COI Basics

1. COI Basics 2-Day Training Version 08.5

2. Purpose / Outline Summarize basic information on Communities of Interest to include: A COI definition COI�s relationship to the Enterprise What COIs do OSD facilitated COIs (purpose, metrics, lessons) Tools COIs (and programs) may use Suggested steps to establish a COI Characteristics of successful COIs COI Strategic Rhythm Summary

3. What is a COI?

4. COIs Solve Information Sharing Problems by Making Data & Services �

5. The COI�s Relationship to the Enterprise

6. DoD Instruction 5000.2 Calls for Pilots DoDI 5000.2, Operation of the Defense Acquisition System, states: 3.3.2.1. �requirements are refined through demonstration and risk management�requirements for future increments depend on feedback from users � 3.6.5. � Multiple technology development demonstrations may be necessary � 3.6.6. � identification and development of the technologies necessary for follow-on increments continues in parallel with the acquisition of preceding increments� DoDI 5000.2 is the �Acquisition Bible�. Pilots / technology demonstrations are required during the Technology Development phase (i.e. before MS B). Post Milestone B (System Development and Demonstration Phase) programs can (and should) spend current year funds on pilot demonstrations to define their next increment Para 3.6.6 notes that if you�re after MS B, well, you�re before MS B for the next increment and these activities happen in parallel. DoDI 5000.2 is the �Acquisition Bible�. Pilots / technology demonstrations are required during the Technology Development phase (i.e. before MS B). Post Milestone B (System Development and Demonstration Phase) programs can (and should) spend current year funds on pilot demonstrations to define their next increment Para 3.6.6 notes that if you�re after MS B, well, you�re before MS B for the next increment and these activities happen in parallel.

7. More on Funding� COIs succeed through active engagement and commitment of members and leadership to solve a specific information sharing problem COIs don�t directly control resources but COI members and leadership do COI Authority comes from its membership and leadership Data producers (i.e., programs) should pay to expose their data on the Global Information Grid The only �COI funding� is administrative overhead

8. COIs Support Portfolio Management QDR 2006 moved DoD toward the use of �joint capability portfolios� to change how the department does business DoD Deputy�s Advisory Working Group (DAWG) A body of the Department�s senior civilian and military leaders co-chaired by the Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff (CJCS) and the Deputy Secretary of Defense (DSD) Established four pilot portfolios to evolve the Department�s business practices and methodologies COIs and COI pilots address information sharing problems and Continuously refine the Department�s business processes Inform acquisition programs to make them more effective Four pilot portfolios are: Joint Command and Control Joint Network-Centric Operations Joint Logistics Battlespace AwarenessFour pilot portfolios are: Joint Command and Control Joint Network-Centric Operations Joint Logistics Battlespace Awareness

9. What do COIs do? Solve mission-specific information sharing problems affecting their communities Increase information sharing volume, speed, and reach to known and unanticipated users Provide a user forum to drive the net-centric information sharing approach forward Provide information exchange vocabulary stewardship Foster collaboration within and across communities Build trust Identify and help resolve enterprise issues

10. The COI Process Identify information sharing problem Join existing COI or form new COI Identify and prioritize capabilities Address information sharing problem increment (see next chart) Obtain user feedback Make recommendations to DoD Components and Mission Area Leads Disband when appropriate

11. To Address an Info Sharing Increment� Determine capability needed Develop information exchange vocabulary Vocabulary = Agreements on terms and definitions common to the COI, including data dictionaries (DoD 8320.02G) Syntax = data structure Semantics = data meaning Implement the software services Service = a mechanism to enable access to one or more capabilities, where the access is provided using a prescribed interface and is exercised consistent with constraints and policies as specified by the service description. (DoD Net-Centric Services Strategy, May 2007) Reuse and refine for next increment

