(U) NSGM3202_GFMSA_Program_Manual.pdf

UNCLASSIFIED

NSGM 3202

9 June 2016

OPR: NGA/CIO-T

Administrative Change 1, 7 December 2018

MANUAL

GEOINT Functional Manager Standards Assessment (GFMSA) Program

A program for maturing consistent and conforming application of GEOINT standards for interoperable operations within the NSG

Originating Office:

National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency Chief Information Officer and Information Technology Services

7 November 2018 ii

This page intentionally left blank.

iii

FOREWORD

The GEOINT Functional Manager Standards Assessment (GFMSA) Program was established by the GEOINT Functional Manager (GEOINT FM) to promote a GEOINT standards-based, interoperable working environment across the National System for Geospatial Intelligence (NSG). The Program is also intended to ensure that GEOINT requirements are considered throughout the acquisition procedures and testing activities (Reference j). This program addresses GEOINT standards approved by the Intelligence Community (IC) and Department of Defense (DoD) Joint Enterprise Standards Committee (JESC) (Reference n z).

The GFMSA program establishes processes that provide program and project managers an authoritative means to confirm that interoperable capabilities are delivered that conform to GEOINT standards. Starting those processes early in the requirements phase of the acquisition life cycle provides Program Managers (PMs) with a higher level of confidence for an interoperable outcome. As a result, PMs can confirm that their system produces, provides, or uses GEOINT in conformance with mandated standards.

These processes are built around an assessment approach that adds significant fidelity and confidence to the GEOINT functional aspect of a program or project. This reduces the research (time and cost), development, and maintenance work a program must conduct to understand application of GEOINT standards and the interoperability objectives and operational capabilities that need to be realized across the NSG.

Bottom line: Information contained in this Manual, and on the GFMSA resource sites, will help managers and sponsors improve their GEOINT requirement statements and acquisition development processes. By following the processes established in this Manual the NSG, including managers and sponsors, will be able to answer these key questions: 1) What interoperable capabilities do I need to have as a result of my program/system requirements; and 2) How will I know when they have been delivered?

iv v vi

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. PURPOSE

2. APPLICABILITY

3. REFERENCES

4. ACRONYMS and DEFINITIONS

5. RESPONSIBILITIES

6. PROCEDURES

7. ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES and CRITERIA

8. 7. ADMINISTRATION

9. 8. RELEASABILITY

10. 9.EFFECTIVE DATE

10. ENCLOSURE 1, REFERENCES

11. ENCLOSURE 2, RESPONSIBILITIES

12. ENCLOSURE 3, PROCESSES

13. ENCLOSURE 4, ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA

ENCLOSURE 5, GLOSSARY

PART I. ACRONYMS

PART II. DEFINITIONS

TABLES

Table 1 – Exemplar N-R KPP Attributes

Table 2 – In–Progress Indicator

Table 3 – Data/Service is Visible

Table 4 – Data/Service is Accessible

Table 5 – Data/Service is Understandable

Table 6 – Data/Service is Trusted

Table 7 – Data/Service is Interoperable

FIGURES

Figure 1 - Process Documents and Actors

Figure 2 - GFMSA Cycle

Figure 3 - Overview of Data/Services Objectives and Criteria

Figure 4 - Data Assets Assessed

Figure 5 - Service Assets Assessed

Figure 6 - Testing for Performance vii

CHANGE LOG

Change

Type &

Number

Change

Date

Revised

By

Pages

Affected Change Description

Admin

12/7/2018 TAES:kvf All

JCIDS Manual update required changing “N-R KPP” to “Net-Ready

Performance Attribute”.

Incorporate recent changes updates caused by changes to the GFMSA

Scorecard, and to improve usability of the document.

Update to the list of references necessitated by changes to the referenced documents.

Language clarification and removal of unused information.

1. PURPOSE.

a. This GFMSA Manual implements policy, defines responsibilities, and provides processes for assessing and asserting conformance to GEOINT standards in accordance with NSGD 3201, “The Geospatial Intelligence (GEOINT) Functional Manager Standards Assessment (GFMSA) Program” (Reference j u).

b. This Manual focuses on the capabilities enabled by GEOINT data and GEOINT web services.

2. APPLICABILITY. This Manual applies (to the extent described in NSGD 3201 (Reference j u)) to elements of the IC, DoD, non-DoD/IC Federal agency members of the NSG, international partners, state/local municipalities, and Native American tribal organizations that are responsible for the operation, acquisition and/or development of systems and applications which collect, procure, produce, serve, exchange, or use GEOINT data. The GFMSA Self-Assessment Guide contains detailed instructions and procedures for self-assessments. This document is available on the GFMSA resource sites listed in Enclosure 2, paragraph 4.

3. REFERENCES. See Enclosure 1.

4. ACRONYMS AND DEFINITIONS. See Glossary, Part 1 and Part 2.

5. RESPONSIBILITIES. See Enclosure 2.

6. PROCESSES. See Enclosure 3.

7. ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES and CRITERIA. See Enclosure 4.

8. ADMINISTRATION. The GFMSA Manager(s) is/are responsible for administration and maintenance of this Manual.

9. RELEASABILITY. This document is available on the GFMSA resource sites listed in Enclosure 2, paragraph 4, and on the NSG Standards Registry, (Reference p ee), and from the GFMSA resource sites listed in Enclosure 2, paragraph 4.

