Difference between revisions of "GC Enterprise Architecture/Board/When to come"
Jana.jessome (talk | contribs) |
m |
||
(106 intermediate revisions by 9 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
− | <multilang> | + | {{OCIO_GCEA_Header}} |
− | @en| | + | <multilang> |
− | + | @en| | |
+ | == '''What do I do first?''' == | ||
− | < | + | </br> |
+ | === Step 1 === | ||
+ | '''Self-assess''' your initiative against the "Criteria" in the <u>[https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=32601 Directive on Service and Digital]</u> to determine if the initiative should be presenting to the GC EARB. | ||
− | + | You can also check [[Media:Departments_who_needs_to_come_to_GC_EARB.xlsx|here who (which departments)]] needs to come as per policy. | |
− | | | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | </br> For reference, please find snippets of the 'Criteria' from the Directive on Service and Digital below: </br> | |
− | + | <b>Section 4.1.1</b> the departmental Chief Information Officer (CIO) is responsible for: | |
− | + | : <b>4.1.1.2</b> Submitting to the Government of Canada enterprise architecture review board proposals concerned with the design, development, installation and implementation of digital initiatives: | |
− | + | ::<b>4.1.1.2.1</b> Where the department is willing to invest a minimum of the following amounts to address the problem or take advantage of the opportunity: | |
− | + | ::::<b>4.1.1.2.1.1</b> $2.5 million dollars for departments that do not have an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class or that have an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of 1 according to the ''Directive on the Management of Projects and Programmes''; | |
− | + | ::::<b>4.1.1.2.1.2</b> $5 million dollars for departments that have an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of 2; | |
− | |||
− | < | + | ::::<b>4.1.1.2.1.3</b> $10 million dollars for departments that have an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of 3; |
− | + | ::::<b>4.1.1.2.1.4</b> $15 million dollars for the Department of National Defence; | |
− | < | + | ::::<b>4.1.1.2.1.5</b> $25 million dollars for departments that have an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of 4; |
− | < | ||
− | |||
− | + | ::<b>4.1.1.2.2</b> That involve emerging technologies; | |
− | |||
− | + | ::<b>4.1.1.2.3</b> That require an exception under this directive or other directives under the policy; | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | <b> | + | ::<b>4.1.1.2.4</b> That are categorized at the protected B level or below using a deployment model <u><b> other than </u></b> public cloud for application hosting (including infrastructure), application deployment, or application development; or |
− | + | ::<b>4.1.1.2.5</b> As directed by the CIO of Canada | |
− | + | </br> | |
− | |- | + | === Step 2 === |
+ | a. If '''REQUIRED''' to come: '''Complete''' a draft of the GC EARB Presenter Template <b>([[Media:2022-11-30_GC_EARB_Presenter_GENERAL_EN.pptx|English Template]] / [[Media:2022-11-30_GC_EARB_Presenter_GENERAL_FR.pptx|French Template]])</b> | ||
+ | ::* This replaces the previous version of the template. | ||
− | + | OR | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | b. If '''NOT REQUIRED''' to come: '''Provide rationale''' in an email | |
− | < | + | </br></br> |
− | + | then forward either the filled out template OR the rationale to: | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | <b><u>[Mailto:EA.AE@tbs-sct.gc.ca TBS EA team] </b></u> (if the link doesn't work, copy and paste this email address: EA.AE@tbs-sct.gc.ca) | |
− | < | ||
− | |||
− | < | ||
− | |||
− | + | </br> | |
+ | === Step 3 === | ||
− | + | Once the filled out document is received, a GC EA member will be assigned as a lead for the initiative and he/she will schedule a review with extended EA teams (various SMEs) to go through the document with the submitting department.</br> | |
+ | During the review, the GC EA lead will go through page by page and the SMEs may ask questions or suggest recommendations to update the page.</br> | ||
+ | Once the review is completed, the department need to incorporate the changes to the document and resubmit it to the GC EA lead. | ||
− | + | </br> | |
+ | === Step 4 === | ||
