wildland fire information and technology - nwcg · pdf filewildland fire information and...

Wildland Fire Information and Technology

Blank Page

Wildland Fire Information and Technology Investment

Management 5-Year Plan

Fiscal Years 2016 – 2021

Submitted by:

___________________________________ William Kaage

Co-Chair - Fire Management Board Division Chief, NPS Fire and Aviation Department of the Interior

___________________________________

Kim Christensen

Co-Chair - Fire Management Board Acting Assistant Director, Operations, FAM US Forest Service

___________________________________ Erik Torres-Jacquez

Vice Chair – WFIT Program Board Branch Chief - NPS Fire and Aviation IT Department of the Interior

____________________________________ Richard del Hierro

Chair – WFIT Program Board Branch Chief – Fire and Aviation Management IT US Forest Service

Received and Accepted by:

___________________________________ Kim Thorsen

Deputy Assistant Secretary – Public Safety Resource Protection and Emergency Services Department of the Interior

Co-chair, Wildland Fire Information and Technology Executive Board

____________________________________ Jim Hubbard

Deputy Chief State and Private Forestry US Forest Service

Co-chair, Wildland Fire Information and Technology Executive Board

December 3, 2015


i


Blank Page


i

“We will fundamentally improve the way we conduct

information and technology to support fire business, not just

refine existing silos”

INTERAGENCY WILDLAND FIRE ROADMAP TEAM

FALL 2011


ii

Blank Page


iii

Vision

The Wildland Fire Information and Technology Investment Management 5 Year Plan is published annually by the WFIT Executive Board to identify and communicate the values used to establish the current technical investment portfolio of the wildland fire business and detail those investment decisions.

In support of the future investment decisions, this plan identifies the current state of investments, identifies the strategy used to establish and prioritize new investment opportunities, puts forth a plan of action to recognize those investments and finally, identifies the investment portfolio for fiscal years 2016 through 2021.

The 5 year plan for Fiscal Years 2016 – FY 2021 introduces a fundamental focus on improving the utilization of wildland fire’s IT investments by identifying and prioritizing investments based on improving the capability of wildland fire operations. Three major principles were considered in this plan’s development:

Mission-based business capabilities will drive technology investment actions. Often, efforts to fix IT related support issues remain rooted in the sponsoring organization’s IT practices, policies, culture, and leadership. A weak linkage of investment prioritization to business requirements creates a void that limits the quality and impact of the investment action.

Enterprise based investment actions will be considered and applied in technology projects. An enterprise focused vision will facilitate moving the community beyond a “silo” view and address the largely similar needs of the wildfire operations. Detailed planning and execution of an enterprise based IT structure are anchored in the vision and goals of the wildland fire community, the OCIO offices of the USDA and DOI, and the overarching guidance of the Executive Branch and Agencies. The community fully endorses 1) the President's “25 Point Implementation Plan to Reform the Federal Information Technology Management,” 2) the USDA Strategic Plan, 3) the DOI Information Resource Management Roadmap, and 4) the Federal Information Technology Acquisition Reform Act.

Workforce enablement to ensure effective portfolio management and project execution across the multi-agency organization that is WFIT. The multi-agency character of wildland fire poses challenges in establishing direction and maintaining oversight of investment activities. This 5 year Plan identifies actions that will focus alignment at the highest levels, to establish aligned portfolio investments, and to establish industry best practices for effective project execution.

WFIT is committed to ensuring that wildland fire’s business needs are met through enhanced information technology capabilities, improved security, interoperability, and cost-effective support services.


iv

Blank Page


v

Table of Contents

Vision ............................................................................................................................................... iii

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................. v

Table of Figures .............................................................................................................................. vii

Executive Summary ......................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction .................................................................................................................................... 3

Chapter 1 – Current Steady State Investment ................................................................................ 5

Chapter 2 – Capability Centric Portfolio Management .................................................................. 7

Chapter 3 – Investment Prioritization Strategy ............................................................................ 15

Chapter 4 – Capability Priorities ................................................................................................... 22

Chapter 5 – Five Year Investment Transition Strategy ................................................................. 29

Chapter 6 – Implementation ......................................................................................................... 35

Chapter 7 - Summary .................................................................................................................... 39

Supporting Information ................................................................................................................ 41


vi

Blank Page


vii

Table of Figures

Figure 1 - Executive Summary of Recommended Investments .................................................................... 1

Figure 2 – 5 year WFIT Portfolio Investments............................................................................................... 6

Figure 3 – FY 16 Summary of: Investors, Number of Investments, and YTD Investments ........................... 6

Figure 4 – LOB Study – Identified Capability Investments with Descriptions and Gaps ............................... 8

Figure 5 - Investment Opportunities, affected LOBs and Steady State Investments ................................. 11

Figure 6- Investment Opportunities and Line of Business Impacted .......................................................... 12

Figure 7 - Values Comprising Return of Investment in Line of Business Study .......................................... 15

Figure 8 – Capability Investment from Line of Business Study with Value and ROI ................................... 16

Figure 9 – Capability Investments – Value vs ROI with Cost and Complexity ............................................. 17

Figure 10 - Capability Investment Opportunities Plotted by Value and Line of Business Impact .............. 17

Figure 11 - Capability Improvement Investments by Priority ..................................................................... 22

Figure 12 - Total Yearly WFIT Portfolio Investment by Project Phase ........................................................ 23

Figure 13 - Distribution of Investments amongst Capability Investments ................................................. 24

Figure 14 – Executive Summary of WFIT Staffing Task group – Final Report - published May 12, 2014 ... 41

Figure 15 – Active Applications – Cross walk by Capability Investment ..................................................... 43

Figure 16 - Value Levels Applied to Capability Investments ....................................................................... 46

Figure 17 - Definition of Values Used in Line of Business Study ................................................................. 46

Figure 18 - Phased Transition Strategy – Detail charts ............................................................................... 47

Figure 19 - Current Development Investments .......................................................................................... 50


viii

Blank Page


1

Executive Summary

This report was prepared by the WFIT Program Board in collaboration with key business stakeholders, including interagency wildland fire business specialists from federal, state and local entities. The WFIT Executive Board provides the vision, leadership, and objectives for these and other interagency fire IT support activities, with accountability placed on the wildland fire business community.

The focuses of strategic objectives are to transition from a project centric and silo oriented portfolio to a portfolio grounded in the operational capabilities of the wildland fire community. These objectives strive primarily for firefighter safety while identifying opportunities to improve operational efficiency.

Based on the assessment and fact finding activities conducted by the core WFIT line of business team, three investment areas are targeted:

1. Current Steady-State investments are on-going IT investments toward maintaining the current operational capability. The numbers shown in Figure 1 represent the current Operation and Maintenance costs for the WFIT Portfolio. The applications are identified and discussed in Chapter 1 of this document.

2. Foundational functions support all WFIT functionality to ensure comprehensive and efficient information technology solutions. The current numbers shown in Figure 1 are an estimation of costs associated with the initial investment currently identified for surge support for the line of business study and WFIT FTEs to help govern future direction of the portfolio. Pending the results of the Line of Business study, the foundational investments will account for elements such as workforce, infrastructure services, data management services, security services, and acquisition services. These investments are identified and discussed in Chapter 2 of this document.

3. Capability investments add or improve upon the operational capabilities of the Wildland Fire Enterprise. The numbers in Figure 1 represent Concept and Development costs to support improvement of operational capabilities. These investments are identified and discussed in Chapter 2 of this document. It should be clearly understood that this is our current investment strategy and does not include what may result from the out year line of business study.

The summation of these investment areas are noted in Figure 1.

Figure 1 - Executive Summary of Recommended Investments

Investment Area ($K) FY 16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY 21 Total

Current Steady State 36,716 38,988 38,316 42,645 42,747 42,797 $ 242,209

Foundational Functions 1,150 1,150 1,150 1,150 400 400 $ 5,400

Capability Investments 7,616 7,832 7,895 3,348 - - $ 26,691

Total 45,482 47,970 47,361 47,143 43,147 43,197 $ 274,300


2

It is important to note that at the time of the publication of this document, budget processes for USDA Forest Service (IRDB) and DOI agencies (IEC) were not yet completed and investments identified for FY 17 and beyond should be considered best guess estimates.

Once IRDB and IEC vetting discussions are completed, updates to this 5-Year planning document will be completed; reflecting approved funding for our respective Information Resource Portfolio items.

The current method of managing the wildland fire portfolio largely considers application targeted investments and does not accurately reflect the business requirements. The following chapters outline a strategy to transition our current portfolio management model to a capability centric model that balances business requirement, operational capability, and finite budget constraints.

The current portfolio consists of a total of 103 contributing IT investments, of which only 61 are directly funded by WFIT. The current management strategy of the WFIT portfolio does not account for the supporting foundational investments nor does it consider enhancements to current investments. In the future, the executives should expect a clear delineation of foundational investments, required to support the application environment, and visibility of current investments. Finally, the inclusion of transition strategy expenditures needs to be consolidated as part of the future WFIT Five Year Budget strategy.


3

Introduction

The purpose of this document is to articulate investment decisions recommended by the Fire Management Board for FY 16 – FY 21. This document identifies current steady state investment activities, prioritized potential investment activities, and a recommendation for FY 16 investment activities.

It is important to note that at the time of the publication of this document, budget processes for USDA Forest Service (IRDB) and DOI agencies (IEC) were not yet completed and investments identified for FY 17 and beyond should be considered best guess estimates.

Once IRDB and IEC vetting discussions are completed, updates to this 5-Year planning document will be completed; reflecting approved funding for our respective Information Resource Portfolio items.

Furthermore, this document introduces a methodology by which investment activities are identified and prioritized based on business impact to the wildland fire community. These capability based investment activities are then aligned with current application development efforts for the FY16 wildland fire IT (WFIT) portfolio.

Wildland fire’s business success is reliant on its capability to execute. Therefore, efforts targeted at improving the effectiveness of the most critical capabilities will drive investment activities. The recommendations made in this document are a result of a business capability centric investment strategy.

The WFIT portfolio is comprised of three unique investment areas, each addressed in this document.

Current steady state investments, those investments supporting current capabilities of the wildland fire community.

Foundational investments, those investments necessary to provide available and accessible data and information to wildland fire operations.

Capability improvements, investments defined to improve the wildland fire community’s ability to execute.

Operational capabilities and capability gaps are identified by the business community (Fire Management Board) and capability improvements implemented by the technology organization (Program Board). The Fire Management Board tasked a Line of Business study to identify the operational capabilities of wildland fire. The early results of this study identified business focused capability gaps and associated capability investments. These are the basis of capability improvement investments identified in this plan.

Workforce capabilities are considered to ensure effective portfolio execution by establishing targets focused on execution and collaborative planning. Inter-agency complexities of WFIT pose challenges in establishing common objectives and ensuring effective execution of investment activities. Governance and management of the interagency WFIT program will be based on collaborative planning and project oversight, while maintaining the integrity of the reporting relationships of personnel within the U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service and U.S. Department of the Interior wildland fire management programs. This structure establishes a clear, single interface point between the wildland fire "lines of business" and the investment decision-making structures of both departments. The purpose of this structure is to provide a unified approach to identify requirements and priorities, to efficiently make investment decisions, and to manage those investments as a single portfolio.