10. EFFECTIVE DATE. This Manual is effective immediately.

Dustin J. Gard-Weiss Chairman, National Geospatial Intelligence Committee

Enclosures

1. References

2. Responsibilities

3. Processes

4. Assessment Objectives and Criteria

5. Glossary

ENCLOSURE 1

REFERENCES

a. ICD 113, “Functional Managers,” 19 May 2009 http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICD/ICD_113.pdf

b. ICD 115, “Intelligence Community Capability Requirements Process,” 21 December 2012 http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICD/ICD%20115%20IC%20Capability%20Requirements%20 Process.pdf

c. ICD 501, “Discovery And Dissemination Or Retrieval Of Information Within The Intelligence Community,” 21 January 2009 http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICD/ICD_501.pdf

d. ICD 801, “Acquisition,” 15 August 2006, as amended, 16 August 2009 http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICD/ICD_801.pdf

e. DoD Directive 5000.01, “The Defense Acquisition System,” 20 November 2007 http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/500001p.pdf

b. DoD Directive 5105.60, “National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency (NGA),” 29 July http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/510560p.pdf

f. DoD Instruction 3115.15, “Geospatial Intelligence (GEOINT),” 06 December 2011 http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/311515p.pdf

g. DoD Instruction 5000.02, “Operation of the Defense Acquisition System,” 07 January 2015 http://dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/ins1.html

h. DoD Instruction 8310.01, “Information Technology Standards in the DoD,” 02 February 2015 http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/831001p.pdf

c. DoD Instruction 8320.07, “Implementing the Sharing of Data, Information, and Information Technology (IT) Services in the Department of Defense,” August 3, 2015, as amended http://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/832007p.pdf

j. DoD Instruction 8320.02, “Sharing Data, Information, and Information Technology (IT) Services in the Department of Defense,” 05 August 2013 http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/832002p.pdf

d. DoD Instruction 8330.01, “Interoperability of Information Technology (IT), Including National Security Systems (NSS),” 21 May 2014, as amended http://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/833001p.pdf http://dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/833001p.pdf http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICD/ICD_113.pdf http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICD/ICD%20115%20IC%20Capability%20Requirements%20Process.pdf http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICD/ICD%20115%20IC%20Capability%20Requirements%20Process.pdf http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICD/ICD_501.pdf http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICD/ICD_801.pdf http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/500001p.pdf http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/510560p.pdf http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/311515p.pdf http://dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/ins1.html http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/831001p.pdf http://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/832007p.pdf http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/832002p.pdf http://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodi/833001p.pdf http://dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/833001p.pdf

i. DoD Instruction 8500.01, “Cybersecurity,” 14 March 2014 http://dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/850001_2014.pdf

j. DoD Chief Information Officer, “Department of Defense Net-Centric Services Strategy,” 04 May 2007 https://dodcio.defense.gov/Portals/0/documents/DoD_NetCentricServicesStrategy.pdf http://dodcio.defense.gov/Portals/0/documents/DoD_NetCentricServicesStrategy.pdf

e. IC Policy Guidance 801.1, “Acquisition,” 12 July 2007, as amended, 29 January https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICPG/ICPG%20801%201.pdf https://intelshare.intelink.ic.gov/sites/acquisitiontechnology/acquisition/KeyDocs/(U)%20Intelligen ce%20Community%20Policy%20Guidance%20801.1%20- %20Acquisition%20(formerly%20ICPG%20105.1).pdf#search=n%2E%09IC%20Policy%20Guida nce%20801%2E1

f. CJCSI 3170.01I, “Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS),” 23 January 2015 http://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Library/Instructions/3170_01a.pdf http://www.dtic.mil/cjcs_directives/cdata/unlimit/3170_01a.pdf

f. Appendix E to Enclosure D of the JCIDS Manual (31 August 2018 12 February 2015), “Net-Ready Content Guide”“Content Guide for the Net-Ready Key Performance Parameter (N-R KPP)” https://intellipedia.intelink.gov/wiki/Content_Guide_for_the_Net-Ready_KPP

g. CJCSI 5123.01H G, “Charter of the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) and Implementation of the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS),” 31 August 2018 12 February 2015 http://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Library/Instructions/5123_01.pdf https://dap.dau.mil/policy/Documents/2015/CJCSI_5123_01G_signed.pdf

h. Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, June 2018 http://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/pubs/dictionary.pdf

s. Joint Publication 1-02, “Department of Defense Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms,” 08 November 2010, (as amended through 15 April 2014) http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp1_02.pdf

k. Joint Publication 2-03, “Geospatial Intelligence in Joint Operations,” 31 October http://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/pubs/jp2_03_20170507.pdf http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp2_03.pdf

i. NSGD 1100, “Geospatial Intelligence (GEOINT) Functional Management,” 02 August 2014 http://www.gwg.nga.mil/documents/NSGD1100_Signed.pdf