− | + | Once the updated document is resubmitted, a follow-up review may be scheduled to go through the document again.</br> | |
+ | This process may be repeated until the document is ready for GC EARB. | ||
− | + | </br> | |
+ | === Step 5 === | ||
− | + | When the document is finally ready, the department may start the translation process of the document.</br> | |
− | + | In the meantime, the GC EA lead will submit the final draft document to the attention of the GC EARB co-chairs for a review on a scheduled date.</br> | |
+ | The co-chairs may provide additional input / recommendation to the document, after which the department will be notified of the additional required changes by the GC EA lead. | ||
− | + | </br> | |
− | + | === Step 6 === | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | The department submit the final document of both English and French version for the GC EARB to the GC EA lead.</br> | |
− | < | + | The committee secretariat send the GC EARB meeting invite to the department, the discussions during the meeting will be transcribed and the decision will be made at the meeting whether or not the initiative is endorsed.</br> |
− | + | The Record of Discussion will be published once it has been approved by the co-chairs. | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | </br> | |
− | + | == '''Things to note''' == | |
+ | Ensure that all proposals submitted for review to GC EARB have first been assessed by your '''DARB''' (Departmental Architecture Review Board) where one has been established as described in the [https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-eng.aspx?id=32601 <u>Directive on Service and Digital.</u>] | ||
− | < | + | <b>Section 4.1.1.1</b> The departmental Chief Information Officer (CIO) is responsible for: Chairing a departmental architecture review board that is mandated to review and approve the architecture of all departmental digital initiatives and ensure their alignment with enterprise architectures. |
− | |||
− | | | + | Ensure your departmental initiatives are evaluated against and '''align''' to the requirements set out as the <u>[[GC_Enterprise_Architecture/Framework|Enterprise Architecture Framework]]</u> |
− | |||
− | + | </br> | |
− | + | == Enterprise Solution == | |
− | |||
− | + | If your solution should be considered as an Enterprise Solution, please go to <b><u>[https://wiki.gccollab.ca/GC_Enterprise_Architecture/Enterprise_Solutions the Enterprise Solution]</u></b> page for further information and to get the right GC EARB template specifically for Enterprise Solution. | |
− | + | </br> | |
− | + | == How do you go about getting on the agenda? == | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | < | + | * Look at <u>[[GC_Enterprise_Architecture/Board/Forward_Agenda| forward agenda]]</u> and send a request to <u>[mailto:EA.AE@tbs-sct.gc.ca EA team]</u> to schedule a date |
− | + | * To know when to submit your first draft for GC EARB, please use the following <u><b>[[Media:2023-02-22_-_GC_EARB_-_Document_timeline_planner.xlsx|Document Timeline Planner]]</u></b> tool. | |
+ | * Complete a draft of the <u>GC EARB Presenter Template ([[Media:2022-11-30_GC_EARB_Presenter_GENERAL_EN.pptx|English Template]] / [[Media:2022-11-30_GC_EARB_Presenter_GENERAL_FR.pptx|French Template]])</u>. For items that are informational or follow-up reports on conditions or actions from previous presentations, and where there are no concerns to raise, can be considered as “consent agenda items.” The review agenda items are not allocated any presentation time at the meeting. Departments are requested to use the Condition Templates <u>[[Media:GCEARB Condition Template (DRAFT).pptx|DRAFT English GC EARB Condition Template]] / [[Media:GCEARB Condition Template (DRAFT)-FR.pptx|DRAFT French GC EARB Condition Template]]</u> to demonstrate compliance with conditions. | ||
+ | * Email the draft GC EARB presentation to the <u>[mailto:EA.AE@tbs-sct.gc.ca EA team]</u> (EA.AE@tbs-sct.gc.ca) | ||
+ | * GC Enterprise Architecture will contact you to review and conduct initial assessment. | ||
− | + | </br> | |
− | + | == Architectural Alignment == | |
− | + | * The TBS EA team will use the details provided in the departmental GCEARB presentation to summarize the alignment to the EA Framework. | |