4

It is important to note budget planning and reporting methods for USDA/Forest Service (IRDB) and DOI (IEC) differ and as such create complexity in planning and reporting staffing investments in Wildland Fire.

In the figures reported in this report, staffing investments for DOI are reported as such, WFIT Staffing – DOI. The associate USDA/FS WFIT staffing investments, while equal in planned expenditure, are incorporated in the investment activities targeted with managing capability investments and their related application investments.

Future alignments between USDA/FS and DOI budget processes, as applied to Wildland Fire, may mitigate these complexities.

Departmental budget timelines and reporting requirements will not be changed to adhere to the goals of the WFIT Investment Management 5 Year Plan; rather the 5 Year Plan will facilitate business leadership and senior executives towards greater transparency and cooperation with the objective of identifying the best utilization of given funds to support the wildland fire program.


5

Chapter 1 – Current Steady State Investment

Investments are required to maintain the on-going operation of existing capabilities. Applications provide methods to collect pertinent data, to perform prescribed analysis to assist decision making and communication. Infrastructure support elements provide an operational foundation on which applications function to meet business needs. Data management efforts are implemented to align information shared between applications to promote effective decisions. Each area requires ongoing investment to maintain, at a minimum, its existing capability.

A survey of applications used by the wildland fire community identified 118 applications used to provide capabilities necessary to achieve the wildland fire community’s mission. Figure 15 identifies those applications, their sponsoring organization and the primary Line of Business utilizing the application in their operational capacity.

The FMB-ITAB is responsible for collecting investment opportunities and with appropriate governance processes, moves an opportunity into the Concept stage of the application’s life cycle. The Concept stage is divided into two major tasks: Prototype Planning, and Prototype Evaluation. Concept activities endorsed by FMB-ITAB and Program Board are proposed to the EB and approved by the respective OCIO investment review process, and then moved into the Development stage of the life cycle. Upon completion of the Development Stage, under proper governance oversight, the investment activity is completed and released for use in wildland fire operations. These activities are now considered in Operations and Maintenance (O&M) stage.

According to OMB’s Exhibit 300 guidance document:

Development, Modernization and Enhancement (DME) refers to costs for projects and activities leading to new IT assets/systems and projects and activities that change or modify existing IT assets to: substantively improve capability or performance, implement legislative or regulatory requirements, or meet an agency leadership request. As part of DME, capital costs can include hardware, software development and acquisition costs, commercial off-the-shelf acquisition costs, government labor costs, and contracted labor costs for planning, development, acquisition, system integration, and direct project management and overhead support.

Operations and Maintenance refers to the phase of the life cycle in which the asset is in operation and produces the same product or provides a repetitive service, also commonly referred to as the Steady State phase.

Maintenance refers to the activity necessary to keep an asset functioning as designed during the O&M phase of an investment. Some maintenance activities should be managed as projects and reported in Section B of Exhibit 300B. Examples of maintenance projects may include, but are not limited to: operating system upgrades, technology refreshes, and security patch implementations. As defined in the Federal Accounting Standards Advisory Board Statement of Federal Financial Accounting Standards Number 10, “Maintenance excludes activities aimed at expanding the capacity of an asset or otherwise upgrading it to serve needs different from or significantly greater than those originally intended.” Maintenance costs refer to all costs (including all related personnel costs) needed to sustain an IT asset at the current capability and performance levels.


6

Figure 2 – 5 year WFIT Portfolio Investments

WFIT Portfolio - Total (118 associated applications) (61 funded applications)

FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 20 FY 21 Total

Concept 9 Applications

3,565 250 - - - - $ 3,815

Development 11 Applications

4,051 7,582 7,895 3,348 - - $ 22,876

Steady State 59 Applications

36,716 38,988 38,316 42,645 42,747 42,797 $ 242,209

Total Investment 44,332 46,820 46,211 45,993 42,747 42,797 $ 268,900

For budgetary management reasons, IT Investments in wildland fire are sponsored by an organization based on the organization’s needs and abilities. Current investments are primarily sponsored by the USDA Forest Service, the DOI Office of Wildland Fire and various non-Federal agencies. Figure 3 identifies current and planned distribution of WFIT investments amongst USDA/FS, DOI and non-Federal agencies based on WFIT’s FY16 Investment strategy. The current portfolio management strategy does not provide transparency into the costs associated with workforce, infrastructure, security, data management, acquisitions, or enhancements. The management strategy proposed by the line of business team will account for these areas to give leadership better oversight of the portfolio.

Figure 3 – FY 16 Summary of: Investors, Number of Investments, and YTD Investments

Portfolio Lifecycle Cost ($K)

Wildland Fire Consolidated FY 16 FY 17 FY 18 FY 19 FY 20 FY 21 Total

USDA/FS 26,091 28,276 27,438 27,433 27,433 27,433 $ 164,105

DOI/non-Federal Agencies 18,241 18,544 18,773 18,560 15,314 15,364 $ 104,795



7

Chapter 2 – Capability Centric Portfolio Management

A primary objective of the Wildland Fire Information and Technology Investment Management 5-Year Plan is to move the managing and governing processes of the wildland fire IT portfolio to a common interagency approach. This objective is founded upon principles that shape information and technology program activities and ensure delivery of solutions and services appropriate and suitable for wildland fire requirements. The principles are:

Wildland fire business requirements and priorities, regardless of agency, shape and drive information and technology solutions and services

Shared interagency governance leads, manages, and oversees delivery of standardized information and technology services and provides accountability to the wildland fire business community

Information and technology investments are managed using “best practice” lifecycle management tools, including regular review and evaluation of all investments

Innovation, flexibility, adaptation, and collaboration are encouraged Solutions and services are interoperable and interconnected Standardized solutions and services improve effectiveness (to meet business requirements) and

efficiency (to provide services in the most cost effective manner) Solutions and services reduce complexity to users Supporting capabilities, such as training and user-support, are integral to development and delivery of

all solutions and services

Capability Investments The wildland fire community performs its mission by executing a series of capabilities in a structured set of processes. The Line of Business Investigation focused on understanding the processes used by the wildland fire community, identifying process issues and identifying improvement opportunities for consideration by the WFIT leadership. The improvement opportunities are structured as capability investments.

The strategy utilized in establishing the investment portfolio is to identify, prioritize, and select a series of capability investments to maximize the benefit to the wildland fire business. For this WFIT Investment Management 5 year Plan, information collected in the Line of Business study identified 375 desired business capability improvements, referred to in the study process as capability gaps, where current portfolio investments were not meeting business expectations. In many cases the functionality noted by a capability gap crossed process and operational lines. Consolidation was done by considering the character of the functionality (e.g. data integrity, application capability or management process) and alignment with other identified gaps. The study identified 375 capability gaps and consolidated 150 into 10 potential capability improvements. The remaining 225 capability gaps were judged by the LOB team and participants as challenges very unique to a function or Line of Business. The resulting ten capability investments are noted in Figure 4.


8

Figure 4 – LOB Study – Identified Capability Investments with Descriptions and Gaps

ID Capability Description

CI 1 Communicate and Collaborate with Stakeholders/Partners

Capability to communicate (message and schedule) and collaborate (share documents) between DOI, FS, and other stakeholders

Gap: Different platforms hinder information sharing and communication (e-mail, document sharing, scheduling).

CI 2 Fuels Management Capability to effectively plan, track, and assess Fuels Treatment

Gap: There is not a common set of tools, data, training, and processes to manage fuels treatments.

CI 3 Strategic Resource Allocation

Capability to strategically allocate resources in anticipation of fire activity

Gap: There is a lack of pertinent information available to make decisions to strategically allocate resources. There is also a lack of a standardized decision making process to allocate resources.

CI 4 Incident Information Management

Capability to manage critical incident information

Gap: There are multiple fire reporting systems with different data standards making it difficult to summarize and compare incident information. Information surrounding an incident is inconsistently released and there is no standardized process for reviewing incident data.

CI 5 Incident Operations Coordination

Capability to efficiently and accurately coordinate incident operations

Gap: Critical decision processes and data vary across dispatch centers and create inefficiencies when teams are required to work together on an incident or for reporting purposes. Training of dispatchers on disparate CAD systems, currently supporting fire operations.

CI 6 Financial Management Capability to manage and track Incident Finances

Gap: Current applications do not report information needed to make critical decisions for suppression costs. Interoperability issues between legacy systems hinder data sharing in real time.

CI 7 Workforce Training and Qualifications Management

Capability to manage workforce training and qualifications

Gap: There is not a clear source of information as to the total trained workforce due to the fact that there are different qualification systems for National, State, and Departmental training.

CI 8 Records Management Capability to manage records

Gap: Document management is not effectively controlled (e.g. PC documents, personal emails, etc.) or automated (e.g. Fire Box paper records) resulting in inefficient methods of searching for critical historical information.

CI 9 Resource and Asset Management

Capability to manage resources and assets

Gap: Information about resource and asset status and location often times is not timely or accurate. Current inventory management systems are complicated, cumbersome, and not conducive for seasonal labor workforce.

CI 10 Procurement/Acquisition Management

Capability to manage procurement/acquisitions

Gap: DOI and USDA use differing acquisitions tools (PRISM, VIPR) for blanket purchase agreements and yet VIPR is utilized by both agencies during incidents. DOI's policy doesn't allow use of VIPR for IBPA impacting efficiency and effectiveness of incident contracting officers and accuracy of expenditures.


9

Foundational Investments Five foundational areas of IT development impact all capabilities utilized by wildland fire operations. The foundational areas support the capability investment activities to facilitate comprehensive, competent and efficient IT solutions. The OCIO offices of both USDA/FS and DOI have strategic initiatives aligned with these foundational investments. They are:

Technology Infrastructure Data Management Security Alignment and Implementation Technology Acquisitions Applications Architecture

Each of the foundational investments offers unique benefits and challenges. As such, each is managed in a manner to maximize its benefit to the wildland fire community, each is implemented uniquely, and each prescribes its own ownership and governance. These elements of each are described here:

Technology Infrastructure provides the foundation for information storage, transfer, sharing and application execution. The breadth of technologies used by the wildland fire community, the infrastructure requirements dictated by government policy and the rapid advancement of technical capabilities provided by industry combine to formulate a challenging environment for technology providers. Infrastructure components considers such factors as server technologies, cloud based applications, security services, private and public access and hardware platform support. A common technology infrastructure considers and incorporates requirements from various participating agencies.

Implementing a common technology infrastructure enables the IT community to efficiently deliver pertinent capability to the broad wildland fire community when and where needed. Well-formed infrastructure considers technology evolution and provides a common structured platform for new capability development. A common platform mitigates the challenges of each development activity to meet multi-agency requirements.