j. NSGD 3201, “The Geospatial Intelligence (GEOINT) Functional Manager Standards Assessment (GFMSA) Program,” 01 June 2015, Administrative http://dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/850001_2014.pdf https://dodcio.defense.gov/Portals/0/documents/DoD_NetCentricServicesStrategy.pdf http://dodcio.defense.gov/Portals/0/documents/DoD_NetCentricServicesStrategy.pdf https://www.dni.gov/files/documents/ICPG/ICPG%20801%201.pdf https://intelshare.intelink.ic.gov/sites/acquisitiontechnology/acquisition/KeyDocs/(U)%20Intelligence%20Community%20Policy%20Guidance%20801.1%20-%20Acquisition%20(formerly%20ICPG%20105.1).pdf#search=n%2E%09IC%20Policy%20Guidance%20801%2E1 https://intelshare.intelink.ic.gov/sites/acquisitiontechnology/acquisition/KeyDocs/(U)%20Intelligence%20Community%20Policy%20Guidance%20801.1%20-%20Acquisition%20(formerly%20ICPG%20105.1).pdf#search=n%2E%09IC%20Policy%20Guidance%20801%2E1 https://intelshare.intelink.ic.gov/sites/acquisitiontechnology/acquisition/KeyDocs/(U)%20Intelligence%20Community%20Policy%20Guidance%20801.1%20-%20Acquisition%20(formerly%20ICPG%20105.1).pdf#search=n%2E%09IC%20Policy%20Guidance%20801%2E1 https://intelshare.intelink.ic.gov/sites/acquisitiontechnology/acquisition/KeyDocs/(U)%20Intelligence%20Community%20Policy%20Guidance%20801.1%20-%20Acquisition%20(formerly%20ICPG%20105.1).pdf#search=n%2E%09IC%20Policy%20Guidance%20801%2E1 http://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Library/Instructions/3170_01a.pdf http://www.dtic.mil/cjcs_directives/cdata/unlimit/3170_01a.pdf https://intellipedia.intelink.gov/wiki/Content_Guide_for_the_Net-Ready_KPP http://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Library/Instructions/5123_01.pdf https://dap.dau.mil/policy/Documents/2015/CJCSI_5123_01G_signed.pdf http://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/pubs/dictionary.pdf http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp1_02.pdf http://www.jcs.mil/Portals/36/Documents/Doctrine/pubs/jp2_03_20170507.pdf http://www.dtic.mil/doctrine/new_pubs/jp2_03.pdf http://www.gwg.nga.mil/documents/NSGD1100_Signed.pdf

Change 1, 19 November 2015.

http://nsg.ic.gov/library/documentsuploads/Signed_20150601_NSGD_3201.pdf (If you cannot access it at this URL message the GFMSA Team.)

k. NSG Pub 1-0, “Geospatial Intelligence (GEOINT) Basic Doctrine,” September https://www.nga.mil/ProductsServices/Pages/GEOINT-Basic-Doctrine-Publication.aspx

l. DoD Acquisition Guidebook https://dag.dau.mil/Pages/Default.aspx

m. DAU Glossary of Defense Acquisition Acronyms and Terms https://www.dau.mil/glossary/Pages/Default.aspx 15th Edition, December 2012

n. Office of the Secretary of Defense (OSD) memorandum directing Combat Support Agency (CSA) alignment with charter for the Joint Enterprise Standards Committee (JESC), 28 March 2014

n. Joint Enterprise Standards Committee (JESC) Charter, 28 March 2013 http://www.gwg.nga.mil/documents/JESC%20Charter%20Signed%202013%2003%2028.pdf

o. Department of Defense Information Technology Standards Registry (DISR) NIPRNET: https://gtg.csd.disa.mil/disr/dashboard.html

SIPRNET: http://gtg.csd.disa.smil.mil/disr/dashboard.html

p. DoD CIO Memorandum, “DoD Net-Centric Data Strategy,” 09 May 2003 http://dodcio.defense.gov/Portals/0/documents/Net-Centric-Data-Strategy-2003-05-092.pdf

q. “Intelligence Community Information Technology Enterprise Strategy 2012-2017” http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/IC_ITE_Strategy.pdf

o. Joint Interoperability Test Command (JITC) Interoperability Process Guide http://jitc.fhu.disa.mil/isg/downloads/IPG_Version_2.pdf http://jitc.fhu.disa.mil/isg/downloads/IPG_Version_2_Change_23_Mar15.pdf

p. NSG Standards Registry http://nsgreg.nga.mil/overview.jsp

r. Program Initial Report https://intelshare.intelink.sgov.gov/sites/gfmsa/Coordination%20Documents/Program%20Initial% 20Report%2020150817.xlsx

ff. DoD Information Enterprise Architecture v2.0, July 2012 http://www.pdfdrive.net/dod-information-enterprise-architecture-version-20-department-of-e2095926.html

q. Title 10 U.S. Code §467. Definitions https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2013-title10/pdf/USCODE-2013-title10-subtitleA-partI-chap22-subchapIV-sec467.pdf

r. Intelligence Community Standard 500-20, “Intelligence Community Enterprise Standards Compliance, (Effective 16 December 2010) http://nsg.ic.gov/library/documentsuploads/Signed_20150601_NSGD_3201.pdf https://www.nga.mil/ProductsServices/Pages/GEOINT-Basic-Doctrine-Publication.aspx https://dag.dau.mil/Pages/Default.aspx https://www.dau.mil/glossary/Pages/Default.aspx http://www.gwg.nga.mil/documents/JESC%20Charter%20Signed%202013%2003%2028.pdf https://gtg.csd.disa.mil/disr/dashboard.html http://gtg.csd.disa.smil.mil/ http://dodcio.defense.gov/Portals/0/documents/Net-Centric-Data-Strategy-2003-05-092.pdf http://www.dni.gov/files/documents/IC_ITE_Strategy.pdf http://jitc.fhu.disa.mil/isg/downloads/IPG_Version_2.pdf http://jitc.fhu.disa.mil/isg/downloads/IPG_Version_2_Change_23_Mar15.pdf http://nsgreg.nga.mil/overview.jsp https://intelshare.intelink.sgov.gov/sites/gfmsa/Coordination%20Documents/Program%20Initial%20Report%2020150817.xlsx https://intelshare.intelink.sgov.gov/sites/gfmsa/Coordination%20Documents/Program%20Initial%20Report%2020150817.xlsx http://www.pdfdrive.net/dod-information-enterprise-architecture-version-20-department-of-e2095926.html http://www.pdfdrive.net/dod-information-enterprise-architecture-version-20-department-of-e2095926.html https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2013-title10/pdf/USCODE-2013-title10-subtitleA-partI-chap22-subchapIV-sec467.pdf https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/USCODE-2013-title10/pdf/USCODE-2013-title10-subtitleA-partI-chap22-subchapIV-sec467.pdf

s. DoDD 8115.01, “Information Technology Portfolio Management,” October 10, http://www.esd.whs.mil/Portals/54/Documents/DD/issuances/dodd/811501p.pdf

ENCLOSURE 2

RESPONSIBILITIES

1. INTRODUCTION. The GFMSA program is focused on ensuring consistent selection of and conformance to GEOINT standards by systems that collect, produce, provide, serve, exchange or use GEOINT. Conformance to NSG-adopted GEOINT standards is critical to interoperability and the ability of the NSG enterprise to effectively and efficiently collect, procure, produce, serve, use or exchange GEOINT data. The standards are those adopted by the JESC (Reference n z), and found in the DoD Information Technology Standards Registry (DISR) or the IC Enterprise Standards Baseline (IC ESB).