− | + | * A summary is prepared that summarizes the level of alignment across business, information, application, technology and security domain, areas of possible concern and finally recommendations for endorsement and any application conditions are noted. | |
− | + | * This EA summary is shared with the departmental contacts, the GC EARB Co-Chairs prior to the meeting and is presented as the summary slide by the TBS EA at the GC EARB presentation. | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | </br> | |
− | + | == Meeting Logistics – How It Works == | |
− | |||
+ | === Minimum 4 weeks ahead === | ||
− | + | * You send your draft version of the GC EARB deck (can be either English or French) to TBS GC EA team | |
+ | * TBS GC EA team shares your draft with the other subject matter experts (SMEs) from TBS Cyber, CCCS, SSC EA, etc... | ||
+ | * A meeting with the SMEs and department is setup for feedback and review. | ||
− | + | </br> | |
− | + | <b> NOTE: PLEASE BRING YOUR TECHNICAL RESOURCES INTO THE EXTENDED EA REVIEW MEETING, AS PREPARATION FOR THE GC EARB </b> | |
+ | </br> | ||
+ | === 2 weeks ahead of EARB ..... === | ||
− | + | * '''Thursday (end of day): Draft English deck for the co-chair pre-brief is due'''. | |
− | + | </br> | |
− | + | === 1 Week ahead of EARB ...... === | |
− | |||
− | |||
+ | * Thursday: Co-chair pre-brief happens and any final feedback from them will be shared with you | ||
+ | * '''Friday (end of day): FINAL presentation materials (BOTH French and English) is due''' | ||
− | = | + | </br> |
+ | === Week of EARB ...... === | ||
− | * | + | * The Secretariat will extend the calendar invitations to the presenters (typically 1-2 people) and other audiences that may be required |
− | * | + | * Packages are prepared and distributed to GC EARB members for their review prior to the scheduled meeting. |
− | |||
+ | </br> | ||
+ | === Day of ..... === | ||
− | = | + | * Documents for the meeting are posted on [https://gcconnex.gc.ca/groups/profile/29755185/gc-enterprise-architecture-review-board-comite-dexamen-de-larchitecture-integree-du-gc-comite-dexamen-de-larchitecture-dentreprise-du-gc?language=en GCEARB GCconnex site]. |
− | < | + | : <b>Virtual</b> |
− | + | ::* Attend via Join Microsoft Teams Meeting link found in the meeting invite. Link also available on the GCconnex site | |
− | * | ||
− | <b> | + | : <b>In Person</b> |
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | ::* Present yourself to the separate security TABLE and see the OCIO Secretariat Representative. (Note: It is recommended to arrive 15 minutes prior to the meeting) | |
− | * Present yourself to the separate security TABLE and see the OCIO Secretariat Representative. | + | ::* You will be signed in and provided a temporary security pass. |
− | * You will be signed in and provided a temporary security pass. | + | ::* Make your way to the identified meeting room. |
− | * Make your way to the identified meeting room. | + | ::* Once in the meeting room, please RETURN the temporary pass to OCIO representatives. |
− | * Once in the meeting room, please RETURN the temporary pass to OCIO representatives. | + | |
+ | </br> | ||
+ | === Post EARB Meeting === | ||
− | |||
* A Record of Discussion (RoD) is prepared after the meeting to capture any highlights that the Board noted, as well as the decision of the Board with any conditions. | * A Record of Discussion (RoD) is prepared after the meeting to capture any highlights that the Board noted, as well as the decision of the Board with any conditions. | ||
− | * The RoD may take several weeks to be officially published, but will be made available on the | + | * Invite will be sent from the OCIO Secretariat for the Monday following the meeting for the presenters to review the draft RoD and contribute any edits |
− | + | * The RoD may take several weeks to be officially published, but will be made available on the [https://gcconnex.gc.ca/groups/profile/29755185/gc-enterprise-architecture-review-board-comite-dexamen-de-larchitecture-integree-du-gc-comite-dexamen-de-larchitecture-dentreprise-du-gc?language=en GCEARB GCconnex site]. | |
− | + | * A decision letter is sent from the co-chairs to confirm the conditions and endorsement if applicable | |