12. COI Activities Showing Promise� C2 Space Situational Awareness (SSA) � Enable operational and tactical command and control with information on status of space-related systems (red, blue, gray) Maritime Domain Awareness (MDA) (includes Federal partners) � Enable improved homeland security through maritime situational awareness Strike (includes coalition partners) � Enable accelerated strike planning by providing situational awareness information (blue, red, gray force) from now to 12 hours Significant Activities (SIGACT) Reporting (includes Intelligence Community) � Enable improved information sharing and agility to counter IED threat. IED = Improvised Explosive DeviceIED = Improvised Explosive Device

13. A Sampling of COI Metrics AFSPC = Air Force Space Command JIEDDO = Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization (US DoD) JFCC GSI = Joint Functional Component Command for Global Strike and Integration USSTRATCOM = United States Strategic Command C2 SSA implementations: Pilot DSCS Thread, Pilot NavAcc thread, SISP, ESSA ACTD, GPS (believe GPSIS), Space Intel Prep of the Battlefield (SIPB) Sample MDA elements/attributes: elements (e.g., vessel, conveyance, time, location) and attributes (e.g., vessel name, call sign, vessel id number) Strike elements: Object, Location, UnitofWork SIGACT: Lead is VADM Edwards, OPNAV N6; POC is CAPT(s) Stu Wharton AFSPC = Air Force Space Command JIEDDO = Joint Improvised Explosive Device Defeat Organization (US DoD) JFCC GSI = Joint Functional Component Command for Global Strike and Integration USSTRATCOM = United States Strategic Command C2 SSA implementations: Pilot DSCS Thread, Pilot NavAcc thread, SISP, ESSA ACTD, GPS (believe GPSIS), Space Intel Prep of the Battlefield (SIPB) Sample MDA elements/attributes: elements (e.g., vessel, conveyance, time, location) and attributes (e.g., vessel name, call sign, vessel id number) Strike elements: Object, Location, UnitofWork SIGACT: Lead is VADM Edwards, OPNAV N6; POC is CAPT(s) Stu Wharton

14. Key COI Lessons To Date Cultural change is hard, technology is easy Willingness to share; TRUST Cross-organization participation is essential Strike COI: UK/Coalition involvement has enhanced community MDA COI: Active collaboration among DoD, DHS, IC, and DoT Pilots are an effective means to reduce risk Clearly define scope, expectations, and resource commitments up front; Document information sharing agreements early Must engage Resource Sponsors for year of execution funds Scoping is vital Clearly defined so COI members have clarity of mission and unity of effort; Tackle in achievable increments Incentivizing net-centric information sharing delivery is needed Consider entire enterprise including unanticipated users DHS= Department of Homeland Security DoD = Department of Defense DoT = Department of Transportation IC = Intelligence CommunityDHS= Department of Homeland Security DoD = Department of Defense DoT = Department of Transportation IC = Intelligence Community

15. Tools COIs (and Programs) May Use Net-Centric Core Enterprise Services (NCES)

16. NCES OverviewMacro Perspective

17. DoD and IC Universal Core Data Schema(Available at core.gov � you will need an account) Universal core data schema to enable information sharing Describes �when, where, what� Includes minimal set of terms Agreed to by DoD and Intel community Uses appropriate open and Federal standards Geography Markup Language (GML) Intelligence Community � Information Security Markings (IC-ISM XML schema) Extensible by COIs, services, and systems as needed Universal core is based on common standards Geography Markup Language (GML) � OGC (Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.) Intelligence Community � Information Security Markings (IC-ISM) XML schema Universal core is based on common standards Geography Markup Language (GML) � OGC (Open Geospatial Consortium, Inc.) Intelligence Community � Information Security Markings (IC-ISM) XML schema