Responsibility for implementing a common technology infrastructure resides with the Program Board to align technical solutions with solution providers. The Program Board collaborates with various government and private agencies to deliver needed infrastructure. Support can be provided by the USDA/FS and DOI OCIOs to identify technology services as well as alignment amongst participating agencies, both federal and non-federal.

Data Management describes the capability to develop and execute strategy, policies, processes, and practices to effectively manage the full set of data requirements defined by the wildland fire business. Wildland fire management utilizes large amounts of information, from a variety of sources. A comprehensive data management capability facilitates authoritative and accurate data, simple and aligned data sharing (when and where needed), improved accuracy of information (well defined data) and improved data collection efficiency (collect what is needed to make effective decisions). Data management aligns data amongst all operational capabilities and provides the governance to realize these gains in an efficient manner. Efficiencies are gained by reducing the complexity of implementing new data, eliminating data redundancies and establishing the authoritativeness, and thus accuracy, of data.

Responsibility for data management lies primarily in the purview of the interagency data management committee and the NWCG in collaboration with their respective supporting OCIO organizations and other stakeholder groups (e.g. other federal agencies, states, local supporting entities) to identify what is good data, provide a venue for discussing data concerns and a governing body for managing the data


10

used and shared amongst applications. Responsibility also lies in multi-agency governing bodies (governance and lifecycle management bodies) to ensure the adherence of capability development activities to established data management standards.

Security Alignment and Infrastructure is critical in enabling the inter-agency operational capabilities, most critical when executing incident response operations. Numerous policies define the security requirements of the multitude of agencies involved in the wildland fire mission. The challenge to the wildland fire community leadership is to identify and agree upon a security policy that meets the expectations of individual agencies yet enables the end-user and incident support resources to execute their jobs safely and efficiently.

Implementation of aligned security and associated infrastructure will enable the effective collaboration of wildland fire operations amongst the agencies involves in wildland fire. Most importantly, aligned security protocols facilitate incident response activities where safe and efficient decisions are paramount. In planning and financial management activities, shared security will simplify data and information sharing to enable accurate and aligned decision making and information reporting.

Responsibility for developing aligned security protocols lies primarily at the OCIOs of the USDA and DOI. Security protocols are often the result of policy decisions and department level infrastructure implementations, putting OCIOs in a unique position to identify areas of alignment and mitigate the challenges due to policy differences.

Technology Acquisition leverages the wide range of technological capabilities available as services in both the public and private sectors. The challenges to WFIT leadership are to clearly articulate the business driven capabilities required to perform wildland fire operations, identify the most efficient and effective source of technology, and identify cost sharing vehicles aligned with the priorities of the multiple agencies comprising the wildland fire organization.

Implementation of common technology acquisition processes will result in the most cost effective and technically comprehensive infrastructure and technology offerings for the wildland fire community.

Responsibility for providing an aligned technology acquisition capability lies primarily in the OCIOs of the USDA and DOI in collaboration with their supporting Research and Development organizations. Whereas these offices provide technology to the numerous organizations in their respective agencies, they can identify and negotiate the most cost effective services.

Application Architecture provides the foundation for developing and delivering new capabilities with focus and agility. Taking advantage of new IT technologies and development techniques and practices provides an ability to evolve operational capabilities quickly to meet specific needs and close capability gaps resulting in more efficient, effective and nimble wildland fire operations.

Adoption of a single application architecture results in a more nimble environment for new capability development. A controlled environment, focused on delivering to the wildland fire business community, becomes less complex and thus capability evolution becomes more efficient.

Responsibility for developing this infrastructure resides primarily with the Program Board in collaboration with DOI, USDA and FS OCIOs, to define a standard architecture and infrastructure that meets the business need and to work with technology partners to adhere to the standards. Additionally, the Program Board partners with the business community to communicate opportunities for development, as well as communicate the future needs of the business community.


11

As earlier noted, a capability is implemented in wildland fire by executing a series of applications to collect and share data and information within an established infrastructure. Figure 5 identifies those Current State Applications which impact the previously defined Capability Investments.

Figure 5 - Investment Opportunities, affected LOBs and Steady State Investments

* externally controlled application; ** - not identified in the 5-Yr Plan Budget plan; italics addition after Sept 10th meeting

ID Capability Lines of Business Steady State Investments


Fire Business Preparedness Fuels Management Incident Response

DOI SharePoint Site Dispatch Messaging System

*Frames Lessons Learned Site Fire FTP Site

CI 2 Fuels Management Fuels Management Preparedness

NFPORS FFI FACTS FCCS

FFE-FVS FOFEM MAGIS IFT-DSS FTEM

CI 3 Strategic Resource Allocation Preparedness Incident Response

EGP WFDSS ROSS E-EiSuite **Various CAD systems AFF WFIPS

*VIPR IQCS *IQS ICBS **7 Weather Apps ICAP

CI 4 Incident Information Management


EGP **Various CAD Systems AFF IRWIN FFI Collector FireStat

WFMI FMIS INCIWeb *GeoMac 209/SIT report FAM Data Warehouse

CI 5 Incident Operations Coordination

Incident Response EGP WFDSS ROSS E-EiSuite **Various CAD systems

AFF *VIPR ICBS IRWIN Collector

CI 6 Financial Management Fire Business Incident Response

E-EiSuite *ABS

*PRISM AMIS


Preparedness Incident Response Fuels Management

ROSS IQCS *IQS

NWCG Training Program

CI 8 Records Management Fire Business Preparedness Fuels Management Incident Response

WFDSS IRWIN NFPORS

FACTS IFT-DSS FS Data Warehouse

CI 9 Resource and Asset Management


EGP WFDSS ROSS E-EiSuite **Various CAD systems AFF

*VIPR IQCS *IQS *PRISM ICBS


Fire Business Incident Response

*VIPR *ABS

*PRISM


12

Capability Investments often impact one or more Lines of Business. The breadth of impact toward LOBs provides another value assessment available to the Fire Management Board when evaluating investment options. The Investment Opportunities and impacted Lines of Business are identified in Figure 6.

Figure 6- Investment Opportunities and Line of Business Impacted

Improvement Opportunities (IO) Lines of Business Impacted

ID Capability Fire Business Preparedness Fuels Mgmt. Incident

Response Total Impact


x x x x 4

CI 2 Fuels Management x x 2

CI 3 Strategic Resource Allocation x x 2

CI 4 Incident Information Management x x x x 4

CI 5 Incident Operations Coordination x 1

CI 6 Financial Management x x 2


x x x 3

CI 8 Records Management x x x x 4

CI 9 Resource and Asset Management x x x x 4


x x 2


13

Infrastructure Investments The WFIT Enterprise Vision establishes nine developmental principles:

Service Oriented Architecture – To enable application flexibility and development agility, all new application development shall utilize a Service Oriented Architecture approach that incorporates a set of principles and methodologies for designing and developing software in the form of interoperable services.

Integrated Security Posture – To ensure appropriate security while facilitating cross-departmental collaboration, application infrastructure shall utilize a single sign-on security capability that meets the needs of and allows interoperability across departmental boundaries.

Web User Interface – To facilitate application portability, all new applications shall be developed to utilize a Web User Interface.

Cloud Hosted Architecture – To facilitate application and information accessibility, all new applications shall be developed to integrate with a cloud environment and to maximize the capabilities that a cloud hosting environment provides.

Data Services and Governance – To support the service oriented architecture, the interagency wildland fire community shall complete an inventory of current systems used for business function and data.

Open Innovation Platform - The interagency wildland fire community, working in collaboration with their supporting OCIO organizations shall establish a cloud hosted open innovation environment that hosts integrated versions of mission systems and forums for idea exchange.

Security Focused-We must continue to layer security and privacy into all of our systems to protect our fire business community’s information. This will be accomplished with strict policies, sound system management and frequent assessments to ensure that gaps do not exist.

Comprehensive Project Oversight- To ensure informed executive oversight, comprehensive project definition, planned efficient execution and application alignment with business needs, a comprehensive project oversight capability is required.

Alignment with Federal IT Mandates- As part of the WFIT governance responsibilities, fire IT service providers must ensure that they align with and adhere to mandates specified in the new Federal IT Acquisition Reform Act (FITARA).

To achieve these business principles the Wildland Fire Business community and the Wildland Fire Information and Technology community established a primary set of strategic IT investment goals to consider with all technology investment actions and initiatives. These are depicted as follows:

A shared vision and strategy that guides all Information Technology (IT) investments, with program management commitment to adhere to that vision and strategy

A collaboration agreement between USDA and DOI to provide common direction, guidance, and approval regarding IT investment actions.

Utilization of a 5-Year rolling IT investment plan to ensure that investments support the business with best value and expected IT deliverables.

Comprehensive life-cycle management of all IT investments. A cross-agency governance and management structure that respects agency organizations while

efficiently organizing and managing the work of the Wildland fire community.


14

Workforce Investments The wildland fire workforce capability must be aligned with the portfolio development and management process to efficiently implement investment activities. This includes the ability to identify and characterize Capability Investment activities by the business community and the ability to effectively establish and comprehensively deliver technology solutions by the technology community. Additionally, the business and technology groups must collaborate to develop an understanding of the others’ areas of responsibility and support the complexity of delivering effective solutions.

Effective WFIT solution development is hampered by existing workforce staffing being silo’d in function and by agency, with lack of formal mechanisms to facilitate alignment. Investment in evolving the workforce capability to align decision and oversight processes to effectively implement a business driven portfolio management process is critical to improving the effectiveness of WFIT deliveries. This matter was investigated and reported upon in WFIT Staffing Task Group – Final Report, May 2014, Executive Summary attached as Figure 14. The results of the tasking are still pertinent to the objectives outlined in this WFIT investment management plan.

Four critical workforce capabilities are established. First, business and technical leadership is necessary to identify Capability Investments aligned with the business community’s needs. Inputs must be collected and organized from the critical wildland fire stakeholders targeted at improving business operations. Effective and transparent value assessment is critical to align organizational efforts and ensures a high level of collaboration and open dialog thus maximizing operational effectiveness.

Second, technical and business leadership is necessary to ensure effective, efficient and comprehensive solution delivery. A transparent process for defining and managing project activities ensures activities meet the intended objectives of Capability Gap closure. Effective methods of communicating project objectives and status provide efficient project management and alignment amongst critical stakeholders.

Third, all affected agencies must utilize aligned contracting vehicles to facilitate providing necessary manpower or unique capabilities to effectively and comprehensively execute project activities. The realities of budget management amongst the various agencies and entities add a level of complexity to project operations and reduce their effectiveness in improving wildland fire capabilities.

Fourth, workforce training and support in technology use must be improved from the current state to benefit from the expected more agile approach of technology implementation. Current project objectives often prioritize these activities below functionality delivery, resulting in new capabilities creating confusion and errors as opposed to improving effectiveness.

These four workforce capabilities are addressed in the WFIT Staffing Task Group – Final Report of May 2014. The objective of this tasking was “to develop a staffing approach that will successfully meet the WFIT project workload while balancing the capability of the agencies to meet their IT functions in a suitable manner.” The team recommended that responsibilities be migrated to the WFIT organization as expeditiously as possible, as permitted within organizational constraints, and recommended an order of implementation to best serve WFIT operations.