The DoD, IC, and other NSG members/partners have different acquisition and development process and milestone models. Some developments use various forms of the agile development methodology. To permit agility in assessment processes, in-progress self-assessments are organized to align with the generic acquisition activities identified in NSGD 3201 (Reference j u) and listed below:

a. Requirements definition and validation

b. Standards selection and system design

c. Standards implementation and development testing

d. Operational and interoperability testing

2. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY (IT)/NATIONAL SECURITY SYSTEMS (NSS)

SPONSORS AND PROGRAM MANAGERS

a. Verify and ensure certified requirements, to include the Net-ReadyPerformance Attribute Key Performance Parameter (N-R KPP) and Intelligence Supportability, that address GEOINT standards conformance and interoperability requirements for effective mission capabilities and have been developed and certified through DoD Components per NSGD 3201 (Reference j u) in order to satisfy standards prescribed by the GEOINT FM In Accordance With (IAW) DoDI 8330.01 (Reference d k) and the JCIDS Manual (Reference f).

b. Ensure mandated standards that provide solutions to the validated/certified requirements are implemented to better realize NSG-wide interoperability or submit a waiver request IAW the Joint Interoperability Test Command (JITC) Interoperability Process Guide (Reference o dd).

c. Coordinate with the GFMSA Manager(s) in the review of IT/NSS developmental, operational, and interoperability test plans to gain as much GEOINT-related assessment data from those events as possible.

d. Self-determine which opportunities in their schedule best align with the generic activities defined in NSGD 3201 for conducting and reporting in-progress self-assessments to the GFMSA Manager(s).

e. Self-assess the degree to which GEOINT data and web services designs conform to GEOINT standards, meet GFMSA objectives and criteria, and are on-track for enabling system capability requirements.

f. Self-assess the degree to which implemented GEOINT data and/or services conform to standards as specified by the system design, meet GFMSA objectives (Enclosure 4), and are on-track for enabling system capability requirements.

g. Self-assess the degree to which GEOINT-related capability and net-ready performance attribute N-R KPP measures of effectiveness and performance thresholds are met.

h. Inform the GFMSA Manager(s) about major gaps or shortfalls to achieving GEOINT standards conformance and meeting effectiveness and performance thresholds, and plans for remediation.

i. In coordination with the GFMSA Manager(s), submit documentation of standards conformance and operational validation to the Interoperability Certification Authority.

(Reference d k).

j. Require that IT programs be adequately funded to execute the interoperability functions specified in this Manual. (Reference d k).

3. GFMSA MANAGER(S)

a. Confirm the integration of GEOINT standards in systems that collect, procure, produce, serve, exchange or use GEOINT by taking part in reviews of GEOINT requirements, and by verifying the net-ready performance attribute N-R KPP and Intelligence Supportability are is adequately defined for GEOINT.

b. Review IT test strategies and developmental and operational test plans to verify that all GEOINT-related requirements are addressed.

c. Review self-assessment substantiating materials to verify that GEOINT requirements are satisfied in conformance with NSG-wide GEOINT standards.

d. Coordinate with net-ready performance attribute N-R KPP, Intelligence

Supportability, and interoperability certification authorities to ensure that GEOINT net-ready performance attribute N-R KPP and interoperability test and evaluation criteria, measures, and requirements are considered before those authorities grant certifications.

e. Represent the GEOINT FM on the Interoperability Steering Group (ISG)

(Reference d k). The ISG adjudicates Interoperability Certification requests, but may waive the requirement and issue an Interim Certification To Operate (ICTO) on DoD networks.

4. POINTS OF CONTACT

A program or project manager can obtain technical assistance with developing and implementing systems or products with GEOINT capabilities by contacting the GFMSA Manager(s).

Email: GFMSA_Team@nga.mil GFMSA_Team@nga.smil.mil GFMSA_Team@coe.ic.gov GFMSA_Team@nga.ic.gov

GFMSA Resource Sites:

https://intelshare.intelink.gov/sites/gfmsa * https://intelshare.intelink.gov/sites/gfmsa/default.aspx https://intelshare.intelink.sgov.gov/sites/gfmsa ** https://intelshare.intelink.sgov.gov/sites/gfmsa/default.aspx https://intelshare.intelink.ic.gov/sites/gfmsa https://intelshare.intelink.ic.gov/sites/gfmsa/default.aspx

* Requires .mil or .gov domain with CAC or PIV to access. To obtain a copy, send an e-mail to: GFMSA_Team@nga.mil ** Requires SIPRNET with NSS token to access https://intelshare.intelink.gov/sites/gfmsa https://intelshare.intelink.gov/sites/gfmsa/default.aspx https://intelshare.intelink.sgov.gov/sites/gfmsa https://intelshare.intelink.sgov.gov/sites/gfmsa/default.aspx https://intelshare.intelink.ic.gov/sites/gfmsa https://intelshare.intelink.ic.gov/sites/gfmsa/default.aspx mailto:GFMSA_Team@nga.mil

ENCLOSURE 3

PROCESSES

1. INTRODUCTION. The GFMSA program provides processes for program managers to obtain easily-recognized, community-wide acknowledgement that an IT component has been assessed in a credible manner and found to meet the standards conformance criteria for interoperability as set forth herein by the NSG community. Successful satisfaction of the standards conformance assessment and assertion process will optimize potential for a system to meet its GEOINT-related operational performance objectives while attaining interoperability certification (Reference d k). A general overview of items to be self-assessed and organizational responsibilities is depicted in Figure 1. See Section 3, Path to Standards-Conforming Interoperability, for details.