18. History of the Universal Core Why important: Harmonized across services, lightweight loose-couplers Standards: Industry Standards Restriction on Geographic Markup Language � lightweight profile XLinks XML Intelligence Community Information Security Markings (IC ISM) Principles: Agreement is hard. That�s why you need: Lightweight model (what, where, when) Loosely coupled Balance between standards and innovation Universal Core 0.8 has five things: What, where, When, Unit of Work, IC ISM Senior Enterprise Services Governance Group (SESGG) formed in January 2007: To increase collaboration on information sharing between DoD and the Intelligence Community (IC) By the DoD CIO and the Associate Director of National Intelligence and Chief Information Officer (ADNI CIO) SESGG Chairs: Mr. Mike Krieger, Office of the DoD CIO Mr. Steve Selwyn, Office of the ADNI CIO SESGG Members: From each of the Services, USD(AT&L), DISA, and DIA DIA = Defense Intelligence Agency DISA = Defense Information Systems Agency DoD = Department of Defense USD(AT&L) = Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, & Logistics First Undertaking: Review and adopt a DoD and IC Universal Core data schema At 9 March 2007 SESGG the following was agreed: Army, AF, Navy, DNI, DIA agreed to use the what, when, and where portions of the Strike COI Schema as the starting point of the Universal Core (v0.8) Government agencies will work together to quickly evolve the Strike COI Core into a v1.0 of the Universal Core The Navy and IC will lead the development of methodology for describing the universal core schema(s) The AF will lead the Governance processes � Who decides, when, and by what authority (to include configuration management of the schema)? JFCOM and Army will lead the Evaluation and Testing methodology � How to apply criteria developed? DIA and DoD CIO will consider the Policy framework for implementation � What does the decision mean? Why important: Harmonized across services, lightweight loose-couplers Standards: Industry Standards Restriction on Geographic Markup Language � lightweight profile XLinks XML Intelligence Community Information Security Markings (IC ISM) Principles: Agreement is hard. That�s why you need: Lightweight model (what, where, when) Loosely coupled Balance between standards and innovation Universal Core 0.8 has five things: What, where, When, Unit of Work, IC ISM Senior Enterprise Services Governance Group (SESGG) formed in January 2007: To increase collaboration on information sharing between DoD and the Intelligence Community (IC) By the DoD CIO and the Associate Director of National Intelligence and Chief Information Officer (ADNI CIO) SESGG Chairs: Mr. Mike Krieger, Office of the DoD CIO Mr. Steve Selwyn, Office of the ADNI CIO SESGG Members: From each of the Services, USD(AT&L), DISA, and DIA DIA = Defense Intelligence Agency DISA = Defense Information Systems Agency DoD = Department of Defense USD(AT&L) = Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition, Technology, & Logistics First Undertaking: Review and adopt a DoD and IC Universal Core data schema At 9 March 2007 SESGG the following was agreed: Army, AF, Navy, DNI, DIA agreed to use the what, when, and where portions of the Strike COI Schema as the starting point of the Universal Core (v0.8) Government agencies will work together to quickly evolve the Strike COI Core into a v1.0 of the Universal Core The Navy and IC will lead the development of methodology for describing the universal core schema(s) The AF will lead the Governance processes � Who decides, when, and by what authority (to include configuration management of the schema)? JFCOM and Army will lead the Evaluation and Testing methodology � How to apply criteria developed? DIA and DoD CIO will consider the Policy framework for implementation � What does the decision mean?