15

Chapter 3 – Investment Prioritization Strategy

Capability Investments Identification and communication of an investment prioritization strategy facilitates alignment amongst wildland fire’s stakeholders and efficiency of execution. In this chapter a prioritization strategy is identified and the analysis applied against identified Capability Investments. A documented prioritization strategy provides a) an objective means of sorting potential capability investment activities allowing the most valued to rise to the surface for discussion and b) a focus for an efficient decision process.

Prioritization strategies may be re-evaluated on a periodic basis to address evolving tactical need and strategic intents of the wildland fire community. The need for agility and flexibility is heightened by the complexity of the multiagency nature of wildland fire.

Most importantly, a documented prioritization strategy enables communication and open discussion on the values of the organization and transparency of those values to the wildland fire community’s stakeholders.

The Fire Management Board is responsible for establishing and maintaining the prioritization strategy, investment scoring, calculating rating scores and communicating the results. The values and input of the rating are the responsibility of the business and technology organizations. In the Line of Business Investigation example, Figure 7, business value is noted and evaluated by the business community (e.g. NWCG), the technical complexity and costs are identified by the technical community (e.g. Program Board) and the consolidated rating calculation is prescribed by the FMB.

The Line of Business Investigation identified a series of Capability Investments and applied a value

analysis to each investment. The analysis is described in Figure 7. In this prioritization, ratings were

applied to each value and a Return on Investment (ROI) value calculated for each Capability Investment.

The resulting prioritized list of Capability Investments is shown in Figure 8. Specific ratings applied to the

values for each Capability Investment are provided in Figure 16 and an explanation of rating values

described in Figure 17.

Figure 7 - Values Comprising Return of Investment in Line of Business Study

Business Assessment o Mission Value – measure of impact on users in the field (none, enabler, direct) o LOB Impact – Line of Business – weighted LOBs impacted (ops =3, plan = 2, support = 1) o Time to impact – concept to delivery time (<1 year, 1-3 years, > 3 years) o Impact on Painpoints – affects multiple Painpoints – (H,M,L pareto)

Technology Assessment o Implementation cost – Rough order of magnitude estimated cost of implementation (low,

medium, high)

Value Assessment o Value Score = Mission Value + LOB Impact + Time to Impact + Impact on Painpoints

Risk/Complexity Cost

Mission Value LOB Impact Time To ImpactImpact on Pain

pointsImplementation Complexity

Implementation

Cost

Value


16

o ROI = (Risk adjusted Value – cost ) / cost

Figure 8 – Capability Investment from Line of Business Study with Value and ROI

ID Capability Investment Implementation

Complexity Value Score

ROI

CI 1 Communicate and Collaborate with Stakeholders/Partners 2 9 2.5

CI 2 Fuels Management 2 8 2.0

CI 3 Strategic Resource Allocation 2 9 2.5

CI 4 Incident Information Management 2 9 2.5

CI 5 Incident Operations Coordination 3 11 3.0

CI 6 Financial Management 2 6 1.0

CI 7 Workforce Training and Qualifications Management 2 8 2.0

CI 8 Records Management 3 6 0.5

CI 9 Resource and Asset Management 3 10 1.3

CI 10 Procurement/Acquisition Management 3 9 1.0

The FMB has responsibility of identifying and managing the WFIT portfolio to the betterment of the wildland fire community, they may choose to adjust the rating system or even ignore some results as it considers the complexity of the wildland fire business, the capabilities of the implementing bodies, the policies affecting wildland fire business, or the immediate needs of the business community. The rating system offers guidance to the FMB on broad value of a capability improvement, transparency of the FMB’s decision process to its stakeholders, and a record of the objectives behind the WFIT portfolio development.

Additional insight may be gained on the relationship of the highest rated Capability Improvements through value mapping. Figure 9 and Figure 10 exemplify two mappings utilized in the Line of Business Investigation’s analysis. For example, Figure 7 identifies a CI 05 which is uniquely high in value and ROI. As well as noting CI 09 and CI 10 as being similar in value and ROI, but both being high cost and complexity. Perhaps an opportunity to deliver important capability if properly managed.

Figure 10 plots the Value of each Capability Investment with respect to the number of Lines of Businesses impacted. The Investments to the right of the chart impact the most lines of business and the Investments toward the top of the chart have the most business value. This tool enables decision makers to understand both the value and the impact that each one of these investment opportunities yield.

The result of the prioritization process and subsequent analysis is a priority of investments which comprise a portion of the WFIT portfolio.


17

Figure 9 – Capability Investments – Value vs ROI with Cost and Complexity

Figure 10 - Capability Investment Opportunities Plotted by Value and Line of Business Impact


18

Foundational Investments Foundational elements, as previously noted will be executed with significant help from the OCIO offices of the USDA and DOI. These efforts will require the development of guiding policy, financial and cost sharing strategy, and alignment with Departmental Roadmap objectives. In addition, within the wildland fire program, staffing and organizational structure must be put in place to govern and manage each of the foundational investments comprehensively.

Data Environment The target data environment provides accurate, consistent, reliable, and timely access to data in support of all applications, functions, and decision arenas. Data are collected and organized to ensure availability in applications or functions in a neutral manner. The number of separately supported databases will decrease through more efficient design and sharing of data among systems and applications. Errors and inaccuracies are reduced through single entry of data. The target data environment includes data standards, authoritative data sources, and systems of record to ensure planning and response is based on the best available information. Collaboration and coordination with both internal and external business areas will be necessary.

Applications Environment The target applications environment leverages the principles and concepts of service oriented architecture and uses components to build suites of interoperable tools or “system of systems” rather than focusing monolithic, stove-piped applications. In this environment, use of web based systems, support for mobile technologies and uses, consistent user interfaces and support for cross platform integration are preferred. The target application environment minimizes the number of unique systems or applications in favor of a framework of modules that allow flexibility and agility in meeting dynamic wildland fire mission requirements.

Infrastructure and Technology Environment The target infrastructure and technology environment provides secure, integrated, and accessible capabilities for all users and applications to be able to collect, analyze, share, and disseminate information regardless of function, agency, or location. The target environment includes both data and voice infrastructure. Interconnection among agency systems and infrastructure is an essential component of the target environment, either through commonly interpreted and applied policies or through engineered solutions.

Security Environment The target security environment ensures an integrated approach to protecting the integrity of data and systems through a combination of application design, data standards, infrastructure design, and management of access credentials. The security environment must explicitly weigh and manage the risks of security measures against the ability of business functions to operate effectively. The ideal security environment is an integrated approach of automating security requirements that were once accomplished through manual processes. Security will continue to focus efforts towards expected confidentiality, integrity and availability through a balanced security in-depth approach that meets all Federal requirements.

Acquisitions This is a supporting aspect to all foundational capabilities. Having a comprehensive strategy will reduce fees, streamline development efforts and reduce overall costs to the wildland fire program.


19

Workforce Investments

The plan identified by WFIT Staffing Task Group – Final Report of May 2014 recommends evolving the organization based on fiscal capability and the other defined needs of the organization. It specifies organizational functions directed by the applicable wildland fire organization and a suggested priority of implementation. They are as follows:

Planning Working Group Portfolio Management Capital Planning (CPIC) Data Management IT/Systems Architect Strategic Planning Contract Management

Development Working Group Project Management Training Management Business Analyst Contracting Officers Representative

Operations & Maintenance Working Group Operations Manager Help Desk Database Admin Systems Admin Hosting/Configuration Management Security Management (Policy/Technical)

Order of Investment

1. Portfolio Management 2. Business Analyst 3. Strategic/Enterprise Planning 4. Data Management 5. Hosting/Configuration Management 6. IT/Systems Architect 7. Capital Planning (CPIC) 8. Contracting Officers Representative 9. Contract Management 10. Project Management 11. Training Management – NWCG Training 12. Operations Manager 13. Help Desk 14. Database Admin 15. Systems Admin 16. Security Management

As there are currently a number of unencumbered positions that were formerly associated with the NWCG Program Management Unit (PMU), an initial strategy would be to select a Minimal Dedicated WFIT Staffing Approach. Fill those positions immediately based upon the Primary WFIT Functions priorities identified earlier in this document in the order prescribed in the chart above. As processes are streamlined and/or existing positions become unencumbered / available in the next 1-3 years, those additional functions/positions would then become available to enhance the movement toward implementation of Major Dedicated WFIT Staffing Approach. At some point in time, in the medium-term future (3+ years), there should be a logical point at which full implementation of the WFIT vision, NICC-like Organization can be accomplished.

It is recognized that as we transition from full implementation of one approach to the next, there will be decision points where the FMB and the EB can influence the implementation and revisit priorities and timelines.

The proposed timeframes for transitioning between each alternative may be shortened by the momentum of successes, but may also be increased depending upon potential unknown issues. A steady continuum approach in transitioning from approaches provides the best probability for the successful implementation of the WFIT vision. The transition plan is detailed in Chapter 5.


20


21

Blank Page


22

Chapter 4 – Capability Priorities

The Fire Management Board has reviewed the Capability Investments identified and consolidated by the Line of Business study. The valuation and prioritization process identified in Chapter 3 orders the Capability Investments as shown in Figure 11 (the same information provided in Figure 8, ordered by ROI). The Fire Management Board agrees that these areas comprise the highest values to the wildfire business and recommends that investment considerations are made with respect to this ordering.

Figure 11 - Capability Improvement Investments by Priority

ID Capability Investment Implementation

Complexity Value Score

ROI

CI 5 Incident Operations Coordination 3 11 3.0

CI 1 Communicate and Collaborate with Stakeholders/Partners 2 9 2.5

CI 3 Strategic Resource Allocation 2 9 2.5

CI 4 Incident Information Management 2 9 2.5

CI 7 Workforce Training and Qualifications Management 2 8 2.0

CI 2 Fuels Management 2 8 2.0

CI 9 Resource and Asset Management 3 10 1.3

CI 6 Financial Management 2 6 1.0

CI 10 Procurement/Acquisition Management 3 9 1.0

CI 8 Records Management 3 6 0.5

Distribution of Planned Investments amongst Capability Investments Current WFIT investment strategies align with investment actions targeted at improving application functions. Some WFIT application investments impact those capabilities identified in Figure 11 above. The identified relationship between current WFIT application investments and those Capability investments noted in Figure 11 are identified in Figure 15 – Active Applications . These alignments were identified by the business community.

Funded applications in the WFIT portfolio have funding in Concept, Development or Operations and Maintenance (O&M) phases. By distributing those funds to the capabilities impacted, a level of funding for each capability can be determined by phase. For example:

Figure 15 – Active Applications identifies that Capability Investment 5 is impacted by 10 applications. One of these applications, EiSuite, has planned O&M investments of approximately $1.5 million per year for FY 16 – FY 21, based on previously identified investment strategies. EiSuite also impacts three of the other Capability Investments identified in Figure 11, a total of four.

