services for IS that employs Enterprise Services (ES) including service registration, authentication, attribute‐based access control, directory services, metadata registration, federated search, and collaboration.
DoD partnering with IC on initiatives; e.g., service definition and implementation, metadata descriptions, Universal Core context‐independent framework, and cross‐domain solutions.

5. Elements of Quality Architecture
Single Architecture Framework
Policy, Direction, Guidance
Exchange
Architecture Tools
Certified Architects
Enabling efficient and effective acquisition of hardware, software and services used by DoD in missions
Common Architecture Framework Approach 5

6. DoDAF V2.0 Viewpoints Fit-For Purpose
Renamed
New
New
New
Overarching aspects of architecture context that relate to all models
All Viewpoint
Articulate the data relationships and alignment structures in the architecture content
Data and Information Viewpoint
Articulate applicable Operational, Business, Technical, and Industry policy, standards, guidance, constraints, and forecasts
Standards Viewpoint
Systems Viewpoint
Articulate the legacy systems or independent systems, their composition, interconnectivity, and context providing for, or supporting, DoD functions
Services Viewpoint
Articulate the performers, activities, services, and their exchanges providing for, or supporting, DoD functions
Operational Viewpoint
Articulate operational scenarios, processes, activities & requirements
Capability Viewpoint
Articulate the capability requirement, delivery timing, and deployed capability
Describes the relationships between operational and capability requirements and the various projects being implemented; Details dependencies between capability management and the Defense Acquisition System process.
Project Viewpoint
New
In DODAF 2.0 we have described an expanded number of viewpoints (categories of models and views expressing differing aspects of a common architecture need) to include those shown on the slide. Some of the viewpoints were introduced in earlier versions of DoDAF, others, such as Project and Capability are new to DoDAF 2.0.
An architecture viewpoint can be displayed in a number of formats, such as dashboards, fusion, textual, composite, or graphs, which represents data and the architecture description which represents an architecture. In DoDAF 2.0, the ability is provided to create an architectural description which can be expressed in many of the same formats normally used for briefing, analysis, and decision-making.
The next few slides present a view of data from an architecture developed for the US Air Force at Arnold Engineering Development Center in Tennessee. This is the Air Force Center for R&D, testing and Analysis of aircraft, engines, and other components. Both Charles and I are using these views today with the permission of the Air Force.
Architecture viewpoints are composed of data that has been organized to facilitate understanding. 6 6

7. DoD Architecture Framework 2.0
What it is:
Guidance on the types of data and relationships needed to document a DoD architecture in a standard way (new in 2.0)
Guidance on format and content for a standard set of DoDAF Described Models for describing architectures
High level meta-process for using the DoDAF
What it isn’t:
A specific architecture
A tool
A detailed architecture development process

8. DoDAF V2.0 Vision Views for Other Stakeholders Structured Knowledge
Base – Common Model
Views for the Architect

9. Levels of Architecture
DoD Enterprise
Enterprise
Level Architectures
System Context
SoS Architectures
FoS Architectures
Capability Based
Segment Level Architectures
Solution Level Architectures

10. 10 10

11. UPDM – Unified Profile for DoDAF/MODAF
Adaptive
Artisan Software
ASMG
BAE Systems
DoD
DND
embeddedPlus
Generic
IBM
Thales
Lockheed Martin Co
Mitre
L3 Comms
MOD
NoMagic
Raytheon
Rolls Royce
Sparx Systems
VisumPoint
Selex
UPDM RFC Group
Walt Okon DoD Support 11

12. Why do we need Exchange UCore
Middle East Pro-Democracy Movements
Coalition Partners
Japan Earth Quake, Tsunami, Nuclear Risks
DoD and IC
Information Sharing
Initiatives
Implement
Lessons
Learned
To Achieve
Operationally
Significant
Results
Federal
Inter-Agency
Haiti Earthquake
Christmas Day Terrorist Attempt
DOJ/DHS Experience in Federal, State, Local, Tribal Interoperability
State,
Civil, Local
Hurricane Katrina
NGOs and
Industry
11 Sep 2001 Terrorist Attacks
“The bottom line is this:  The U.S. government had sufficient information to have uncovered this plot and potentially disrupt the Christmas Day attack.  But our intelligence community failed to connect those dots, which would have placed the suspect on the "no fly" list.
In other words, this was not a failure to collect intelligence; it was a failure to integrate and understand the intelligence that we already had. ”
President Barack Obama, 05 JAN 2010

13. UCore V2.0 Conceptual Data Model
What is UCore
UCore V2.0 Conceptual Data Model
Message Framework
Metadata
XML representation Interrogatives: When, Where, Who, What,
What Taxonomy
Common Terms
Security markings
Message framework
Rendering Instructions
Extension Guidance
When
What
Where
Who

14. Vendor Tools are Necessary
Architecture Tools
Guidance
DoDAF v2.0
Federated Architecture Strategy
DoD IEA
DoD Tools
DoD Architecture Registry System (DARS)
DoD IT Standards Registry (DISR)
GIG Technical Guidance (GTG) Tool
Meta Data Repository (MDR)
Vendor Tools are Necessary