− | + | * The RoD is brought to a future meeting to be approved by the members | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | * | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | * | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | | | + | @fr| |
− | + | == '''Qu’est-ce que je fais en Premier?''' == | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | </br> | |
− | + | === Étape 1 === | |
− | + | '''Auto-évaluation''' contre le de votre initiative contre les « Critères » dans le <u>[https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-fra.aspx?id=32601 Directive sur les Services et le Numérique]</u> pour déterminer si l’initiative devrait être présentée au CEAI GC. | |
− | |||
− | < | + | <b>Section 4.1.1</b> le dirigeant principal de l’information (DPI) ministériel est responsable des éléments suivants: |
− | + | : <b>4.1.1.2</b> Soumettre au comité d’examen de l’architecture d’intégrée du gouvernement du Canada des propositions concernant la conception, le développement, l’installation et la mise en œuvre d’initiatives numériques: | |
− | |||
− | + | ::<b>4.1.1.2.1</b> Lorsque le ministère est prêt à investir au moins les montants suivants pour régler le problème ou profiter de l’occasion: | |
− | |||
− | <b>1.</b> | ||
− | |||
− | + | ::::<b>4.1.1.2.1.1</b> $2.5 millions de dollars pour les ministères qui n’ont pas de catégorie de capacité de gestion de projet organisationnel approuvée, ou qui ont une classe de capacité de gestion de projet organisationnel approuvée de 1 selon la ''Directive sur la gestion des projets et programmes''; | |
− | |||
− | <b>2.</b> | ||
− | |||
− | + | ::::<b>4.1.1.2.1.2</b> $5 millions de dollars pour les ministères qui ont une catégorie de capacité de gestion de projet organisationnel approuvée de 2; | |
− | |||
− | <b> | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | ::::<b>4.1.1.2.1.3</b> $10 millions de dollars pour les ministères qui ont une classe de capacité de gestion de projet organisationnel approuvée de 3; | |
− | < | ||
− | < | + | ::::<b>4.1.1.2.1.4</b> $15 millions de dollars pour le ministère de la Défense nationale; |
− | |||
− | + | ::::<b>4.1.1.2.1.5</b> $25 millions de dollars pour les ministères qui ont une classe de capacité de gestion de projet organisationnel approuvée de 4; | |
− | |||
− | + | ::<b>4.1.1.2.2</b> Cela implique des technologies émergentes; | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | <b> | + | ::<b>4.1.1.2.3</b> Qui nécessitent une exception en vertu de la présente directive ou d’autres directives en vertu de la politique; |
− | |||
− | |||
− | < | + | ::<b>4.1.1.2.4</b> Qui sont classés au niveau B protégé ou inférieur à l’aide d’un modèle de déploiement <b>autre que</b> le cloud public pour l’hébergement d’applications (y compris l’infrastructure), le déploiement d’applications ou le développement d’applications; ou |
− | |||
− | + | ::<b>4.1.1.2.5</b> Selon les directives du DPI du Canada. | |
− | |||
− | + | Si l’investissement répond à au moins un des critères ci-dessus, le ministère doit présenter la proposition au CEAI GC. | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | < | + | </br> |
− | | | + | === Étape 2 === |
− | < | + | a. Si '''REQUIS''' à venir : '''Compléter''' une ébauche du Modèle de présentateur CEAI GC <b>([[Media:2022-11-30_GC_EARB_Presenter_GENERAL_EN.pptx|Modèle anglais]] / [[Media:2022-11-30_GC_EARB_Presenter_GENERAL_FR.pptx|Modèle français]])</b> |
+ | ::* Ceci remplace la version antérieure du modèle.</br> | ||
+ | OU | ||
− | + | b. Si « NON REQUIS » à venir : « Fournir une justification » dans un courriel</br></br> | |
− | + | et envoyez la présentation ou la justification </br> | |
− | |||
+ | au [Mailto:EA.AE@tbs-sct.gc.ca L’équipe d’AI du SCT] (EA.AE@tbs-sct.gc.ca) | ||
− | = | + | </br> |
+ | === Étape 3 === | ||
− | + | Une fois le document rempli reçu, un membre de l'AI du GC sera désigné comme responsable de l'initiative et il/elle planifiera une révision avec des équipes d'AI élargies (des experts diverses) pour examiner le document avec le service demandeur.</br> | |
− | + | Au cours de la révision, le responsable de l'AI du GC parcourra page par page et les experts peuvent poser des questions ou suggérer des recommandations pour mettre à jour la page.</br> | |
− | + | Une fois la révision terminé, le ministère doit incorporer les modifications au document et le soumettre à nouveau au responsable de l'AI du GC. | |
