Comparison of EPA's QMS to SEI's CMMI

EPA and other government organizations make decisions based on environmental measurements. How good are the data? How well are the data generators performing? What measurements apply to them? How can the data life cycle processes be improved so data generators can continually provide the best data? EPA's Quality Management System requirements go beyond evaluation of environmental data quality itself to examine systems associated with production, collection, processing (validation/verification), transfer, reduction, storage, and retrieval of data throughout a life cycle. This QMS specifies minimum quality requirements for particular environmental programs. But how can you measure and compare programs that go well beyond the minimum, towards optimal quality? This paper compares EPA's requirements for Quality Management Systems (R2) and Project Plans (R5) to the Software Engineering Institute Capability Maturity Model (CMMISM). The CMMISM model provides for growth (staged or continuous) and a comprehensive assessment that is not yet provided in EPA's R2 or R5. Properly implemented, the CMMISM model serves as a quality framework for integrating and aligning organizational processes and implementing a program of continual process improvements. It identifies process areas ("things to do"), and provides measures of performance ("how well things are done") against specific goals and practices. CMMISM uses a Systems Engineering Management approach, built on process models, that helps identify "how good" the system is. Goodness is defined as stages in a complete model for optimal operation. CMMISM provides two methods for evaluating the goodness of the project. The Staged model in CMMISM provides a Maturity Level that is a well-defined evolutionary plateau describing the manner in which a specified set of processes are performed. As the organization advances in maturity, these levels become more defined and processes are tailored for specific project needs. The other method is called the Continuous Model in CMMISM, and it allows you to achieve Capability Levels. These are used to describe how well each project is doing in relationship to the different process areas. There are six Capability Levels from 0-5 that apply to individual process areas. Organizations using the Capability Level approach can select individual process areas that are important to specific projects and work to improve the processes. Improving capability in individual process areas raises the organization's overall quality of products delivered. The Continuous Model, unlike the Staged Model, lets you pick higher maturity level process areas before completing all of the ones below. Environmental measurement programs need to focus on the quality of the systems where data are collected, processed, transferred, and so forth. DynCorp built on the quality foundation from our experience with R2 to successfully implement CMMISM practices in the development of Forms II Lite and other applications. DynCorp is now migrating to the CMMISM model that has evolved from the existing CMM model. The CMMISM model focuses on the full cycle of Requirements Management from identification, development, collection, refinement, analysis, and validation throughout a project life cycle. It also has a more refined focus on the identification, development, collection, analysis, and evaluation of meaningful measurements, so the results can be used to improve a process or product.