Figure 1. Process Documents and Actors

2. GFMSA APPROACH. The GFMSA approach includes:

a. Aids for preparation of GEOINT-related standards conformance and performance requirements, Measures of Effectiveness (MOEs), Measures of Performance (MOPs), and the net-ready performance attribute Net-Ready Key Performance Parameter (N-R

KPP).

b. GEOINT Standards Working Group (GWG)-adopted standardization objectives and criteria for GEOINT data and web services to be deemed Visible, Accessible, Understandable, Trusted, and Interoperable (VAUTI), (Reference c j). See Section 6.

GFMSA Objectives – GEOINT Data and Services.

c. Credible, yet flexible, risk-reduction processes for programs to self-assess and assert GEOINT standards conformance.

d. Identification of items to be assessed for standards conformance.

e. Information about availability and capabilities of GEOINT-related means of test and test services.

f. Guidance for meeting GEOINT-related processes and interoperability responsibilities set forth by (Reference d k) to:

(1) Confirm integration of GEOINT standards in GEOINT-related Information Support Plans (ISPs).

(2) Verify the net-ready performance attribute N-R KPP is adequately defined to address GEOINT requirements.

(3) Verify that GEOINT requirements are addressed in IT developmental, operational, and interoperability test plans.

(4) Review test results to verify that GEOINT-related requirements are satisfied.

(5) Ensure that GEOINT interoperability test and evaluation criteria, measures, and requirements are fulfilled before certification authorities grant interoperability certifications.

g. In-progress status reporting on the state of meeting GEOINT standards conformance and interoperability objectives during the system development and testing cycle.

h. The GFMSA Resource Sites (Nonclassified Internet Protocol Router Network

(NIPRNET) Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU)/Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNET)/Joint Worldwide Intelligence Communications System (JWICS)) serve as a central location for the GEOINT community to mutually share information about available test and evaluation (T&E) infrastructure, test tools, and test service providers.

3. PATH TO STANDARDS-CONFORMING INTEROPERABILITY

a. Overview. The GFMSA process defines five focus areas to assess how well system developments are progressing towards meeting the VAUTI objectives and criteria for asserting standards conforming interoperability as described in Enclosure 4.

The GFMSA cycle, depicted in Figure 2, can be an overlapping, repetitive, and/or regressive process as conditions change. The focus areas are:

(1) Identify mission capability requirements and associated Measures of

Effectiveness (MOE) and Measures of Performance (MOP).

(2) Identify data, service, and technical requirements; and establish system data and services design in conformance with applicable GEOINT standards.

(3) Verify that data and services conform to both the GEOINT standards and the system data and services design for implementing those standards.

(4) Validate that the performance of the conforming design, data, and services fulfill the approved mission capability, effectiveness, and performance requirements established in focus area 1.

(5) Submit evidence substantiating GFMSA objectives and criteria are met to the GEOINT FM for endorsement to the interoperability certification authority. GFMSA results contribute to an interoperability certification determination.

Figure 2. GFMSA Cycle

b. GEOINT-Enabled Requirements. Establishing technical design requirements for the capabilities to be enabled by GEOINT data and services is a critical activity, and component/system sponsors must resolve any requirements/capabilities issues with the appropriate Milestone Decision Authority (MDA). The GFMSA process enables identification of GEOINT requirements in the Defense and IC requirements and acquisition processes. Successful implementation of validated/certified requirements for GEOINT data and services is confirmed by GEOINT-aware T&E activities. These T&E activities reflect the requirements of the following documents:

(1) CJCSI 3170.01I, “Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS)” (Reference f o). The capabilities development process has been strengthened with the publication of CJCSI 3170.01I. The JCIDS supports the Joint Staff and the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) in identifying, assessing, and prioritizing joint military capability needs. As prescribed by the JCIDS process, technical assessment is needed to ensure IT and NSS capability and requirements documents are specified in measurable and testable forms. Appendix E to Enclosure D of the JCIDS Manual (Reference g p) provides details for the Net-Ready Key Performance Parameter which is a key part of the GFMSA process.

(1 2) Intelligence Community Policy Guidance Number 801.1, “Acquisition,” 12 July 2007, as amended, 29 January 2015 (Reference e n). This IC acquisition document includes the Intelligence Community Acquisition Model (ICAM) which defines the acquisition cycle to be used by members of the IC. Those NSG members who are also members of the IC will use this document to guide their acquisition processes. Please note that use of the ICAM does not relieve those members that are also DoD Combat Support Agencies of the requirements found in Reference d k.

(2 3) CJCSI 5123.01H G, “Charter of the Joint Requirements Oversight Council (JROC) and Implementation of the Joint Capabilities Integration and Development System (JCIDS)” (Reference g q). This Instruction canceled both N-R KPP Manual, “Net Ready Key Performance Parameter (N-R KPP)” and CJCSI 3312.01B, “Joint Military Intelligence Requirements Certification (IRC),” and now establishes the policies and procedures for both under the JCIDS. This change makes the document directly GEOINT-aware to better ensure that GFMSA objectives, associated criteria, and measurable performance parameters are addressed.