− | |||
+ | </br> | ||
+ | === Étape 4 === | ||
− | + | Une fois que le document mis à jour est soumis à nouveau, une révision de suivi peut être programmé pour parcourir à nouveau le document.</br> | |
+ | Ce processus peut être répété jusqu'à ce que le document soit prêt pour le CEAI du GC. | ||
− | + | </br> | |
− | + | === Étape 5 === | |
− | |||
+ | Lorsque le document est enfin prêt, le ministère peut commencer le processus de traduction du document.</br> | ||
+ | Dans l'intervalle, le responsable de l'AI du GC soumettra le projet de document final à l'attention des co-présidents du CEAI du GC pour réviser à une date prévue.</br> | ||
+ | Les co-présidents peuvent apporter des commentaires/recommandations supplémentaires au document, après quoi le ministère sera informé des modifications supplémentaires requises par le responsable de l'AI du GC. | ||
− | = | + | </br> |
+ | === Étape 6 === | ||
− | < | + | Le ministère soumet le document final en version anglaise et française pour le CEAI du GC au responsable de l'AI GC.</br> |
+ | Le secrétariat du comité envoie l'invitation à la réunion du CEAI du GC au ministère, les discussions lors de la réunion seront transcrites et la décision sera prise lors de la réunion si l'initiative est approuvée ou non.</br> | ||
+ | Le compte rendu des discussions sera publié une fois qu'il aura été approuvé par les coprésidents. | ||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | </br> | |
− | + | == '''Choses à Noter''' == | |
− | + | Assurez-vous que toutes les propositions soumises pour examen au CEAI GC ont d’abord été évaluées par votre '''CEAM''' (Comité d’examen de l’architecture ministérielle) lorsque l’un d’entre eux a été établi comme décrit dans le [https://www.tbs-sct.gc.ca/pol/doc-fra.aspx?id=32601 <u>Directive sur les Services et le Numérique</u>]. | |
− | <b> | + | <b>Section 4.1.1.1</b> Le dirigeant principal de l’information (DPI) ministériel est chargé de : Présider un comité d’examen de l’architecture ministériel qui a pour mandat d’examiner et d’approuver l’architecture de toutes les initiatives numériques ministérielles et de veiller à leur harmonisation avec les architectures ministérielles. |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | < | + | Assurez-vous que les initiatives de votre ministère sont évaluées par rapport et et s’aligner sur les exigences énoncées dans <u>[[GC_Enterprise_Architecture/Framework|le Cadre d’Architecture d’Intégée]]</u> |
− | |||
− | |||
+ | </br> | ||
+ | == Comment vous y prenez-vous pour Participer au Programme? == | ||
− | + | * Examinez la [[GC_Enterprise_Architecture/Board/Forward_Agenda| programme avancé]] et envoyez une demande à [mailto:EA.AE@tbs-sct.gc.ca l’équipe d'AI] pour planifier une date | |
+ | * Complétez une ébauche du <u>Modèle de présentateur CEAI GC ([[Media:2022-11-30_GC_EARB_Presenter_GENERAL_EN.pptx|Modèle anglais]] / [[Media:2022-11-30_GC_EARB_Presenter_GENERAL_FR.pptx|Modèle français]])</u>. Pour les éléments qui sont des rapports d’information ou de suivi sur les conditions ou les actions des présentations précédentes, et lorsqu’il n’y a pas de préoccupations à soulever, peuvent être considérés comme des « points de l’ordre du jour relatifs au consentement ». Les points de l’ordre du jour de l’examen ne sont pas attribués de temps de présentation à la réunion. Les ministères sont priés d’utiliser les modèles d’état [[Media:GCEARB Condition Template (DRAFT).pptx|Ébauche de la modèle d’état du CEAI GC en Anglais]] / [[Media:GCEARB Condition Template (DRAFT)-FR.pptx|Ébauche de la modèle d’état du CEAI GC en Français]] pour démontrer le respect des conditions. | ||
+ | * Envoyez par courriel l’ébauche de la présentation du CEAI GC à [mailto:EA.AE@tbs-sct.gc.ca l’équipe d’AI] (EA.AE@tbs-sct.gc.ca) | ||
+ | * l'Architecture d’intégrée du GC communiquera avec vous pour examiner et effectuer une évaluation initiale. | ||
− | + | </br> | |
− | + | == Alignement Architectural == | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
+ | * L’équipe d’AI du SCT utilisera les détails fournis dans la présentation ministérielle du CEAI GC pour résumer l’harmonisation avec le Cadre de l’AI. | ||