The total planned investment for EiSuite may be “equitably distributed” to each Capability Investment it impacts – approximately $1.5m / 4 = $375k per year applied during the same year and to the same phase of development. By summing the “equitable shares” of all associated applications of Capability Investment 5, an investment plan can be developed for Capability Investment 5 utilizing only the funds already identified.


23

Utilizing existing investment information, cross-walk information, Figure 15, and capability impact information, Figure 11, the investment plan can be developed and represented as such:

The ten capability investments noted in Figure 11 - Capability Improvement Investments by Priority were analyzed in this manner. Those tables are noted in Figure 13 - Distribution of Investments amongst Capability Investments.

The total investment of the current WFIT portfolio is illustrated in Figure 12. This table represents the totality of Capability Investments. Identified are: 1) the total number of applications affecting Capability Investments, 2) the number of applications funded in each development phase and 3) the yearly, established or planned, investment and the total WFIT investment.

Figure 12 - Total Yearly WFIT Portfolio Investment by Project Phase

WFIT Portfolio - Total (118 associated applications) (61 funded applications)



3,565 250 - - - - $ 3,815


4,051 7,582 7,895 3,348 - - $ 22,876


36,716 38,988 38,316 42,645 42,747 42,797 $ 242,209



24

Capability Investment Recommendations in priority order Based on the business need prioritization analysis identified in Chapter 3, Capability Investment emerged in the priority order shown in Figure 13. What is demonstrated in these charts is the current strategy of investment distribution of the priorities identified in the WFIT Line of Business study.

It is important to note that these financial values do not indicate a level of approved funding, but do reflect requested funding. All funds need to be requested through the WFIT governance structure and managed accordingly.

Figure 13 - Distribution of Investments amongst Capability Investments

CI 5 - Incident Operations Coordination (52 associated applications) (34 funded applications) Calculated ROI = 3



205 250 - - - - $ 455


1,152 1,357 1,427 902 - - $ 4,838

Steady State 31 Application

7,025 7,328 7,254 7,527 7,545 7,537 $ 44,217

Total CI 5 Capability Investment 8,382 8,935 8,681 8,429 7,545 7,537 $ 49,510

CI 1 - Communicate and Collaborate with Shareholders/Partners (29 associated applications) (13 funded applications) Calculated ROI = 2.5



478 - - - - - $ 478


- 556 863 - - - $ 1,419

Steady State 13 Application

1,471 1,571 1,534 2,397 2,398 2,398 $ 11,769


"CI 3 - Strategic Resource Allocation (40 associated applications) (27 funded applications) Calculated ROI = 2.5"


Concept 1 Application

500 - - - - - $ 500

Development 1 Application

- 500 500 - - - $ 1,000


5,789 6,119 5,931 6,476 6,473 6,484 $ 37,272



25

"CI 4 - Incident Information Management (54 associated applications) (31 funded applications) Calculated ROI = 2.5"



405 - - - - - $ 405


1,152 1,507 1,177 902 - - $ 4,738


6,160 6,480 6,584 6,822 6,892 6,929 $ 39,868


"CI 7 - Workforce Training and Qualification Management (17 associated applications) (9 funded applications) Calculated ROI = 2"



- - - - - - $ -


- - - - - - $ -


2,824 3,015 3,007 3,043 3,032 3,045 $ 17,966


"CI 2 - Fuels Management (26 associated applications) (15 funded applications) Calculated ROI = 2"



- - - - - - $ -


423 352 332 321 - - $ 1,427


1,813 1,953 1,952 1,932 1,933 1,934 $ 11,518


"CI 9 - Resource and Asset Management (49 associated applications) (30 funded applications) Calculated ROI = 1.3"



500 - - - - - $ 500


- 500 500 - - - $ 1,000


5,961 6,347 6,123 6,666 6,674 6,678 $ 38,448



26

"CI 6 - Financial Management (19 associated applications) (9 funded applications) Calculated ROI = 1"



500 - - - - - $ 500


- 500 500 - - - $ 1,000


1,447 1,552 1,461 1,968 1,978 1,971 $ 10,376


"CI 10 - Procurement/Acquisition Management (19 associated applications) (5 funded applications) Calculated ROI = 1"



500 - - - - - $ 500


- 500 500 - - - $ 1,000


991 1,083 1,046 1,546 1,546 1,546 $ 7,759


"CI 8 - Records Management (51 associated applications) (24 funded applications) Calculated ROI = 0.5"



478 - - - - - $ 478


1,325 1,810 2,097 1,223 - - $ 6,454


3,225 3,528 3,413 4,257 4,265 4,264 $ 22,953


The portfolio of Capability Investments is targeted at delivering the highest business value to the wildland fire organization with established funds. Each investment targets a specific business need but affects the broad range of applications assembled and organizations partnered to meet the wildland fire’s mission. As such, the portfolio of wildland fire demands; 1) a collective IT strategy across those applications and infrastructure, 2) a focused and purposeful alignment of the primary stakeholders and 3) an oversight methodology to ensure execution efficiency and achievement of objectives. A purposeful execution of a comprehensive transition strategy is essential to the capabilities desired by the business community.


27


28

Blank Page


29

Chapter 5 – Five Year Investment Transition Strategy

The investment strategy articulated in this document transitions three critical aspects of the WFIT operations. First, it establishes a means of identifying and prioritizing investment activities based on business driven capability gaps. Second, it initiates the management of several foundational capabilities critical to IT operations, closely aligned with departmental OCIO efforts and policies. Thirdly, it recognizes the need to establish project and portfolio oversight with a focus on collaboration between the two participating agencies, USDA and DOI.

When this approach is taken and combined with the 2011 report Implementing the National Wildland Fire Enterprise Architecture Blueprint there are two consistent tasks that emerge:

Develop a single, executive level governance body and structure for wildland fire information and technology investments and activities for lifecycle management and governance

Develop a common wildland fire information and technology vision and strategy for use in evaluating current and new investments

Wildland fire supports departmental development of "roadmaps" to manage investments within specific lines of business (LOB) through desired capability. In addition to the business requirements, there are support requirements of the information and technology component to meet the objectives for increasing demand on data and data management. To accomplish this mission objective a common WFIT Architecture is required.

Wildland Fire Information and Technology Target Architecture The WFIT Target Architecture established a set of objectives applied to all new application development activities within the wildland fire community, as well as for upgrades to existing applications.

Wildland Fire Information and Technology (WFIT) Target Architecture Objectives:

• Service Oriented Architecture All new application development shall utilize a Service Oriented Architecture approach that incorporates a set of principles and methodologies for designing and developing software in the form of interoperable services.

• Integrated Security Posture The interagency wildland fire and aviation community has identified a need for a single sign-on capability that crosses Departmental boundaries.

• Web User Interface All new applications shall be developed to utilize a Web User Interface.

• Cloud Hosted Architecture All new applications shall be developed to reside in a cloud environment and to maximize the capabilities that a cloud hosting environment provide.

• Data Services and Governance The interagency wildland fire community shall complete an inventory of systems for business function and data.

• Open Innovation Platform The interagency wildland fire community, working with the CIO’s office shall establish a cloud hosted open innovation environment that hosts integrated versions of mission systems and forums for idea exchange.

Wildland Fire Information and Technology Strategy, Governance, and Investments (WFIT Plan) Principle Concepts

• Mission requirements drive integrated, modular based applications and tools.

• Authoritative data are readily available for all uses and users.

• Interconnection and accessibility regardless of organization affiliation or user location.

• Technology, research, and innovation enable and enhance mission accomplishment.


30

Towards these target architecture objectives, inclusion of the Presidential 25 Point Plan adds value to the Wildland Fire Program efforts. The 25 Point Plan (as it is often referred to) was created over an 18-month period by Federal IT, acquisition, and program management communities; industry experts; and academics. This also included listening sessions with Congress, Agency CIOs, and Senior Procurement Executives and detailed input and recommendations from many industry groups. The 25 Point Plan contains recommendations for IT reform in the areas of operational efficiency and large-scale IT program management.

The 25 Point Plan is divided into two sections: Achieving Operational Efficiency and Effectively Managing Large-Scale IT Programs Effectively. The section Achieving Operational Efficiency has one section:

Apply “Light Technology” and Shared Solutions

The Wildland Fire Program can benefit from this collective knowledge, leveraging cloud services where appropriate, depending on the respective Office of Chief Information Office (OCIO) departments and agencies to provide macro services, and embracing common strategies to reduce cost and risk.

The section Effectively Managing Large-Scale IT Programs Effectively covers the structural areas that impact the success rates of large IT programs across government. This section has five sub-sections:

Strengthen Program Management Align the Acquisition Process with the Technology Cycle Align the Budget Process with the Technology Cycle Streamline Governance and Improve Accountability Increase Engagement with Industry

The WFIT Target Architecture is based on the Presidential 25 Point Plan principles:

Business processes and operations will drive changes to information systems and the technology infrastructure

WFIT will preserve and leverage information systems and technology assets for as long as those assets deliver net business value over the benefits of replacement

Provide the data, tools, and technologies needed to improve and strengthen the ability to make sound and timely strategic and tactical wildland fire management decisions

Increase the effectiveness and efficiency of the wildland fire program through reengineering of processes and activities

Encourage and leverage innovation

The expected outcome of adopting the WFIT Target Architecture is that interagency fire IT organizations will move away from isolated, stove-piped tools and move towards systems that are more componentized, easier to integrate and maintain, have greater transparency and have lower total cost of ownership (TCO). In an effort to achieve these goals the Wildland Fire Program must manage key issues to assure success.

Key Issues to Be Addressed Several key issues have hampered previous wildland fire transformation efforts:

Governance processes appear to be review-based and missing key elements such as performance measures linking IT investments to actual strategic and mission goals

There is no authoritative, resourced office to manage the transition effort The business and engineering analysis conducted and management and engineering resources being

applied are not commensurate with the magnitude of the desired transformation


31

There is limited alignment of the mission/business perspective with the IT and technology

perspectivefor the current state, future state, or any of the transition stages. Significant information regarding strategic objectives, mission and business processes, and IT systems,

applications, tools, and data – as well as the relationships between all of these – is either missing or disconnected with other key elements.

There was no mechanism or facility for users to simulate current and future mission processes in a realistic environment of current and potential IT systems and capabilities.

Three Phased Approach to the Transition Plan This Strategic Transition Plan is composed of three phases to be executed over a multi-year period. These three phases are depicted below.

The actions recommended in Phase 1 are designed to create the foundational organizational capabilities necessary to address the key issues that have hampered previous transition initiatives. Phase I also revises this plan in light of the knowledge gained to pace the execution of Phase II and Phase III. The scope and details of the actions recommended in each of the three phases appears at the end of this plan, Figure 18.