(3 4) The Appendix E to Enclosure D of the JCIDS Manual (31 August 2018 12 February 2015), “Content Guide for the Net-Ready Key Performance Parameter (N-R KPP)” (Reference f p). Testability information should be contained in the Joint Interoperability or Intelligence Supportability sections as well as in the applicable KPPs and performance attributes. This Manual defines procedures to develop the N-R KPP and its certification requirement for all IT and NSS to prepare for the review of the N-R KPP and architecture data, as applicable, in all JCIDS documents and ISPs.

(a) The N-R KPP is one of the six mandatory KPPs that must be considered.

The intent of the net-ready performance attribute N-R KPP is to ensure new systems fit into the existing architectures and infrastructure to the maximum extent practicable.

(b) For the net-ready performance attribute N-R KPP, system sponsors identify the capability requirement for each mission or function, and at least one measurable performance attribute that is critical to the system. Threshold values are then developed based on what is achievable through the current state of technology as a minimum; and objective values are based on a goal for the end-state of the system.

(c) The JCIDS Manual provides example Key Performance Parameter (KPP) attributes and performance attributes for the various Joint Capability Areas (JCAs). As examples, Table 1 lists JCIDS Manual extracts of performance attributes and intelligence supportability for data (e.g., GEOINT) dissemination, analysis, prediction, and production services. Information contained in this Manual, and on the GFMSA Resource Site, helps program/project managers and component/system sponsors bring improved GEOINT awareness to the requirements and acquisition development processes.

Table 1. Exemplar Intelligence Supportability and Net-Ready Performance Attributes

Intelligence Supportability

N-R

Attributes

T a rg e ti n g

In te ll ig e n c e ro p e ra b il it y ll ig e n

M is s io n D a ta

S p a ll ig e n ro p e ra b il it y

X Ability to authenticate users/machines and make authorization decisions for their access to information

X Ability to discover and retrieve information for all appropriate data sources

X X Ability to hold track (time and type of target)

X X Ability to integrate, evaluate, interpret, and predict knowledge and information from available sources to develop intelligence and forecast the future state

X Ability to securely transmit data from collector through a media link to a processing site

X Ability to support data relay with adequate capacity, continuity, and reliability

X X Contiguous area (wide and narrow field of view)

X X Effective range to target for onboard sensors under differing weather conditions

X X Endurance once on target

X X X X Geolocation accuracy and precision

X Image quality

X X Minimum detectable velocities

X Number and type of data sources able to be fused together

X X Resolution in National Imagery Interpretability Rating Scale (NIIRS) or Ground Sample Distance (GSD)

X X X Revisit rates or intervals

X X X Sensor tasking

X X Simultaneity

X X Spectrum covered by sensor collection

X Synoptic area coverage

X X X Time on target

X X Time to report; once data is collected, time to requested user

X X X Time to target or re-target sensors

Table 1. Exemplar N-R KPP Attributes

Contiguous area (wide and narrow field of view) Simultaneity

Synoptic area coverage

Effective range to target for onboard sensors under differing weather conditions

Time on target

You can’t test a system into standards conformance.

It must be conforming by design.

Endurance once on target

Revisit rates or intervals

Time to target or re-target sensors

Time to report; once data is collected, time to requested user

Bandwidth range collected against

Geolocation accuracy and precision

Resolution in National Imagery Interpretability Rating Scale (NIIRS) or Ground Sample Distance (GSD) Spectrum covered by sensor collection

Minimum detectable velocities

Ability to hold track (time and type of target)

Image quality Image interpretability

Ability to discover and retrieve information for all appropriate data sources Ability to authenticate users/machines and make authorization decisions for their access to information

Ability to securely transmit data from collector through a media link to a processing site

Ability to support the data relay with adequate capacity, continuity, and reliability

Ability to integrate, evaluate, interpret, and predict knowledge and information from available sources to develop intelligence and forecast the future state

Number and type of data sources able to be fused together

Time spent data mining vs. time spent performing analysis, prediction, and production

c. GEOINT Awareness by Design. Mission capability requirements are stated in operational terms typically expressed as required warfighting capabilities, or as a technological development that presents an opportunity to enhance military capabilities.

Translating mission capability requirements into an implementable system design for which GEOINT data and services are in conformance with applicable GEOINT standards is critical for achieving mission capabilities in an enterprise such as that supporting the NSG. Assessing the design (GEOINT data and service specifications) for standards conformance promotes program confidence that the data and service design solution will satisfy the desired mission capabilities.

d. GEOINT Standards and Development Timelines. A common design and development decision point is when to freeze the design and the versions of GEOINT standards. GFMSA objectives and criteria for data and services may be satisfied using older versions of GEOINT standards when mission requirements are met under one or more of the following circumstances:

(1) The design-selected GEOINT standards were cited in the DISR/IC ESB baseline at the time the data and/or services specification design was frozen.

(2) The design-selected GEOINT standards are cited in a configuration managed product specification, services interface control document, implementation profile, or similar design documentation current at the time the data content and/or services design was frozen.

(3) The design-selected GEOINT standards remain generally supported within the

NSG enterprise, and are supported by intended use applications and users in supporting mission effective capabilities.

e. GEOINT-Aware Testing and Assessment Reporting

(1) While the terms “verification and validation” are often used together, there is an important distinction depicted in the GFMSA cycle to first verify conformance with the design and its use of GEOINT standards, and then validate that the conforming data and services fulfill the mission capability requirements. Verification of standards conformance is principally conducted during the developmental testing phase. Verification should be substantially completed as one of the entry conditions considered at the test-readiness-review prior to proceeding to validation test activities during the operational test phase. Test planning commences during the early stages of the requirements definition and acquisition processes.

(Enclosure 4, Section 2), Test and Evaluation Planning, Conduct, and Reporting).