+ | * Un résumé est préparé qui résume le niveau d’alignement dans les domaines de l’entreprise, de l’information, des applications, de la technologie et de la sécurité, les domaines de préoccupation possibles et, enfin, les recommandations d’approbation et les conditions de demande sont notées. | ||
+ | * Ce résumé de l’AI est communiqué aux personnes-ressources ministérielles, aux coprésidents du CEAI GC avant la réunion et est présenté sous forme de diapositive sommaire par l’AI du SCT lors de la présentation du CEAI GC. | ||
+ | </br> | ||
+ | == Logistique des Réunions – Comment ça Marche == | ||
+ | </br> | ||
+ | === Minimum 4 semaines à l’avance, idéalement 5-6 semaines à l’avance === | ||
− | + | * L'equipe d'AI à SCT partage votre brouillon avec les autres experts en la matière (EM) de la cybersécurité du SCT, CCCS, SSC AI, etc. | |
+ | * Une réunion avec les PME et le département est organisée pour la rétroaction et l’examen | ||
+ | </br> | ||
+ | <b> AVERTIR: VEUILLEZ AMMENER VOTRE RESSOURCE TECHNIQUE À LA REUNION AVEC LES ÉQUIPES D'AI EXTENUÉE COMME UNE PREPARATION POUR LE CEAI GC </b> | ||
+ | </br> | ||
− | + | === 2 semaines à l’avance..... === | |
− | + | * '''Jeudi (fin de journée) : Le projet de pont en anglais pour le pré-brief du co-président est dû''' | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
+ | </br> | ||
+ | === 1 semaine à l'avance .... === | ||
+ | * Jeudi : Le pré-briefing du coprésident aura lieu et toute rétroaction finale de leur part sera partagée | ||
+ | * '''Vendredi(fin de journée) : Le matériel de présentation FINAL (Français et en anglais) est dû''' | ||
− | < | + | </br> |
− | + | === Semaine du CEAI .... === | |
− | + | * Le Secrétariat adressera les invitations au calendrier aux présentateurs (généralement 1 à 2 personnes) | |
− | + | * Les trousses sont préparées et distribuées aux membres du CEAI GC pour examen avant la réunion prévue. | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | < | + | </br> |
− | + | === Jour de.... === | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | + | * Les documents de la réunion sont affichés sur la [https://gcconnex.gc.ca/groups/profile/29755185/gc-enterprise-architecture-review-board-comite-dexamen-de-larchitecture-integree-du-gc-comite-dexamen-de-larchitecture-dentreprise-du-gc?language=fr site de CEAI GC GCconnex]. | |
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | |||
− | < | + | : <b>Virtuel</b> |
− | + | ::* Participez via le lien Rejoindre la réunion Microsoft Teams qui se trouve dans l’invitation à la réunion. Lien également disponible sur le site GCconnex | |
+ | : <b>En personne</b> | ||
− | + | ::* Présentez-vous à la TABLE de sécurité séparée et consultez le représentant du Secrétariat du BDPI. (Remarque: Il est recommandé d’arriver 15 minutes avant la réunion) | |
+ | ::* Vous serez connecté et recevrez un laissez-passer de sécurité temporaire. | ||
+ | ::* Rendez-vous à la salle de réunion identifiée. | ||
+ | ::* Une fois dans la salle de réunion, veuillez RETOURNER le laissez-passer temporaire aux représentants du BDPI. | ||
+ | === Après le Réunion de CEAI === | ||
+ | * Un Record de Discussion (RoD) est préparé après la réunion pour saisir tous les faits saillants que le Conseil a notés, ainsi que la décision du Conseil avec toutes les conditions. | ||
+ | * L’invitation sera envoyée par le Secrétariat du BDPI pour le lundi suivant la réunion pour les présentateurs pour examiner l’ébauche du RoD et contribuent modifications | ||
+ | * Le RoD peut prendre plusieurs semaines pour être officiellement publié, mais sera mis à disposition sur la [https://gcconnex.gc.ca/groups/profile/29755185/gc-enterprise-architecture-review-board-comite-dexamen-de-larchitecture-integree-du-gc-comite-dexamen-de-larchitecture-dentreprise-du-gc?language=fr site de CEAI GC GCconnex]. | ||
+ | * Une lettre de décision est envoyée par les coprésidents pour confirmer les conditions et l’approbation, le cas échéant. | ||
+ | * Le RoD est amené à une prochaine réunion pour être approuvé par les membres | ||
</multilang> | </multilang> |
Latest revision as of 14:08, 22 February 2023
What do I do first?[edit | edit source]
Step 1[edit | edit source]
Self-assess your initiative against the "Criteria" in the Directive on Service and Digital to determine if the initiative should be presenting to the GC EARB.