The wildland fire community must translate each phase’s recommended actions into a project management plan of actions and milestones considering leadership priorities and resources. It is critical that appropriate authorities review and revise this plan on a regular basis to adapt and adjust the plan

•Refine the Plan

•Capture Mission and System Information

•Resource the Effort

Phase I - Build the Foundation (1-2 years)

•Implement the Plan

•Improve Support for Highest Priority Mission(s)

•Address Highest Priority Technical Imperative(s)

Phase II - Institutionalize Practices (2-3 years)

•Evolve the Plan

•Improve Support for Next Highest Priority Mission(s)

•Address Next Highest Priority Technical Imperative(s)

Phase III - Continiously Improve Practices (2-3 years)

Year 1 Year 2

Year 3 Year 4 Year 5


32

to wildland fire community and departmental policies and directions, Congressional mandates, technology advances, and program performance. This review must consider factors such as the interdependencies among tasks, schedule, and cost impact.

Because of their importance, key elements of Phase 1 are described below.

Governance and Lifecycle Management Create an effective governance framework. The community has frameworks in place for many processes, but many of the processes are still in draft form and have not been fully exercised. Many of processes are overly lengthy even allowing for the complexity of the multi-department and multi-bureau nature of the wildland fire community.

As cited in the larger report, when setting governance processes in place the community would benefit from some guidance from the financial sector:

Regulating business-driven change projects through an appropriate governance framework is the most important factor in success.

However, regulation should not be overdone as stakeholder acceptance may be lost and the effort cut down or abandoned. Regulation should rather be complemented by extensive communication and support efforts.

Success requires special attention to implementation issues.

Transition Management Establish a program office to manage and coordinate this effort. This program office should provide these types of expertise to the community as needed – governance, project management, enterprise architecture, business architecture, data architecture, application architecture, geospatial knowledge, etc.

Certain aspects of the program office’s responsibilities are so critical to the success of the Plan that they form a core, or foundation, upon which everything else resides. There are four critical aspects:

Data management includes data governance, the movement of data through the WFIT business processes (i.e., mission flows) and reconciling data with authoritative data sources.

Acquisition strategy encompasses both consideration of strategies for a particular acquisition (e.g., choice of contract type, award or incentive fee structures) and “macro” acquisition strategy decisions (e.g. should new capability acquisition be done through separate contracts, or would a singular “multiple award contract” or Indefinite Delivery, Indefinite Quantity (IDIQ) contract serve better?)

Emerging technologies capability introduces a single centralized development and test environment for all fire programs facilitates resulting in more effective and efficient technology development. The current overlapping environments, with sometimes competing objectives, need to be consolidated to a single environment, supporting the whole of the wildland fire community. A consolidated environment is capable of providing a realistic operational environment supporting application development, testing, and integration. Furthermore, a single environment encourages collaboration amongst projects.

Application development promoting a nimble, iterative software application development environment fully leverages the potential of a Service Oriented Architecture (SOA). A SOA-based IT infrastructure facilitates rapid development and deployment of new capabilities as a combination of existing services, or through the rapid development of new services.


33

The program office should provide the resources and skills to implement the program activities under appropriate government wildland fire community governance. The program office should consider the use of tool support to efficiently model data to support analysis and decision-making.

The program office would be the focal point for the transition effort. It would provide support to the wildland fire community and the IT SMEs as they execute their transition-related tasks. It should be led by a qualified government program manager and this position should be vested with the appropriate level of authority to act across the community.

Planning Approach Implement an iterative, collaborative planning process based on a prioritized set of needs to meet the goals – mission prioritization, mission workflow characterization, technology upgrade or refresh, governance implementation, data standardization, enterprise security implementation, etc.

This prioritized list of needs should be regularly reviewed and “groomed” by all wildland fire community stakeholders at least every six months to guide activities and reflect changes in missions, mission priorities, mission workflows, funding, technological imperatives, and other factors.

Mission Workflows Adopt a workflow or “mission thread” approach to inform analysis and planning. The bulk of the efforts to characterize and document these workflows will be carried out by experts in the program office under the guidance of the wildland fire community SMEs. The characterization and documentation efforts will include the use of pilots, prototypes and/or workflow demonstrations as needed.

The workflows should be approved using wildland fire community governance practices.

System Information Define and use a consistent, uniformly-applied framework for describing systems. As with mission workflows, the bulk of this effort will be carried out by experts in the program office under the guidance of the wildland fire community SMEs. The characterization and documentation efforts will include the use of pilots, prototypes and/or workflow demonstrations as needed.

The system information should be approved using wildland fire community governance practices.

Cloud and Services Participate in the departmental multi-year cloud transformation project. This approach will provide both USDA and DOI with cloud computing technologies and services, including data storage, secure file transfer, Web hosting, virtual machines, development testing and SAP application hosting.

An aspect of this that may support multi-agency wildland fire community objectives is the availability to federal agencies of the Foundation Cloud Hosting Services.

Emerging Technology Inclusion Establish a prototype and test lab capability hosted by the program office (or other suitable organization) to encourage and support users and developers to work with executable representations of evolving mission workflows and IT solutions. This is not as a “playground” but a critical part of the Strategic Transition Plan to focus and manage activities.

This approach, enabled with suitable governance policies and procedures, can establish the foundation for institutionalizing an innovation pathway for collaboration within the Wildland Fire Community, other agencies and organizations, and vendors. The specific activities of this capability may include:


34

Create scenarios of current or evolving mission workflows – using current or evolving systems – to gain understanding of any projected change (improvement, retirement, replacement, etc.,)

Construct pilots using new IT and software technologies to gain firsthand knowledge of its capabilities and constraints with particular focus on existing IT products and fire-related systems or applications

Conduct experiments with promising IT products or new fire-related systems and applications to understand directly their impact on current and changed mission workflows

Conduct more formalized tests on maturing IT products and fire-related systems and applications before authorizing them for general use

Guiding Principles for Success In executing this plan, the Wildland Fire Community should be guided by several key principles to enhance the likelihood of achieving successful outcomes:

The effort is driven by the mission-business-IT partnership – not one at the expense of the others The three simultaneous transitions must be planned, balanced and managed in the context of the

other two:

Current Strategic Objectives to Future Strategic Objectives Current Mission & Business Processes to Future Mission & Business Processes Current IT Environment & Systems to Future IT Environment & System

Missions should be captured mission workflows Work should be planned in out-come-based, time-boxed, leadership-prioritized increments Planning and execution must be negotiation-driven across all stakeholders Stakeholders must operate in an iterative, collaborative manner A facility to supporting both mission and IT piloting and demonstrations is vital The plan must be revised on a regular basis to reflect evolving mission and business priorities,

resource changes, Congressional, Departmental, and legal mandates, technology advances, etc.

Transition Summary Figure 18 - Phased Transition Strategy (included in the Supporting Documents chapter) identifies suggested actions within each phase. Based on evaluation by the wildland fire community, these actions need to be assessed, modified as needed by the wildland fire community, and translated into a project management plan of actions and milestones considering priorities and resources.


35

Chapter 6 – Implementation

The development of a portfolio based on supporting and improving business centric capabilities is driven by a well-structured decision making process, a significant level of shared accountability, transparency in decision making and status reporting, and a heightened desire to work collaboratively amongst the various stakeholders. Competent implementation results in the definition and execution of a well-defined program.

WFIT Roles and Relationships The WFIT governance structure is based on a set of collateral duty “boards” and WFIT-specific staff comprised of existing U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and Department of the Interior (DOI) staff associated with wildland fire programs, supported by staff directly associated with the boards and working groups.

The Program Board (PB), Fire Management Board – Information Technology Advisory Board (FMB-ITAB), and Executive Board (EB), collaborate to identify, prioritize and manage wildland fire business requirements and their technologic implementation. Their primary collaborative responsibilities include:

Understanding and championing WFIT requirements, Identifying priorities and investments with agency governance bodies. Monitoring the performance, status, and health of the investment portfolio Adjudicating and reconciling differences and competing fire business priorities

Change Control Board (CCB) roles and responsibilities are under discussion. The WFIT Fire Management Board recognizes their importance to the overall governance structure. All CCBs are chartered organizations within the WFIT structure.

OCIO (Office of the Chief Information Officer) The respective OCIOs of DOI, USDA, and USFS develop, deliver, and defend the business information technologies that empower every aspect of the fire program mission. They do this by:

Supporting all strategic priorities and initiatives by ensuring all technology investments are mission-focused and business-driven

Ensuring technology resources are effectively and efficiently managed from planning to operations with informed oversight and accountability

Creating a proactive and robust security environment through actionable insight by integrating security policy and operations to continuously monitor and protect information assets

The respective OCIOs:

Recommend:

Standardized processes and procedures to help align the WFIT governance process with established policies and procedures

Strategies for common approaches to foundational elements of infrastructure, data management, application development, acquisitions, security infrastructure

Establish:

IT strategies, policies, and priorities for the respective department levels Approves and provides management oversight for:

Capital investments Budget


36

Executive board (EB) The EB leads and oversees the WFIT program and the WFIT portfolio. The EB provides information and recommendations to the USDA/FS and DOI Investment Review Boards (IRBs) regarding strategies, policies, and investments for interagency wildland fire investments. The EB represents and advocates for the interests, requirements, and priorities of wildland fire information and technology, including infrastructure and services necessary to conduct wildland fire business. Within parameters established by the IRBs, the EB may approve strategies, policies, and investments for interagency wildland fire investments.

The Executive Board:

Recommends:

IT strategies, policies and priorities jointly to the USDA and DOI investment review boards Investment proposals for joint approval by the USDS and DOI investment review boards

Establishes:

Oversight governance structures, policies, and procedures for WFIT Establishes resource allocations to support IT investments and programs

Approves:

Resource allocations to support IT investments and programs Investment proposals within parameters established by the joint decisions of the Department of

Agriculture and Department of the Interior investment review boards. Architectures within parameters established by the Department of Agriculture and Department

of the Interior investment review boards

Fire Management Board (FMB) - Information Technology Advisory Board (ITAB) The Fire Management Board-ITAB:

Advises the Executive Board on:

Information and technology strategies, policies, priorities, and funding related to and in support of wildland fire business

Governance structures, policies, and procedures for wildland fire information and technology related to and in support of wildland fire business.

Management of the WFIT program in support of the wildland fire business community requirements and priorities

Investment proposals, including business requirements, priority, funding, and technology related to and in support of wildland fire business.

Assigns business leads to steward all business requirements throughout an investment’s life cycle Provides liaison, coordination, and cooperation between the wildland fire information and technology

governance and management structures and other wildland fire governance and management structures, e.g. National Wildfire Coordinating Council (NWCG)

Manages the Change Control Boards (CCB) for business requirements related to applications

Program board (PB) The Program Board is chartered by the Executive Board to provide coordinated implementation of the wildland fire information and technology program to achieve the wildland fire information and technology mission. The Program Board is charged with providing information and technology services to the WFIT in a timely, consistent, reliable and integrated manner to meet the business requirements and priorities of the wildland fire community.


37

The Program Board:

Manages, supports, and executes:

IT strategies, policies and priorities established by the Executive Board Governance structures, policies, and procedures for WFIT

Recommends to the EB:

Resource allocations to support IT investments and programs Investment proposals Architectures necessary to implement the WFIT strategy

The User Advisory Group (UAG) and Emerging Technology Group (ETG) provide advice and interface between the information and technology program and users and developers.

