IIOG Program / Portfolio Management Slide 1 Interagency Interoperability Oversight Group Jim Douglas IIOG Chair Kolleen Shelley IIOG Program Manager April

IIOGProgram / PortfolioManagement Slide 1

Interagency Interoperability Oversight Group

Jim DouglasIIOG Chair

Kolleen ShelleyIIOG Program Manager

April 13, 2011

Interior Operations Center3400 West Corridor

Main Interior BuildingWashington, DC

8:00 – 12:30

http://www.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0e/USDA_logo.svg/800px-USDA_logo.svg.png&imgrefurl=http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:USDA_logo.svg&h=552&w=800&sz=30&tbnid=KyYXw4Ib9gVJ-M::&tbnh=99&tbnw=143&prev=/images?q=usda+logo&hl=en&usg=__VZ0oCPcIBZfNeElyLPbdoDQspEA=&sa=X&oi=image_result&resnum=1&ct=image&cd=1

http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:US-DeptOfTheInterior-Seal.svg


Agenda

1. Strategic Objectives/Priorities2. High Priority Project Activities3. Role and Function of the IIOG4. Next Meeting




A Brief Recap• 2005-2006: Executive Telecommunications Inter-agency

Management Council– Proposed partnership of USDA, DOI, DHS, and States, lead by USDA/DOI CIOs– Several preliminary meetings– Final draft charter– Membership of:

• USDA: 12 agencies• DOI: 9 agencies• DHS: 3 agencies• States: 50

• August 2007: Boise Sojourn– CIOs and staff at NIFC and visit to large fire incident base– Greater understand of user needs/requirements (especially fire)– Realization of lack of governance structure to link users and providers




• 2008: follow up meetings and discussions– September: Interagency Communications Summit

• January 2009: IIOG charter signed– Decision to self charter– Program manager– Agenda of high priority projects and activities

• August 2009: Field Trip to Central Oregon – law enforcement and fire business

• August 2010: Field Trip to MN/WI – law enforcement and state partnership issues




Goals, Role & Function of the IIOG

• Goals– Integrated, seamless network services and access for all accredited

users– Integrated, seamless reliable land mobile radio services and coverage

that allow communication to meet program business requirements– Cooperative, combined well maintained radio facilities jointly operated

and maintained by benefitting agencies– Use of proven technologies that allow communication among the land

managing agencies and with federal and non-federal partners– Integrated maintenance and management of network and land mobile

radio networks and equipment– Best practices for planning, investment, budgeting, and management of

network and land mobile radio capabilities




• Membership: DOI/USDA CIOs, agency CIOs, USDA/DOI “mission” executives (fire/LE) = 11

• Roles:– sponsors projects that promote its vision, using the resources of

its members. Projects are designed to demonstrate feasibility; implementation of enterprise or program solutions based on the results of projects is the responsibility of agencies and programs

– provides a forum for the resolution of policy and program differences that impede its vision and goals, and to coordinate the development and implementation of policies and programs that enable the vision and goals.




What’s Worked with the IIOG• Forum for identifying user requirements• Forum for communication between Departments• Positive message to users that leadership cares• Completed projects: thin client demonstration for fire;

aviation radio toning, credentials MOU• Initiated projects: access/authentication, Central Oregon

demonstration• Program Manager




What Hasn’t Worked

• Uneven participation by principals• Lack of follow through on commitments –

funding, staffing• Overly ambitious agenda• Failure to use the structure – independent and

uncoordinated agency activities




Changing Environment

• DOI IT Transformation – changes roles and functions of CIOs

• DOI Radio Transformation – enterprise approach with opportunities for USDA and other partnerships

• HSPD-12 requirements and opportunities• Universal broadband availability and other

technologies




Strategic Priorities

1. Interconnectivity of systems• “one computer” on desks• Recognition of credentials

2. Sharing of radio/wireless infrastructure & services

3. Leveraging new technologies




High Priority Project Activities• Interconnectivity

– Access Authentication & Accepting Federal Credentials– Credentials MOU Implementation– Logical Access for Non-Federal Personnel

• Radio/Wireless Communication– Combined service/infrastructure/program management– Digital Migration strategy– ROIP– Use of Broadband




• Dispatch Improvement– Communications– Consolidation of facilities– Business applications– Staffing




Interconnectivity• Requires integrated, multi-agency effort• Leverage Access/Authentication work

• ACTION: create integrated work group to coordinate and standardize efforts




Radio/Wireless Communication• DOI Radio Transformation project as vehicle• Partner with USDA/FS on strategy and implementation• Seek additional partners (DHS, others)

• ACTIONS: – Project governance and implementation shared between DOI &

USDA– Central Oregon alternative selection and implementation




Dispatch Improvement• Charter signed by heads of USFS, BLM, NPS, FWS, BIA• Two pilot optimization projects underway: SW and

California – leading to “toolbox” for broader use• Draft strategic plan• Application investments: fire reporting (in progress);

computer-aided dispatch (concept)• Interim program coordinator

• ACTION: (1) monitor pilots; (2) develop integrated governance structure to guide future




Discussion

• Are these the major issues?• What’s missing?• What’s needed to accomplish?

• NOTE: IIOG organization/function discussion to follow…..




How Do We Proceed?

• Issues:– Purpose, functions, roles– Membership and structure– Matching demand and supply (desires and

resources)– Equitable contributions




Options

• Status Quo• Status Quo Streamlined• Formal Charter and Structure• Disband




Status Quo

• Pros– Current charter, commitments, members

• Cons– Uncertain commitments, resource problems,

unwieldy




Status Quo - Streamlined

• Summary– Membership limited to Dept. CIOs, mission exec’s = 5

(DOI mission = 1; FS mission =2); chaired by one of the 5

– PM and approach remain same

• Pros– Smaller, more focused group

• Cons• Uncertain commitments, resource problems




Formal Charter & Structure

• Summary– Secretarial Charter– Executive Steering Committee of 5 (see “Streamlined)– Senior Working Group of managers representing the

ESC members– Program Manager– Formal agency resource commitments




• Pros– Greater status/recognition– Smaller, more focused leadership group– Reliance on senior managers to ensure project

success– Resource commitments

• Cons• Signature requirements• Resource commitments




Disband

• Summary– Use informal and ad hoc coordination mechanisms

within Departments and between Departments

• Pros– Agency-specific and informal governance is sufficient

• Cons– Lack of ability to coordinate effectively; slows

progress– Signal to field/users of lack of commitment




Discussion/Resolution




Next Steps

• Follow-up from this meeting

• Next meetings

• 2011 Field Visit?



Documents

IIOG Program / Portfolio Management Slide 1 Interagency Interoperability Oversight Group Jim Douglas IIOG Chair Kolleen Shelley IIOG Program Manager April