You can also check here who (which departments) needs to come as per policy.
For reference, please find snippets of the 'Criteria' from the Directive on Service and Digital below:
Section 4.1.1 the departmental Chief Information Officer (CIO) is responsible for:
- 4.1.1.2 Submitting to the Government of Canada enterprise architecture review board proposals concerned with the design, development, installation and implementation of digital initiatives:
- 4.1.1.2.1 Where the department is willing to invest a minimum of the following amounts to address the problem or take advantage of the opportunity:
- 4.1.1.2.1.1 $2.5 million dollars for departments that do not have an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class or that have an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of 1 according to the Directive on the Management of Projects and Programmes;
- 4.1.1.2.1.2 $5 million dollars for departments that have an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of 2;
- 4.1.1.2.1.3 $10 million dollars for departments that have an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of 3;
- 4.1.1.2.1.4 $15 million dollars for the Department of National Defence;
- 4.1.1.2.1.5 $25 million dollars for departments that have an approved Organizational Project Management Capacity Class of 4;
- 4.1.1.2.2 That involve emerging technologies;
- 4.1.1.2.3 That require an exception under this directive or other directives under the policy;
- 4.1.1.2.4 That are categorized at the protected B level or below using a deployment model other than public cloud for application hosting (including infrastructure), application deployment, or application development; or
- 4.1.1.2.5 As directed by the CIO of Canada
Step 2[edit | edit source]
a. If REQUIRED to come: Complete a draft of the GC EARB Presenter Template (English Template / French Template)
- This replaces the previous version of the template.
OR
b. If NOT REQUIRED to come: Provide rationale in an email
then forward either the filled out template OR the rationale to:
TBS EA team (if the link doesn't work, copy and paste this email address: EA.AE@tbs-sct.gc.ca)
Step 3[edit | edit source]
Once the filled out document is received, a GC EA member will be assigned as a lead for the initiative and he/she will schedule a review with extended EA teams (various SMEs) to go through the document with the submitting department.
During the review, the GC EA lead will go through page by page and the SMEs may ask questions or suggest recommendations to update the page.
Once the review is completed, the department need to incorporate the changes to the document and resubmit it to the GC EA lead.
Step 4[edit | edit source]
Once the updated document is resubmitted, a follow-up review may be scheduled to go through the document again.
This process may be repeated until the document is ready for GC EARB.
Step 5[edit | edit source]
When the document is finally ready, the department may start the translation process of the document.
In the meantime, the GC EA lead will submit the final draft document to the attention of the GC EARB co-chairs for a review on a scheduled date.
The co-chairs may provide additional input / recommendation to the document, after which the department will be notified of the additional required changes by the GC EA lead.
Step 6[edit | edit source]
The department submit the final document of both English and French version for the GC EARB to the GC EA lead.
The committee secretariat send the GC EARB meeting invite to the department, the discussions during the meeting will be transcribed and the decision will be made at the meeting whether or not the initiative is endorsed.
The Record of Discussion will be published once it has been approved by the co-chairs.