(2) Program/Project Managers conduct in-progress assessments prior to Milestone (MS) or major program reviews to ensure that all appropriate GEOINT capabilities have been accounted for, and design considerations have been made. The GFMSA process tracks the in-progress degree of satisfying GFMSA objectives and criteria for those programs on the path to standards conformance-based interoperability at these significant requirements and acquisition decision points and milestones. Early GEOINT considerations will decrease overall program costs, maximize a program’s GEOINT capability, and decrease GEOINT-related technical and schedule risk. Further, in-progress reviews increase the likelihood of meeting GFMSA objectives and criteria.

(3) Typically, programs/projects conduct and report five focus area four in-progress assessments of GEOINT standards conformance in consonance with the system’s acquisition phase stages corresponding to:

(a) Requirements definition and validation

(b) Standards selection and system design

Early GEOINT considerations will decrease overall program costs, maximize a program’s GEOINT capability, and decrease GEOINT-related technical and schedule risk.

(c) Standards implementation and development testing

(d) Operational and interoperability testing

(e) Interoperability Certification

f. Substantiation

(1) Program/Project managers conduct self-assessments, and submit evidence substantiating that GFMSA objectives and criteria have been successfully met. Sources of substantiating evidence include results from documentation reviews, analysis, demonstrations, evaluations, examinations, inspections, tests, questionnaires, surveys, conformance registers, collateral sources, and similar activities that confirm conforming implementation of GEOINT standards in a manner enabling interoperability across the NSG enterprise. Refer to the online GFMSA Resource Site (Enclosure 2, Section 4, Points of Contact for the link) for self-assessment tools and instructions about making evidence submissions.

(2) Configuration Management (CM) plays a significant role in the GFMSA process.

GFMSA objectives and criteria must be reassessed when version changes occur to data and/or services supporting mission capability requirements. The assessment rigor and substantiation evidence will be commensurate with the nature and extent of the changes to the earlier assessed version. Program/ Project Managers, in coordination with the GEOINT FM staff, submit evidence of GEOINT standards conformance and operational validation to the Interoperability Certification Authority (Reference d k).

g. In-Progress Status Indicators. In-progress status indicators are organized by GFMSA Cycle focus areas as described in 3.a (1)-(5) and depicted in Figure 2, above.

Those performing the in-progress assessment assign progress indicator values in consonance with the system’s acquisition phase stages at time of assessment. The indicator values are listed in Table 2, below. High level questions for those focus areas, by number, are:

(1) Focus Area 1. Identify Mission Capability Requirements and MOE/MOP.

(a) Validated/Certified requirements and net-ready performance attribute N-R KPP thresholds and objectives address GEOINT standards conformance and interoperability requirements sufficient to enable effective mission capabilities.

(b) Acquisition documents require implementation of GEOINT standards with means to deliver substantiating evidence of GEOINT standards conformance and interoperability.

(2) Focus Area 2. Identify Data, Services and Technical Requirements, and

Establish Design.

(a) GEOINT data design conforms to GEOINT standards, meets VAUTI objectives and is on-track for enabling system mission.

(b) GEOINT services design conforms to GEOINT standards, meets VAUTI objectives and is on-track for enabling system mission.

(3) Focus Area 3. Verify Data/Services Conformance to Standards and System

Design.

(a) GEOINT data conforms to standards as specified by the system design, meets VAUTI objectives and is on-track for enabling system capability requirements.

(b) GEOINT services conform to standards as specified by the system design, meet VAUTI objectives and are on-track for enabling system capability requirements.

(4) Focus Area 4. Validate Performance Fulfills Mission Capability Requirements.

(a) GEOINT-related capability effectiveness and performance thresholds are met.

(b) GEOINT-related net-ready performance attribute N-R KPP effectiveness and performance thresholds are met.

(5) Focus Area 5. Submit GFMSA Evidence to Interoperability Certification Authority (Reference d k).

(a) GEOINT FM-approved evidence of GEOINT standards conformance submitted to Interoperability Certification Authority.

(b) System is interoperability certified.

Table 2. In-Progress Indicator

Score Assessment Assessment Status Description

80%-100% Assessed;

On Track

High probability of standards conformance: metric substantially met for the in-progress phase under evaluation.

60% - 79% Assessed;

On Track with Shortfalls

Working toward GEOINT standards conformance: metric progressing for the in-progress phase under evaluation, but not yet met.

0% - 59% Assessed;

Not On Track

Low probability of standards conformance: inadequate (little/no) progress made toward meeting the metric for the in-progress phase.

Not Assessed;

Status Unknown

No activity/attempt has been made towards evaluating the metric during the in-progress stage under evaluation.

Assessed;

Not On Track

Inadequate (little/no) progress made toward meeting the metric, or attempts to meet the metric have failed during the in-progress stage under evaluation.

Assessed;

Marginally On Track

Metric marginally progressing for the in-progress stage under evaluation, but not yet met.

Assessed;

On Track with Shortfalls

Metric progressing for the in-progress phase under evaluation, but not yet met.

Assessed;

On Track with Minor Shortfalls

Metric actively progressing for the in-progress stage under evaluation, but not yet met.

Assessed;

On Track

Metric substantially met for the in-progress stage under evaluation.

h. Overall Assessment Status Levels. In recognition that many programs are already in development or fielded (are not new starts), three levels of overall GFMSA status are defined to characterize continuing progress toward achieving GFMSA objectives. The overall assessment status level is derived from the scores the in-progress status indicators identified in Table 2. The scores are expressed as rounded integers as they are only estimates. The Summary Tab of the GFMSA Scorecard states:

Estimate/Likelihood of GEOINT Standards Conformance* *This is not a guarantee, but an indicator of conformance.

(1) Green (80% - 100%). Green status is for programs/projects that substantially meet, or are on the path to substantially meet, the GFMSA objectives and criteria in context of the acquisition phase stages or development phase for which the assessment is conducted.