19. Strike COI Schema - Key Events JUN 14-15 - Strike COI Data Mgmt Working Group (DMWG) established JUN-JUL - Several contentious meetings on problem approach, scope, and proposed solutions Different organizations, cultures and perspective; trust; Each organization thinks they have the best (possibly only) solution AUG 4- Draft Logical Data Models and Schemas Distributed No consensus � voting was along service lines SEP 21- Steering Committee (SC) Meeting Directs re-focus on vocabulary and defining a common Strike implementation Requests new support from �outside� technologists OCT 24-28 � Consensus reached on standards-based model partitioned into loosely-coupled core and Strike extensions NOV 6� Steering Committee Meeting � Approach Approved DEC 8 � Final Draft Schema distributed for �official review� (after several iterations) JAN 8, 07 � Final Schema Delivered to USSTRATCOM JAN 07 - Senior Enterprise Services Governance Group formed Standards: Geographic Markup Language (GML) Defense Discovery Metadata Specification (DDMS) Intelligence Community Information Security Marking (IC ISM) Outside technologists to help broker a consensus on a common core data model architecture AND apply loose-coupling tenets Standards: Geographic Markup Language (GML) Defense Discovery Metadata Specification (DDMS) Intelligence Community Information Security Marking (IC ISM) Outside technologists to help broker a consensus on a common core data model architecture AND apply loose-coupling tenets

20. Key Challenges Identifying a technical solution is not the biggest challenge�

21. Establishing a COI

22. Establishing a COI Identify information sharing problem Determine information sharing need that can be solved by exposing or sharing data Sample Problem Statement: Unable to get timely space situational awareness data to support command and control 2. Identify related COIs Consult DoD COI Directory to find other related COIs (https://metadata.dod.mil/mdr/menu.htm?menu=beta/coi) Determine whether an existing COI can be used or new one needs to be established Coordinate with related COIs to share experiences

23. 3. Form a COI Define COI scope (preferably in a single sentence) Advertise COI Register the COI in the DoD COI Directory Ensure that DoD users can discover its existence and mission Allow the opportunity to participate Go to https://metadata.dod.mil/mdr/coiList.htm?sortOn=name and click on �Add A New COI� at bottom of page Identify membership (next chart) Establish governance (detail follows) Establish a charter, if needed Kickoff COI Sample COI Kickoff Meeting Template is available in COI Toolkit at: https://www.us.army.mil/suite/page/479547

24. COI Membership COIs should be joint across DoD Components (Military Services, Agencies and Combatant Commands) Could include non-DoD government agencies, coalition partners, and commercial partners COI membership includes: Decision Makers Planners Operators and Users Program Managers Engineers and Developers Subject Matter Experts Initial membership will coalesce around a common mission and information sharing problem Members / Stakeholders are those who stand to benefit and those whose processes and/or systems will change as a result of COI activities COI participants� involvement may change throughout the COI lifecycle

25. Sample COI Governance Structure Note: When a COI first stands up, the order of COI Working Group creation is likely to be 1) Pilot WG, 2) DMWG, and 3) Joint Implementation WG Relationship between working groups will evolve as the COI evolvesNote: When a COI first stands up, the order of COI Working Group creation is likely to be 1) Pilot WG, 2) DMWG, and 3) Joint Implementation WG Relationship between working groups will evolve as the COI evolves

26. 4. Identify and Prioritize Capabilities Develop COI Roadmap Identify, prioritize, and select key COI capabilities and data assets to expose to the Enterprise Document this high level COI capability roadmap including schedule milestones Define measures of success Define and coordinate COI-specific success criteria and measure progress against those criteria Some criteria will be mission specific, e.g., Reduce the time required to plan strikes as a result of having information available Other success criteria might be non-mission specific, e.g., Time saved in fielding new capabilities as a result of reusing existing information sources rather than re-creating information Number of systems using common COI vocabulary Reduction in the number of point-to-point interfaces Number of relevant stakeholders actively participating in the COI Measure progress against these success criteria

27. 5. Address Info Sharing Problem Increment Select highest priority information sharing need from the roadmap Develop vocabulary for this increment (see COI Vocabulary briefing) Engage Programs or Record (PoRs) and Resource Managers Engage relevant PoRs to resolve information sharing increment Engage Resource Sponsors (often on the COI Executive Board) since you�ll want to resource the COI in the year of execution Form Pilot Working Group if appropriate Use pilots for PoR risk reduction (see Pilot Development and Deployment briefing)

