Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 14:16, 28 March 2017

Latest revision as of 11:44, 9 November 2024

(9 intermediate revisions by 8 users not shown)

Line 1:

{{multiple issues|

{{prose|date=February 2012}}

{{pufferypromotional|date=February 2012}}

}}

[[File:EAAF Maturity levels.jpg|thumb|320px|EAAF Maturity levels.]]

The '''Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework''' ('''EAAF''') iswas created by the US Federal government [[Office of Management and Budget]] (OMB) to allow federal agencies to assess and report their [[enterprise architecture]] activity and maturity,<ref name="eaaf">[https://webobamawhitehouse.archive.org/web/20090328180830/http://www.whitehousearchives.gov/omb/e-gov/eaaf/ Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework], {{deadWebarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210513010154/https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/omb/E-Gov/eaaf link|date=February2021-05-13 2017}} [[Office of Management and Budget]], USA.</ref> and to advance the use of [[enterprise architecture]] in the federal government.<ref>Pallab Saha (2009) ''Advances in Government Enterprise Architecture''. Idea Group Inc (IGI). p.133</ref>

The version 2.2 of the framework was released in October 2007,<ref name="eaaf-v22">OMB (julyJuly 2007) ''Federal Enterprise Architecture Program EA Assessment Framework 2.2''. (Online copy [httphttps://www.scribd.com/doc/6846223/OMB-EA-Assessment-Framework-22 here])</ref> and version 3.1 in June 2009.

== Overview ==

The OMB Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework (the Framework) helps [[Office of Management and Budget|OMB]] and the [[List of United States federal agencies|agencies]] assess the capability of enterprise architecture programs to guide [[Information technology|IT]] investments.<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/2009013002110820170121152604/httphttps://wwwobamawhitehouse.whitehousearchives.gov/omb/e-gov/fea/FEA Federal Enterprise Architecture],{{dead link|date=February 2017}} Office of Management and Budget, USA.</ref> It also helps to better understand the current state of an agency’sagency's EA, and assists them in integrating it into their decision-making processes. By applying the assessment themselves, agencies can identify strengths and weaknesses within their programs, and adjust them accordingly.

Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework (EAAF) version 3.1 identifies the measurement areas and criteria by which agencies are expected to use the EA to drive performance improvements that result in the following outcomes:<ref name="eaaf"/>

Line 19:

* Increasing the transparency of government operations by increasing the capacity for citizen participation and cross-governmental collaboration.

While agencies have clearly demonstrated a degree of maturity and competency in developing and using their EAs, EAAF seeks to advance the practice of EA, particularly through the development and use of agency segment architectures, aimed at driving the kinds of government-wide outcomes.<ref name="OBM09">US OBM (2009). [https://web.archive.org/web/20101028030345/http://wwwobamawhitehouse.whitehousearchives.gov/sites/default/files/omb/assets/fea_docs/OMB_EA_Assessment_Framework_v3_1_June_2009.pdf Improving Agency Performance Using Information and Information Technology : Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework v3.1] June 2009</ref>

== Performance Improvementimprovement Lifecyclelifecycle ==

Government agencies are continually assessingassess current performance, identifying opportunities for improvement, and translatingtranslate them into specific actions. Enterprise architecture is an integrated management practice that maximizeshelps the use of an agency’sagency's resources to achieve their goals. Architecture describes the pathway from strategic goals and objectives, through investments, to measurable performance improvements for the entire enterprise or a portion.<ref name="OBM09"/>

[[File:Information and IT-Enabled Performance Improvement Lifecycle.jpg|600px|thumb|center|Information and IT-Enabledenabled Performanceperformance Improvementimprovement Lifecyclelifecycle]]

Continuous performance improvement is the principal driver connecting EA program staff with key business stakeholders across each phase of the Performanceperformance Improvementimprovement Lifecyclelifecycle. Agency Chief Architects and EA program staff:<ref name="OBM09"/>

* identify and prioritize enterprise segments and opportunities to improve mission performance, linked to agency goals and objectives;

* plan a course of action to close performance gaps, using common or shared information assets and information technology assets;

Line 32:

* measure and assess performance to verify and report results; and

* assess feedback on program performance to enhance architecture, investment and implementation decisions.

Opportunities to improve mission performance are prioritized in terms of their relative value to the agency’sagency's strategic goals and objectives in the enterprise transition plan (ETP) and segment architecture.<ref name="OBM09"/>

=== Architect ===

Enterprise architecture describes the current (baseline) and future (target) states of the agency, and the plan to transition from the current to the future state, with a focus on agency strategy, program performance improvements and information technology investments. Agency EAs are organized by segments – core mission areas (e.g., homeland security, health), business service (e.g., financial management, human resources), and enterprise services (e.g., Information Sharing). Segments are defined using the [[Federal Enterprise Architecture]] (FEA) reference models .<ref name="OBM09"/>

=== Invest ===

Performance improvement opportunities identified during the “Architect”"Architect" process are ideally addressed through an agency portfolio of IT investments. This step defines the implementation and funding strategy for individual initiatives in the Enterprise Transition Plan (ETP) and described in the segment architectures. Program management plans are created to implement the individual solutions.<ref name="OBM09"/>

=== Implement ===

Projects are executed and tracked throughout the [[system development life cycle]] (SDLC). Achievement of the program / project plan within acceptable variance for schedule and budget is measured and reported through [[Earnedearned Valuevalue Managementmanagement]] (EVM) process.<ref name="OBM09"/>

=== Measure, assess and improve ===

Line 47:

Information and information technology, as critical enablers of program performance improvements, must be assessed and evaluated in the context of agency missions and outcome-oriented results defined in the enterprise-wide performance architecture.<ref name="OBM09"/>

Performance improvement plans and priorities, including those previously gathered under the PART and Performance Assessment Report (PAR) programs, are reflected in the agency EA, particularly the performance architecture and ETP. Performance metrics previously gathered are used to evaluate the results in agency performance improvement plans, identifying a program’sprogram's strengths and weaknesses and addressing ways to improve the program performance.<ref name="OBM09"/>

=== Agency submission data quality ===

OMB collects a significant amount of IT investment data and other related data from executive agencies during each phase of Performance Improvement Lifecycle. OMB uses the information for development of an IT investment portfolio as a part of the President’sPresident's budget request to Congress.<ref name="OBM09"/>

==See also==

{{Wikipedia books|Enterprise Architecture}}

* [[Capability Maturity Model]] (CMM)

* [[Capability Maturity Model Integration]] (CMMI)

Line 63 ⟶ 62:

== External links ==

{{Commons category}}

* [https://webobamawhitehouse.archive.org/web/20090328180830/http://www.whitehousearchives.gov/omb/e-gov/eaaf/ E-GOV EA Assessment] at whitehouse.gov

[[Category:Enterprise architecture frameworks]]

[[Category:United States Office of Management and Budget]]

[[Category:Management frameworks]]