(2) Yellow (60% - 79%). Yellow status is for programs/projects that are not quite on the path to meet GFMSA objectives and criteria, but the deficiencies pose low operational risk and resolution will occur in a planned acquisition phase stages, development phase, or incremental upgrade to the system.

(3) Red (0% - 59%). Red status is for programs/projects that are not on a path that will meet GFMSA objectives and criteria (e.g., deficiencies pose high operational risk with no plan or expectation of resolution).

i. Acknowledgement. Findings, results, and status are incorporated into the GEOINT

Manager’s Annual Report to inform the SecDef, the DNI, and the NSG on the state of GEOINT standards conformance, and achievement of NSG-wide interoperability by assessed IT. Components/systems assessed to GFMSA objectives and criteria are available to the submitting program in the Program Document Library on their Program SharePoint site which is a sub-site of cited on applicable registers within the GFMSA Registry on the GFMSA SharePoint Resource Site.

j. GFMSA SharePoint Resource Site. The online GFMSA SharePoint Resource Site provides a centralized location for programs/projects to submit GFMSA substantiation materials, track in-progress status, and a document library for self-assessment feedback by use of the In-Progress Review registry to acknowledge successful completion of GFMSA objectives. Individual sub-sites registers are established to reflect the general categories of NSG components/systems for which NSG objectives and criteria have been established.

This site also contains informational resources in support of the GFMSA process.

These resources include:

(1) An overview description of the GFMSA procedures.

(2) A description of the GFMSA objectives and criteria applicable to each sub-site

Register.

(3) An area with information regarding the “State of Testability” for GEOINT standards and known test services providers.

(4) Information about technical services that are made available to program/project offices.

(5) GFMSA-specific documentation with a content synopsis for each document.

(6) An area to post draft GFMSA documentation for community review.

(7) An announcement and bulletin area for highlighting ongoing and planned events.

(8) A means for users to ascertain content has changed since last visiting the site.

k. Waiver Process. The GFMSA program honors waivers approved by standards and interoperability waiver decision authorities. GFMSA status is based on meeting the objectives and criteria stated herein (see paragraph 3.h, Overall Assessment Status Levels). For the DoD, the process for managing and granting waivers to standards is addressed in DoDI 8310.01, Information Technology Standards in the DoD. The process for managing and granting waivers to interoperability certification is addressed in DoDI 8330.01, Interoperability of Information Technology (IT), including National Security Systems (NSS). A similar process takes place for the IC (Reference r) and other NSG member organizations. The GEOINT FM coordinates with and advises NSG member organizations on matters involving requested waivers to GEOINT standards, and represents NSG enterprise interests to decision-making authorities when considering waiver requests.

l. Dispute Resolution. Disputes concerning the provisions of this Manual, including applicability to IT Systems, conduct of the GFMSA process, assessment results, and/or agreement between PMs and GFMSA Manager(s) regarding which standards should apply to specific programs should be first worked between PMs and GFMSA Manager(s), and if needed, elevated to Component Heads and the GEOINT FM. If no resolution is reached between Component Heads and the GEOINT FM, per NSGD 3201 (Reference j u) disputes are referred to DNI or USD(I) for resolution.

4. BENEFITS

a. Program and project managers executing GFMSA benefit from:

(1) Technical consultation for the identification and implementation of GEOINT standards necessary for the system.

(2) Assistance in preparing GEOINT-related inputs for Test and Evaluation

Strategies, Test and Evaluation Master Plans (TEMPs), and similar test planning documentation.

(3) Identification of GEOINT-aware test service providers.

(4) NSG-vetted test criteria and measures for GEOINT.

(5) Improved GEOINT test and evaluation cost projections for budget planning.

(6) Sample data exemplifying proper application of GEOINT data standards.

(7) Access to sample service interfaces exemplifying proper application of GEOINT interface standards.

(8) In-progress assessment and review services provided as part of development process to minimize risk of inadvertent misapplication of GEOINT standards.

(9) Reduced technical and schedule risk achieved through ready access to

GEOINT expertise.

(10) Reduced risk of GEOINT “surprise test findings” at the end.

(11) Increased confidence that GEOINT aspects of system development are on track.

b. Benefits to Program Oversight Bodies. GFMSA assessments provide critical GEOINT-related performance information to senior leadership and oversight bodies, enabling them to manage programs better and arrive at better decisions supported by more detailed GEOINT-specific information. This equates to more informed decisions promoting DoD/IC objectives for cost avoidance and savings. Benefits include:

(1) Improved insight for the degree to which GEOINT-enabled capabilities are realized in support of military operations.

(2) Quantifiable measures for the effective exchange of GEOINT information for both anticipated and unanticipated users.

(3) Earlier ability to identify gaps in GEOINT standards conformance to anticipate functional capability gaps likely impacting interoperability.

(4) Ease of integration of new GEOINT-aware data source capabilities into the NSG enterprise.

(5) Applicability to various acquisition models to include post-acquisition (legacy), incrementally delivered, and fielded systems and system components.

VAUTI

Data, information, and IT services will be made visible, accessible, understandable, trusted, and interoperable throughout their lifecycles for all authorized users.

Key enablers necessary for sharing data, information, and IT services and ensuring data, information, and IT services are visible, accessible, understandable, trustworthy, and interoperable. (DoDI 8320.07)

IC elements shall ensure that new IT systems or significant changes to existing IT systems provide the capability for discovery, dissemination, and retrieval of information collected or analysis produced through automated means. (ICD 501)

ENCLOSURE 4

ASSESSMENT OBJECTIVES AND CRITERIA

1. INTRODUCTION

a. Net-Centric Data and Services Objectives.1 (References c j, m, bb, and c)

(1) The general net-centric objectives for any type or variety of…