28. 6. Obtain User Feedback Gather user feedback to assess if information sharing capability meets users� needs Make recommendations on information sharing capabilities to Mission Area Leads and DoD Components Synchronize COI products with existing processes, e.g., JCIDS: Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System Acquisition PPBE: Planning, Programming, Budgeting, and Execution Provide feedback to relevant programs

29. 7. Assess COI Assess COI against measures of success Update roadmap and address next information sharing increment Use metric results to determine when the COI has achieved its goal and should disband and turn over operations to continuing organizations

30. Characteristics of Successful COIs Well-Defined Purpose Clear, well-defined purpose addressing specific problems that are relevant to all members Clear Vision Clear roadmap of capabilities to be delivered Priorities based on well-defined selection criteria Relevant Programs of Record engaged Clear transition strategy for pilot capabilities Active Engagement Engaged leadership that can effectively facilitate cross-component, inter-agency collaboration Active engagement by the right mix of stakeholders (e.g., those with authority and with the right domain and technical knowledge) Appropriate cross-Component, inter-agency membership A community of action within the COI who �makes things happen�

31. Characteristics of Successful COIs (concluded) Enterprise (DoD and beyond) Orientation Stakeholders willing to compromise (e.g., accept a shared solution if it meets the majority of their needs) Consideration of entire enterprise including unanticipated users Capability Based Perspective Suitable Pilot Targets real operational need Implementable in 9-12 months Does not overly burden stakeholders

32. COI Strategic Rhythm

33. COI Strategic Rhythm � The Big Picture Exponential growth in capability (a �network effect�) is possible Metcalf�s Law: The usefulness of a network equals the square of the number of users.Exponential growth in capability (a �network effect�) is possible Metcalf�s Law: The usefulness of a network equals the square of the number of users.

34. Summary COIs are the user forum for driving a net-centric information sharing approach forward Formed to solve information sharing problems affecting a community Make data and services visible, accessible, understandable, trusted and governable Increase information sharing volume, speed, and reach to known and unanticipated users COIs identify and help resolve enterprise issues DoD Components plan, program, and budget to resource COI agreements

35. Backup Charts

36. Form a New COI or Use an Existing COI? COIs can be formed to: Address standing missions and business operations Usually explicitly recognized, chartered, and persist for very long periods Address information sharing problems in spirals with an objective to deliver solutions in 9 to 12 month spirals Example: Blue Force Tracking COI Support tactical missions and ad-hoc objectives Usually implicitly recognized and persist for shorter periods (e.g., 3-6 months) May also be a sub-group of another COI Example: Counter-Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) COI Things to Consider Nature of the information sharing problem: Does it fit within the charter of an existing COI? Resources: Less costly to leverage existing governance structure Priority / Timing: Does your need align with existing COI priorities? If not, perhaps a new COI or sub-group is warranted.

37. Roles and Responsibilities

38. Roles and Responsibilities JCIDS: Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (replaces Requirements Generation System, RGS) PPBE: Planning Programming Budgeting and ExecutionJCIDS: Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (replaces Requirements Generation System, RGS) PPBE: Planning Programming Budgeting and Execution

39. Roles and Responsibilities

40. DoD Net-Centric Data & Services Strategies�Relationship to COIs Define info sharing need Create info exchange vocabulary with well defined syntax & semantics to address info sharing problem Publish vocab in registry Develop services to access and share data on GIG using COI vocab Use DoD Security infrastructure to provide assured access Create description of data available and advertise Register services in Service Registry for discovery and access Manage across programs

41. DoD Net-Centric Data & Services Strategies�Relationship to Core Enterprise Services Federated Search Content discovery across the Enterprise DoD Discovery Metadata Specification (DDMS) Discovery metadata to advertise information holdings Metadata Registry Electronic marketplace for structural metadata components Service Registry Catalog of services available for development time discovery Service Registry Service endpoints for runtime location transparency Security Services Authenticate via PKI Certificate Authorize via attribute based access control