15. Architecture Education & Training
Certified Enterprise Architects design the information technology architecture structure enabling the efficient and effective acquisition of hardware, software and services utilized by the DoD in missions supporting the warfighters.
Common Architecture Framework 15

16. Elements of Quality Architecture
Single Architecture Framework
Policy, Direction, Guidance
Exchange
Architecture Tools
Certified Architects
Enabling efficient and effective acquisition of hardware, software and services used by DoD in missions deliverables.
Common Architecture Framework Approach 16

17. Future of Architecture
Achieving Secure Information Sharing
Information Integration Subcommittee Identity Federation Meeting
Implement ICAM
Identity, Credential, and Access Management

18. Federal CIO Council
ICAM Alliances: Interagency Security Committee, NSTIC NPO, CNSS, IC IdAM, NASCIO, & More
Unclassified

19. Secure Information Sharing
Extract from FY10: Leveraging the Power of Technology
To support this effort, the Federal Identity, Credential, and Access Management (ICAM) segment architecture provides Federal agencies with a consistent approach for managing the vetting and credentialing of individuals requiring access to Federal information systems and facilities
The ICAM segment architecture will serve as an important tool for providing awareness to external mission partners and drive the development and implementation of interoperable solutions

20. Secure Information Sharing
Extract from FY12: IT Security and Privacy
Improve Identity Management: ICAM, PIV Credentials, HSPD-12, NSTIC
ICAM solutions leverage existing investments in the Federal Government while promoting efficient use of tax dollars when designing, deploying, and operating information technology systems
With the majority of the Federal work- force now possessing credentials, agencies can accelerate their use of these for secure access to Federal facilities and information systems

21. ICAM Scope Non-Persons Persons Logical Access Physical Access
Unclassified

22. Current DOD IdAM Attribute Governance
Secretary of Defense (SECDEF)
Identity Protection Mgt Sr. Coord Group (IPMSCG)
& working groups
DOD CIO
DoD CIO Executive Board
Enterprise Guidance Board (EGB)
IA Enterprise Review Group (IAERG)
Enterprise Services Review Group (ESRG)
Architecture Standards Review Group (ASRG)
Information Assurance Senior Leaders (IASL)
Identity Access Mgt Task Force (IdAM TF)
Identity Assurance & PKI (IdA/PKI) Directorate
Defense Information Systems Agency (DISA)
Joint Staff
GFM DI GOSC
GFM DI PIPWG
OUSD Personnel & Readiness (P&R)
Defense Human Resources Agency (DHRA)
Defense Manpower Data Center (DMDC)
DOD/IC Authorization Attribute Steering Committee AASC
Legend for governance
light blue: DOD organizations dark blue: DOD governance bodies grey: DOD/IC governance bodies
black: federal governance bodies
Federal CIO Council
(FICAM Subcommittee)

23. Architecture & Information Sharing
Achieving Secure Information Sharing
Office of Management and Budget Common Approach Federal Enterprise Architecture (CA-FEA)
Dr. Scott Bernard, Federal Chief Architect

24. Changes in Federal Direction
Mission. Federal enterprise architects provide leading-edge advisement, analysis, and design services that align strategic priorities with mission capabilities and technology solutions.
Vision. To be a trusted, knowledgeable partners with agency executives, managers, staff, and external stakeholders to help accomplish mission goals, manage change, and optimize resources through proven enterprise architecture methods.

25. Changes in Direction Outcomes:
Revitalized community that is relevant and engaged.
Strong leadership support for the participation of architects in key initiatives.
A diversity of views within the community are heard and considered.
New methods for architecture that are more agile, efficient and standard.
Updated policy to reflect new priorities, methods, and desired outcomes.
A career path and training standards for federal enterprise architects.

26. Changes in Governance
OMB, Federal CIO: Sets federal policy- EA programs, practices, reporting.
OMB, Chief Architect: Leads federal EA community, advises Federal CIO. Runs quarterly Chief Architect Forum Meetings.
OMB, FEAPMO: Maintains federal EA approach and does projects.
CIO Council: Promotes federal IT community discussions, advises Federal CIO, publishes best practices and reports, maintains reference archive.
CIO Council, AIC: Promotes best practices, supports outreach.
AIC Sub-Committees: Promotes the development of best practices and methods in specific EA areas, supports outreach, and projects.
AIC Outreach Sub-Committee: Runs quarterly “Architecture Plus” meetings for government and industry participants to discuss EA issues.