FMB in concert with NWCG needs to develop a governance and Change Management Structure which support the capability centric prioritization of the WFIT portfolio.

Executive Board sets the expectation for timing and delivery of meeting capabilities defined by the business segment of the Wildland Fire program.


38

Blank Page


39

Chapter 7 - Summary

This plan introduces a fundamental focus on improving the efficiency and effectiveness of wildland fire’s IT investments by identifying and prioritizing investments based on improving the capability of wildland fire operations. Three major principles were considered in this plan’s development:

Mission-based business capabilities Enterprise based investment actions Workforce enablement

The approach to achieve this transition is to move from a project centric and silo oriented portfolio, to a portfolio strategy grounded in the operational capabilities of the wildland fire community. The objectives strive primarily for firefighter safety while identifying opportunities to improve operational efficiency.

Based on the assessment and fact finding activities conducted by the core WFIT line of business team, three investment areas are targeted:

Current steady state investments Foundational functions Capability investments

The summation of these investment actions, based on the principles noted above, and targeted at improving the effectiveness of the wildland fire operations are as follows:.

Summary of Recommended Investments (identical to Figure 1)

Investment Area ($K) FY 16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY 21 Total

Current Steady State 36,716 38,988 38,316 42,645 42,747 42,797 $ 242,209

Foundational Functions 1,150 1,150 1,150 1,150 400 400 $ 5,400

Capability Investments 7,616 7,832 7,895 3,348 - - $ 26,691

Total 45,482 47,970 47,361 47,143 43,147 43,197 $ 274,300

The portfolio consists of a total of 140 contributing IT investments (including 118 application investments), of which only 61 are directly funded by WFIT. The current management strategy of the WFIT portfolio does not account for the supporting foundational investments nor does it consider enhancements to current investments. In the future, the executives should expect a clear delineation of foundational investments that will be required to support the application environment and transparency into enhancements of current investments. Finally, the inclusion of transition strategy expenditures needs to be consolidated as part of the future WFIT Five Year Budget strategy.


40

Two considerations must be given to the budgetary processes of USDA/FS (IRDB) and DOI (IEC). First, at the writing of this report, the budget processes were not yet complete for FY 2016 and such all investment activity values are best guess estimates and subject to change based on budget processes.

Second, the budget process for USDA/FS (IRDB) establishes the expectation that staffing expenditures be incorporated in the associated investment activity. While the budget process for DOI (IEC) establishes separate staffing funding. At the writing of this report, both organizations report identical intended staffing investments. USDA/FS has incorporated its funding into the values presented in investment activities. DOI’s investment is reported in the investment activity WFIT Staffing – DOI.


41

Supporting Information

Figure 14 – Executive Summary of WFIT Staffing Task group – Final Report - published May 12, 2014

Tasking

The FMB is establishing a Task Team of subject matter experts (SMEs) to develop a strategic approach to realign existing agency Information and Technology (I&T) staffing to support the WFIT project effort. The intent of this task is to develop a staffing approach that will successfully meet the WFIT project workload while balancing the capability of the agencies to meet their IT functions in a suitable manner.

Outcomes/Deliverables:

Consider various staffing plan scenarios Recommend I&T staffing organization by functional expertise, name and agency affiliation required

to address the WFIT workload and the staffing scenario to organize the group. Provide description of alternatives considered and rationale leading to selected alternative.

Working Assumptions:

Agencies will continue to host FTEs WFIT principles and objectives may drive the direction of the WFIT Staff Tasking Target architecture may drive the direction of the WFIT Staff Tasking Executive Board (EB) would drive the priorities and requirements (i.e., workload) The traditional business lead is a service provided by the WF business community (assigned by

FMB) Business leads will be provided an appropriate amount of time to support the projects (certain

dedicated % of workload assigned to the projects)

Alternatives:

1. Status Quo 2. Blended: Minimal Dedicated WFIT Staffing Approach 3. Blended: Major Dedicated WFIT Staffing Approach 4. NICC-like Organization

Findings/Recommendations:

As this task team continued to meet and develop this report, it became readily evident that selection of a single alternative would not be in the best interests of the wildland fire community. Instead, it is the consensus recommendation of this team to select a continuum of alternatives.

As there are currently a number of unencumbered positions that were formerly associated with the NWCG Program Management Unit (PMU), an initial strategy would be to select Alternative 2: Blended: Minimal Dedicated WFIT Staffing Approach. Fill those positions immediately based upon the Primary WFIT Functions priorities identified earlier in this document. As processes are streamlined and/or existing positions become unencumbered/available in the next 1-3 years, those additional functions/positions would then become available to enhance the movement toward implementation of Alternative 3: Blended: Major Dedicated WFIT Staffing Approach. At some point of time in the


42

medium-term future (3+ years), there should be a logical point at which full implementation of the WFIT vision, Alternative 4: NICC-like Organization can be accomplished.

The task team also recognized that as we transition from full implementation of one alternative to the next, there will be decision points where the FMB and the EB can influence the implementation and revisit priorities, timelines, etc.

Rationale:

The rationale for beginning with Alternative 2 is that it gives us an immediate surge of three unencumbered and dedicated positions to implement the WFIT vision. Given the current situation of multiple/different processes that exist today (e.g., how projects are approved; how IT/business FTE is funded; fire business re- engineering) these positions will get a start on the first phase of re-engineering some of our current processes.

As these positions realize modest process re-engineering efficiencies at the Working Group/Program Board level, this will facilitate the movement toward implementing Alternative 3. Based upon the successes and gains with more dedicated resources, a logical decision point will be reached where a formal business process re-engineering can be realized that will take us to Alternative 4.

The proposed timeframes for transitioning between each alternative may be shortened by the momentum of successes, but may also be increased depending upon potential unknown issues. A steady continuum approach in transitioning from Alternative 2 to Alternative 4 provides the best probability for the successful implementation of the WFIT vision.

End of Executive Summary - WFIT Staffing Task group – Final Report - published May 12, 2014