Things to note[edit | edit source]
Ensure that all proposals submitted for review to GC EARB have first been assessed by your DARB (Departmental Architecture Review Board) where one has been established as described in the Directive on Service and Digital.
Section 4.1.1.1 The departmental Chief Information Officer (CIO) is responsible for: Chairing a departmental architecture review board that is mandated to review and approve the architecture of all departmental digital initiatives and ensure their alignment with enterprise architectures.
Ensure your departmental initiatives are evaluated against and align to the requirements set out as the Enterprise Architecture Framework
Enterprise Solution[edit | edit source]
If your solution should be considered as an Enterprise Solution, please go to the Enterprise Solution page for further information and to get the right GC EARB template specifically for Enterprise Solution.
How do you go about getting on the agenda?[edit | edit source]
- Look at forward agenda and send a request to EA team to schedule a date
- To know when to submit your first draft for GC EARB, please use the following Document Timeline Planner tool.
- Complete a draft of the GC EARB Presenter Template (English Template / French Template). For items that are informational or follow-up reports on conditions or actions from previous presentations, and where there are no concerns to raise, can be considered as “consent agenda items.” The review agenda items are not allocated any presentation time at the meeting. Departments are requested to use the Condition Templates DRAFT English GC EARB Condition Template / DRAFT French GC EARB Condition Template to demonstrate compliance with conditions.
- Email the draft GC EARB presentation to the EA team (EA.AE@tbs-sct.gc.ca)
- GC Enterprise Architecture will contact you to review and conduct initial assessment.
Architectural Alignment[edit | edit source]
- The TBS EA team will use the details provided in the departmental GCEARB presentation to summarize the alignment to the EA Framework.
- A summary is prepared that summarizes the level of alignment across business, information, application, technology and security domain, areas of possible concern and finally recommendations for endorsement and any application conditions are noted.
- This EA summary is shared with the departmental contacts, the GC EARB Co-Chairs prior to the meeting and is presented as the summary slide by the TBS EA at the GC EARB presentation.
Meeting Logistics – How It Works[edit | edit source]
Minimum 4 weeks ahead[edit | edit source]
- You send your draft version of the GC EARB deck (can be either English or French) to TBS GC EA team
- TBS GC EA team shares your draft with the other subject matter experts (SMEs) from TBS Cyber, CCCS, SSC EA, etc...
- A meeting with the SMEs and department is setup for feedback and review.
NOTE: PLEASE BRING YOUR TECHNICAL RESOURCES INTO THE EXTENDED EA REVIEW MEETING, AS PREPARATION FOR THE GC EARB
2 weeks ahead of EARB .....[edit | edit source]
- Thursday (end of day): Draft English deck for the co-chair pre-brief is due.
1 Week ahead of EARB ......[edit | edit source]
- Thursday: Co-chair pre-brief happens and any final feedback from them will be shared with you
- Friday (end of day): FINAL presentation materials (BOTH French and English) is due
Week of EARB ......[edit | edit source]
- The Secretariat will extend the calendar invitations to the presenters (typically 1-2 people) and other audiences that may be required
- Packages are prepared and distributed to GC EARB members for their review prior to the scheduled meeting.
Day of .....[edit | edit source]
- Documents for the meeting are posted on GCEARB GCconnex site.
- Virtual
- Attend via Join Microsoft Teams Meeting link found in the meeting invite. Link also available on the GCconnex site
- In Person
- Present yourself to the separate security TABLE and see the OCIO Secretariat Representative. (Note: It is recommended to arrive 15 minutes prior to the meeting)
- You will be signed in and provided a temporary security pass.
- Make your way to the identified meeting room.
- Once in the meeting room, please RETURN the temporary pass to OCIO representatives.
Post EARB Meeting[edit | edit source]
- A Record of Discussion (RoD) is prepared after the meeting to capture any highlights that the Board noted, as well as the decision of the Board with any conditions.
- Invite will be sent from the OCIO Secretariat for the Monday following the meeting for the presenters to review the draft RoD and contribute any edits
- The RoD may take several weeks to be officially published, but will be made available on the GCEARB GCconnex site.
- A decision letter is sent from the co-chairs to confirm the conditions and endorsement if applicable
- The RoD is brought to a future meeting to be approved by the members