STAKEHOLDER | IMPACT/ | DESIRED OUTCOME | DEMAND FOR ESIGNATURES | PRIORITIES/ ENABLERS | CONCERNS/ BARRIERS | VALUE PROPOSITION | STRATEGY FOR ACTION | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Who are the people who will be affected by what we want to do? | How can this group affect, positively or otherwise, what we want to do? | What specifically do we want this group to do with regard to our initiative? | What did they say they were interested in during initial meetings? | What is important to these stakeholders? | What are these stakeholders worried about? | Does what we're doing offer any specific benefit(s) to this group? | What do we plan to do to influence/ achieve the desired outcome? | ||||||
Primary pilot candidates | eSignature team or program office have identified this program as potential pilot |
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
National Permit System | Serve as a source of learning for our team | We want them to have their solution go through our evaluation process to test our evaluation criteria |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Secondary pilot candidates | eSignature team has had preliminary discussions with these program offices |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Other Potential pilots | eSignature team has not yet "pitched" the idea of a pilot to these program offices |
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Internal Stakeholders |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
IT Experts |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
CIO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Project Management Team for FIS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Office of Policy |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Program Offices (i.e., Fisheries) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Regional Offices | must ultimately implement systems using our design | participate in our project |
| efficient operations | fraud | improved customer satisfaction |
| ||||||
Office of Law Enforcement |
|
|
|
|
|
| Has to review and possibly approve solutions? | Would like them to help shape alternatives and criteria to ensure approval | Necessary to enable electronic reporting and ensure accountability | Accuracy of data and accountability for data submitted | Solution(s) need to withstand judicial scrutiny and be consistent with case law | improves accuracy , makes individuals legally responsible for data they submit regardless of report | Get it right the first time and include OLE staff on team to help with "reach back" into organization and get hands on expertise. |
General Counsel | GCF (in conjunction with F/CIO and GCEL) must approve our project outcome | advise, answer questions, and ultimately approve |
| legal sufficiency | increased difficulty of prosecution | no | maintain lines of communication | ||||||
NOAA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Commerce |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Service providers (examples) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
Professional/Trade Groups (examples) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |||||||
Partner Organizations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
States (e.g., Alaska) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Countries (e.g., Canada) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Commissions (e.g., Tuna or Halibut) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
End User Community |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Non-profit organizations (filers) |
| File for themselves or on behalf of others |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
For-profit organizations (filers) |
| File for themselves or on behalf of others |
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Individuals (filers) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
*Oversight/ Public Interest* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
OMB |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Congress (authorizing committees) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
Congress (appropriating committees) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||||||
GAO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Page Comparison
General
Content
Integrations