43

Figure 15 – Active Applications – Cross walk by Capability Investment

Application Investment Managing

Agency Line of Business C

I 1

CI 2

CI 3

CI 4

CI 5

CI 6

CI 7

CI 8

CI 9

CI 1

0

ABS FS Fire Business 1 1

ADT Fire Business

AFF FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1 1 1

ALMS NWS Incident Response 1 1 1 1

AMIS Other Incident Response 1 1

APS FS Fire Business 1 1

AWIPS NWS Incident Response 1 1 1

AWSR Other Preparedness 1

BARC Preparedness 1

BehavePLUS FS FAM IT Incident Response 1

Bluesky FS R&D Incident Response 1 1

CALPUFF Modeling NWS Incident Response 1 1

CFES2 State Preparedness 1 1

Collector(Pilot) NPS Incident Response 1 1

Concur Incident Response 1 1

CPARS Fire Business 1 1

CROS DOI Fire Business 1 1 1 1

DAPs NOAA Incident Response 1 1 1

Dispatch Messaging System

Incident Response 1

DTS Preparedness 1 1

EAV Fire Business 1 1

EFTS Fire Business 1 1

EGP FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1 1 1

E-Isuite FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1 1 1

eRecruit Fire Business 1 1

eTracker Fire Business 1 1

FACTS FS Preparedness 1 1

FAMWEB FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1 1

Farsite FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1 1

FBMS DOI Fire Business 1 1

FCCS Fuels Management 1

FEIS FS FAM IT 1 1 1

FEMS BLM Fuels Management 1 1 1

FEOS BLM Fuels Management 1 1 1

FEPMIS FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1 1

FFE-FVS FS Fuels Management 1

FFI-FEAT-FIREMON Integration

FS FAM IT Fuels Management 1 1 1

FFP FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1 1 1 1 1

FHX-2 FS Preparedness 1 1 1

FIMT-ICS FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1

Fire Occurrence BLM Incident Response 1 1

Fire Size-up Incident Response 1 1

FireBase FS Preparedness 1

Firecode BLM Fire Business 1 1 1

Firenet.gov DOI 1 1

FIRES BLM Fire Business 1

FireStat FS FAM IT Preparedness 1

FLAMMAP FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1 1


44



I 1

CI 2

CI 3

CI 4

CI 5

CI 6

CI 7

CI 8

CI 9

CI 1

0

FLIGHT FS 1

FMDB Preparedness

FMIS FWS Preparedness 1

FMMI FS Fire Business

FOFEM FS R&D Fuels Management 1

FOIAXpress FS Fire Business 1 1

Formatta Filler FS Fire Business 1

FPA FS FAM IT Preparedness 1 1

FPDSS Preparedness 1 1 1

FPPS DOI Fire Business 1 1

FRAMES FS R&D Preparedness 1

FSIM Preparedness 1 1

FSPRO FS R&D Incident Response 1 1

FTEM FS Fuels Management 1 1

Fx-Net NOAA Incident Response 1 1 1 1

G7F FS Incident Response 1 1 1 1 1 1

GEOMAC USGS Incident Response 1

IAS Fire Business 1 1 1

ICAP FS Fire Business 1

ICBS FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1 1

IDB Incident Response 1 1

IDS FS FHP Incident Response 1 1 1 1 1 1 1

IFT-DSS DOI DOI Fuels Management 1 1

INCIWeb FS FAM IT Incident Response 1

IPAC Other Fire Business 1 1 1

IPP Other Fire Business 1 1 1

IQCS BLM Fire Business 1 1 1

IQS State Fire Business 1 1 1

IRWIN DOI Incident Response 1 1 1

KCFAST Preparedness 1 1 1

LandFire DOI DOI Incident Response 1 1

Landsum FS R&D Incident Response 1 1

LCMS BLM Fire Business 1

LMS NWCG Fire Business 1

MAGIS FS R&D Fuels Management 1

MARS Preparedness

MESOWEST Other Preparedness 1 1 1

Modis-AFMP FS RSAC Incident Response 1

NAMS BLM Fire Business 1 1 1 1 1

NFAS FWS Preparedness 1

NFDRS Update FS Incident Response 1

NFMD FS Incident Response 1 1

NFPORS DOI DOI Preparedness 1 1

NLDC BLM Incident Response 1 1 1

NRM Other Fire Business 1 1

OLMS FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1 1

PDT Fire Business 1 1

Planning Data System NPS Incident Response 1 1 1 1

PRISM DOI Fire Business 1 1

PSDC Incident Response 1 1

PSGP Incident Response 1 1

RAMS Preparedness 1


45



I 1

CI 2

CI 3

CI 4

CI 5

CI 6

CI 7

CI 8

CI 9

CI 1

0

RAVAR Preparedness 1 1

RAWS BLM Incident Response 1 1 1

ROMAN FS Incident Response 1 1 1

ROSS FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1 1 1

SAFECOM FS Preparedness 1 1

SAFENET BLM Incident Response 1 1 1 1 1

SIMPPLLE FS R&D Preparedness 1 1

SIT/209 FS FAM IT Incident Response 1

SMART FS CF Preparedness 1 1 1 1

SWRA State Preparedness 1 1 1 1

Symbols FS CE Preparedness 1 1 1 1

VIPR FS AQM Fire Business 1 1 1 1

WFAS FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1

WFDSS DOI DOI Incident Response 1 1 1 1

WFIPS FS FAM IT 1

WFMI BLM 1

Wildcad BLM BLM Incident Response 1 1 1 1 1 1

WIMS FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1 1

Planned, not funded Funding not presented in report values

FCAT FS FAM IT Fire Business 1 1 1 1

National Dispatch Initiative

FS FAM IT Incident Response 1

IROC (Next Gen ROSS) FS FAM IT Incident Response 1 1 1 1


46

Figure 16 - Value Levels Applied to Capability Investments

ID Capability

Mis

sio

n V

alu

e

LOB

Imp

act

Tim

e To

Imp

act

Imp

act

on

Pai

n

po

ints

Imp

lem

enta

tio

n

Co

mp

lexi

ty

Imp

lem

enta

tio

n

Co

st

Val

ue

Sco

re

RO

I


3 3 2 1 2 2 9 2.5

CI 2 Fuels Management 3 2 2 1 2 2 8 2.0

CI 3 Strategic Resource Allocation 3 2 2 2 2 2 9 2.5

CI 4 Incident Information Management 2 2 2 3 2 2 9 2.5

CI 5 Incident Operations Coordination 3 3 2 3 3 2 11 3.0

CI 6 Financial Management 1 1 2 2 2 2 6 1.0


2 3 2 1 2 2 8 2.0

CI 8 Records Management 1 2 1 2 3 2 6 0.5

CI 9 Resource and Asset Management 3 3 1 3 3 3 10 1.3

CI 10 Procurement/Acquisition Management 3 3 2 1 3 3 9 1.0

Figure 17 - Definition of Values Used in Line of Business Study

Mission Value LOB Impact Time To Impact

Impact on Painpoints

Implementation Complexity

Implementation Cost

3 High; Has a direct impact on the personnel in the field

Supports Operational LOB

Less than 1 year to achieve desired outcome

High Impact on Painpoints

High Complexity; significant dependencies, required resources, and organizational/political obstacles

High; Over $500K

2 Moderate; Enables a capability that impacts personnel in the field

Supports Planning LOB

1-3 years to achieve desired outcome

Medium Impact on Painpoints

Moderate Complexity; some dependencies, required resources, some organizational/political obstacles

Moderate; between $100K and $500K

1 Low; Important but does not directly impact personnel in the field

Supports a Supporting LOB

Over 3 years to achieve desired outcome

Low Impact on Painpoints

Low Complexity; minimal dependencies, required resources, organizational, political obstacles

Minimal; under $100K


47

Figure 18 - Phased Transition Strategy – Detail charts

Phase I – Build the Foundation Phase I (one year – two years)

Refine the Plan Capture Mission and System Information

Resource the Effort

Harmonize and simplify the roles and responsibilities of the cross-agency governance boards and processes [3.2, Table 6 in Appendix D]

Ensure the authority, roles and responsibilities of the governance boards are clearly supported by senior leadership [3.2, Table 6 in Appendix D]

Harmonize the Lines of Business [3.3]

Harmonize and simplify cross-agency implementation procedures [7]

Characterize the current & future missions and their objectives that implement the strategic vision and goals [6.1.1]

Characterize the current & future processes used to execute the missions/business processes [6.1.2, 3.3]

o Capture as mission workflows in a consistent, uniform manner that supports modeling efforts [3.4.1]

o Start with a primary objective such as incident response, learn what is the more important information/ best approach to elicit &capture information, and then iterate & refine method

Establish the Program Office to provide the guidance, expertise, and resources needed to realistically and effectively execute the work [6.1.5, 6.3, 3.4, Appendix F]

Characterize the need for business, technical, and user support (expertise required, estimated demands on time, etc.) and put signed agreements in place

Create EA program measures [6.1.4, Appendix E]

o Measure progress towards achieving strategic goals

o Measure value gained by improved mission effectiveness

o Measure value gained by IT investments

Capture legacy system information and data flows in a consistent, uniform manner that supports modeling efforts [3.4.1]

Conduct engineering and business analysis [6.1.3]

o Expand mission workflows to include applications/ systems used, information/ data used, and roles involved at each step

o Determine services and data commonality/variability as well as infrastructure requirements (capacity, availability, etc.) for use of cloud, SOA, etc.

o Characterize the impact of known technological imperatives (DOI, FS, etc.)

Create the “guiding framework” that includes both blueprints of the target architecture as well as general rules and standards that systems must be followed (i.e., an approach aligned with the “city planning” metaphor) [7]

o Emphasis on SOA o Governs new system development

as well as upgrades/maintenance o Ensure integration of the R&D

community

Inventory existing wildland fire applications and data for services that can be exposed for reuse consistent with SOA guidelines [4.2.1]

Update plan [6.2] Identify mission/technology pilots [6.2.1]

Establish the pilot/prototype facility [6.2.1]

Numbers in brackets refer to sections in the report Wildland Fire Enterprise Architecture Strategic Plan: SEI Recommendations, SEI Special Report CMU/SEI-2014-SR-005 (RESTRICTED USE), March 2014.

yri

to

riP

rst

FiSe

con

d P

rio

rity

Th

ird

Pri

ori

ty


48

Phase II – Institutionalize Practices and Principles

Phase II (one year – three years)

Implement the Plan Improve Support for Highest Priority Missions

Address Highest Priority Technical Imperatives

Refresh through negotiation [5.2]:

o Mission objectives/processes

o Mission workflows and IT models

o Strategic Transition Plan

Define feasible scope for Phase II [6.2.1]

Collaboratively select priorities

Elicit and capture future concepts of operations as “scenario vignettes,” describing the overall environment, the wildland fire community’s structure, resources, strategies, and tactics, and the same for “opposition” – fire, fuel, fire-prone landscapes, etc. [6.1.2]

Develop the wildland fire community cloud hosting strategy (aligned with DOI/FS guidance/initiatives) [4.2.4]

Regulate change projects through the appropriate governance framework [3.2.1, 4.4, 5.1]

o Pilot the governance process for a new or upgrade system

o Pilot the governance process for a new or revised mission workflow

Inform and update the plan based on:

o Pilots o Mission changes o Budget changes o Etc.

Set budget priorities to replace or phase out systems that do not expose or consume modular capabilities and encourage modular system development (reward reuse and compensate service providers) [Bennett, 2013]

If the Phase I experimentation facility was not cloud hosted, transition to the cloud and expand as an open innovation environment and a forum for idea exchange [4.2]

Work selected “gap analysis” areas (e.g., CAD Dispatching) [6.2.1]

o Use mission thread modeling practices to amplify the incident response management mission thread baseline for the CAD Dispatching part of the mission/business processes

o Include systems capturing the scenarios of the circumstances and locations where they are used (iRWIn project has part of this information and a pattern of how scenarios within a mission thread could be expressed)

o Collaborate between the engineering analysts, mission/business process owners, and IT technologists using the augmented mission thread with the CAD Dispatching detail to identify actual duplications and gaps

o Identify improvement paths to prototype and demonstrate value to the community

Pilot candidate alternatives that hypothesize combinations of various technologies coupled with possible future CONOPS [6]

Add/evolve/transition/retire mission processes as needed [6]

Construct a mission-oriented pilot integrating IFTDSS, BlueSky, and WFDSS systems in two ways [6.2]:

o From a mission/business process perspective (supporting the column to the left)

o Forming a prototype SOA-based cloud infrastructure

Establish a centrally managed identity management infrastructure [4.2.2]

Develop/enforce common user interface standards for a consistent experience [4.2.3]

Ensure cloud strategy consistent with integrated security posture

Implement platform governance o platform design o operational enhancements and

support o legacy system extensions and

enhancements o new (research-driven) system

development

Facilitate third-party reuse and support “self-service integration” of wildland fire scientific models [4.2]

Add/evolve/transition/retire systems as needed [6]

Sub

seq

uen

t P

rio

rity

Det

erm

ined

Th

ru t

he

Iter

ativ

e P

lan

nin

g P

roce

ss

Firs

t P

rio

rity


49

Phase III – Evolve Practices and Principles*

Phase III (one year – three years)

Evolve the Plan Improve Support for Next Highest Priority Missions

Address Next Highest Priority Technical Imperatives

Refresh through negotiation [5.2]:

o Mission objectives/processes

o Mission workflows and IT models

o Strategic Transition Plan

Define feasible scope for Phase III [6.2.1]

Collaboratively select priorities

Inform and update the plan based on:

o Pilots o Mission changes o Budget changes o Etc.

Pilot candidate alternatives that hypothesize combinations of various technologies coupled with possible future CONOPS [6]

Assess mission gaps/overlaps/ retirements and inform the Strategic Transition Plan

Add/evolve/transition/retire mission processes as needed [6]

Continue business/technology balanced cloud, security, and SOA transitions [4]

Inform the Strategic Plan with business-focused cloud, security and SOA pilots[6]

Add/evolve/transition/retire systems as needed [6]

* Because Phase III is potentially five years out, there is minimal detail for this Phase. The argument can also be made that Phase III does not have an end-date; Phase III is the wildland fire community operating as an agile, mature, self-improving organization.

Sub

seq

uen

t P

rio

rity

Det

erm

ined

Th

ru It

era

tive

Pla

nn

ing

Pro

cess

Fi

rst

Pri

ori

ty


50

Figure 19 - Current Development Investments

FY16 Proposed Funding ($K)

Project Name System Name FS DOI WFIT

FIRECODE FIRECODE $0 $77 $77

FX Net FX Net $45 $90 $135

FFI-FEAT/FIREMON (integrated)

FFI-FEAT/FIREMON $56 $91 $147

IRWIN IRWIN $0 $3,026 $3,026

IFTDSS IFTDSS $625 $340 $965

MTBS MTBS (Monitoring Trends in Burn Severity) $288 $366 $654

NFPORS NFPORS $115 $590 $705

WFDSS WFDSS $2,100 $925 $3,025

WFMI WFMI $0 $208 $208

Fire Effects (FEIS) Fire Effects (FEIS) $227 $75 $302

Interagency IT Projects Lightning Detection Services $0 $35 $35

Interagency IT Projects Online Web Based 7-day Predictive Services Product $40 $0 $40

Interagency IT Projects Fire Behavior Field Reference Guide – adds web based interactivity and videos

$10 $0 $10

Interagency IT Projects RAWS Data Archive $25 $0 $25

Interagency IT Projects Predictive Services Web Portal $15 $0 $15

Interagency IT Projects Sit 209 Redesign – COGNOS improvements $15 $0 $15

Interagency IT Projects National Fuels Moisture Database $8 $0 $8

Interagency IT Projects Canopy Characteristics Tools/Modeling $10 $0 $10

IQCS IQCS $1,261 $1,261

Safenet Safenet $28 $28

ESRI Collector ESRI Collector $167 $167

End of document