DRAFT Unified Accreditation Program Feasibility Study
This material is DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION only and has not been reviewed by the HIAWG.
Â
Â
DELETE THIS ROW IN ACTUAL FORM | Â | DELETE THIS GUIDANCE COLUMN ONCE THE FORM IS COMPLETED |
Work Product Title (short) | Unified Accreditation and Approval Program Feasibility Study Report | The name by which this work product will be known. Keep it short. Should end in "Report", "Proposed Standard" or other noun signifying the 'physical' deliverable. |
---|---|---|
Work Product Information | Â | |
Type of work product | Feasibility Study | "Report", "Proposed Standard", "Reference Document", "Feasibility Study", "Glossary", "Registry", "Assessment Criteria", or similar noun. |
Commissioned by (Sponsor) | ??? TBD | Identify the Sponsor - the person who declared the need for this work product. Should be an individual. The individual may represent a group or organization - if so, include that information. This should be an entity with a direct interest in the outcome of the work product. The Sponsor is not necessarily the target consumer of this work. The Sponsor is accountable for advising and directing the working team on content to ensure the purpose is achieved. |
Commissioned for the purpose of | Determining the feasibility of and options for the consolidation or unification several Trust Framework Accreditation and Approval Programs to reduce administrative burden and cost to Approved IDP, Credential Service Providers and other Service Component Organizations. | State the rationale behind doing this work and creating this deliverable. Work Products should be publishable (post-approval) and directly add value to the Commission-er and the Target Consumer. Indirect or general work should be the exception, not the rule. |
Synopsis | Analysis of the Trust Framework Accreditation and Approval Programs of FICAM TFS, Kantara, DirectTrust, Federal Bridge CA, tScheme or NIST-based Trust Framework schemes.
This work product will not examine the Assessment Criteria for commonality or conflict - that will fall to a separate work product. | Describe the expected content. Is this Research on a subject? Guidance? Requirements? Standards? Criteria? |
Work Product Beneficiaries | Credential Providers and Identity Verification/Proofing Providers seeking Approval under the FICAM TFS, Kantara, DirectTrust, Federal Bridge CA, tScheme or NIST-based Trust Framework schemes. Assessors and Auditors Accredited under these Trust Framework schemes. For convenience, the term Credential & Identity Service Provider (CISP) will be used to describe the Credential Provider and Identity Verification/Proofing Provider beneficiary group. | Who or what will benefit and realize value from this work product? This can be individuals, types of entities, organizations or industry associations. These are typically called 'stakeholders' - representatives of these beneficiaries should be eager to contribute to the work, see real reasons to do the work, and be able to provide either Requirements or Content directly based on their experience or needs. |
General Approach | The high level approach will be to compare the published documentation about each of the Assessment and Approval Programs with respect to processes, requirements and governance features. Experts from Credential & Identity Providers and Accredited Assessor communities will provide expertise based on their working knowledge of the programs and schemes. | Describe the high level approach to create the work product. Interviews? Subject Matter Experts contributing material? Internet/document research? Case Study? Testing? |
Meeting Minutes Cross-Reference | TBD | Reference at least one HIAWG meeting where the Work Product was discussed during origination. |
Work Product Timelines | Â | |
Terms of Reference Date | TBD | The date this Terms of Reference was substantially complete and ratified by the HIAWG. This is effectively the start date of this work. |
Deadline Date | unknown TBD | If there is an actual deadline date for the work product, state it here. Do not use false dates to try to force progress - they have negative long term effects. |
HIAWG First Review Date | TBD | The date by which the HIAWG should expect to see work in progress for discussion or review. Adjust as needed until it occurs. |
HIAWG Final Draft Date | TBD | The anticipated for the Final Draft to be delivered to the HIAWG for next steps (ratification, review cycle, etc.) |
Sponsor Receipt Date | TBD | The anticipated date for delivery to the Sponsor (in draft or final state - you choose) |
Work Product Desired Outcomes and Results | Â | |
The Expected Value Increase |
| Identify how the beneficiaries will realize value and benefit from this work. Use phrases like: "Beneficiary X decreases time to become approved" or "Beneficiary Y increases market penetration". The pattern is {{ Beneficiary }} {{ Increases OR Decreases }} {{ Business objective or thing }} For each Beneficiary, there should be at least 3 beneficial outcomes - if fewer, they are probably not Beneficiaries. |
Work Product Resource Assignments | Â | |
Leader responsible for delivery | Terry Gold | The individual (plus one alternate if needed) who is accountable for delivering the completed Work Product to the HIAWG. The Leader must stay in contact with the Sponsor as the work progresses. |
Individual Contributors | Â | The list of individuals who are actively contributing. Optionally, indicate how they are contributing (Writer, SME, Reviewer, Editor, etc). Please try to avoid listing contributors who do not actually contribute to the work. |
Kantara Resources | TBD | Staff required to support this work product (pre-approval by Executive Director required) |
Work Product File Locations | Â | |
Wiki | Â | A link to the Wiki space for this work product |
Listserv | Â | If email tools other than the normal HIAWG lists are used, declare them here |