27. Changes in Approach
Common Approach to Federal EA
FEAF-II

28. Changes in Scope Level Scope Planning Detail Impact Audience Medium
Multiple
Agencies
Govt.-Wide
Services
U.S. & Other
Governments
Medium
National/Global
Outcomes
Government-Wide
& International
Multiple Agencies,
Businesses,
Interest Groups
Sector
Services
Medium
Sector
Outcomes
Multi
G2C, G2B, G2G
Agency-Wide
Services
Line of Business
Specific Services
Single Agency
Program
Specific
Services

29. Environment & Natural Resources
Changes in Use – Shared Services
Sector designations are needed to support new services and interoperability across traditional agency boundaries.
General
Government
Policy
Resources
Oversight
Transparency
Education & Workforce Sector
Defense & Security Sector
Law & Justice
Sector
Diplomacy & Trade
Economic & Financial Sector
Transport
& Space Sector
Energy & Technology
Environment & Natural Resources
Health & Well-Being
Example: Electronic
Patient Records
Example: Border
Protection
Example:
International Legal
Cases
Example: International Trade & Exports
Example: Global
Economic Tracking
Example:
On-line Learning
Example: Energy
Efficient Housing
Smart-Roads
Example: Alternative
Fuels
Central sector for general government
support services and transparency

30. Secure Information Sharing
Achieving Secure Information Sharing
White House
Information Sharing Environment Governance
Interagency Policy Committee

31. Information Sharing Environment Governance
Cross
Federal
Information
Sharing
Co Chairs
NSS / PM-ISE
DNI
DHS
DOJ
DOD
DOS
Intelligence
Law Enforcement
Defense
Homeland Security
Foreign Affairs
Scope
I&A / POL
Sharing and
Access IPC
WH / DHS
Information and
Communications
Infrastructure
IPC
Smart Grid Cyber Security
Cyber
Legislation
Architecture/
R&D
International
Privacy,
Civil Rights,
Civil Liberties
Cyber Budget
Cyber OPS
Legal
IRIS
IS&A Sub IPCs
National SAR
Initiative
DOJ BJA
Fusion Centers
DHS I&A
Watchlisting &
Screening
DHS POL
Integration
PMISE
TREAS
IC CIO
DoD CIO
TBD
RISS
LEISP
RISS National
Policy Group
IC ISE

32. Sub-Committees Working Groups Information Sharing & Access
Interagency Policy Committee
Co-Chairs: Monte Hawkins, NSS & Kshemendra Paul, PM-ISE
Paul Grant (DoD CIO); Chuck Kosak (USD(P)); Karen Riggs (JS)
Sub-Committees
Watchlisting & Screening
Chair: Monte Hawkins (NSS)
Fusion Center
Chair: Bart Johnson (DHS)
Vice Chair: Owen Harris (FBI)
Suspicious Activity Reporting
Chair: Jim Burch (DoJ/BJA)
Privacy, Civil Rights & Civil Liberties
Chair: Alex Joel (DNI)
Information Integration
Chair: David Bray (PM-ISE)
Matt Taveres (HD&ASA)
Adam Gorowitz (USD(P))
Chuck Kosak (USD(P))
Stephanie Beavers (HD&ASA)
Mike Reheuser (DPCLO)
Paul Grant (DoD CIO)
Carl Consumano (DoD CIO)
Working Groups
HSPD-6 International Outreach
HSPD-24 National Security Threat
ISE Privacy Guideline Revisions
Information Technology
Audit
Standards Working Group
Chair: Walt Okon (DoD)
Nominations
Database Enhancements
Data Aggregation Working Group
Chair: Donna Roy (DHS)
Chair: Hank Bebe (DNI)
Assured Secret Network Interoperability Working Group
Chair: James Beagles (DHS)
Assured SBU Network Interoperability Working Group
Chair: Kevin Heald
Encounters
Screening
Regina Piper (DoD CIO)
Paul Grant (DoD CIO)
Carl Consumano (DoD CIO)
Paul Grant (DoD CIO)
Walt Okon (DoD CIO)

33. Federal Shared Services Strategy Shared Service Working Group Office of Management and Budget Office of E-Government & IT

34. Shared Services: Part of the IT Reform Agenda
Reform Item #6: Develop a Strategy for Shared Services

35. History of Shared Services
Quicksilver
2001
Cloud-First
2010
E-Government Act
2002
Clinger-Cohen
1996
E-Gov Initiatives
Initial 25
2003
Lines of Business
Initial 5 (HR, GM, FM, FHA,CM)
2004
Round 2 (Geo, BFE, ITI, ISS)
2006
Payroll Consolidation Completes
2009
GAO Report: Opportunities to Reduce Potential Duplication
2011
Round 2 (DAIP, ITDS, IAD-Loans/Grants)
2008
Shared Services

36. What is a Shared Service?
Producer
Provider
Consumers
Roles: Provider, Producer, Consumer
Sources: Internal or external to the agency (government or commercial).

37. Shared Service Concept
Education & Workforce
Defense & Security
Economic & Financial
Transport & Space
MISSION SERVICE SECTORS
Health & Well-Being
Diplomacy & Trade
Environment & Natural Resources
Energy & Technology
enablers
Content Management
Virtual Meeting
Cloud
Collaboration
Others
SUPPORT
SERVICE
SECTOR
First focus on support sector services, as this has the greatest initial potential for lowering duplication & waste.
Public Clouds
Federal Clouds

38. Delivery Channels & Considerations
Delivery Considerations
Is the service commercially available?
Are there security, privacy, classified requirements?
Does the agency need to be a provider?
How does a provider agency meet customer needs?

39. Secure Information Sharing
Questions
Walt Okon
Senior Architect Engineer
Architecture & Infrastructure Directorate
Office of DoD CIO