Regional ITS Architecture Assessment Checklist
:
:
:
: Regional
:
:
:
:
:
Each lettered question is essentially a yes/no question but there are places where you will need to make a determination of how adequate or complete a certain item is covered in an architecture.
With that in mind, questions can be answered Mostly if you determine that an architecture is close to being complete in a particular area or Partly if it appears to partially address the criteria but still needs significant enhancement. Unknown may be used if you cannot tell from the documentation whether the architecture satisfies the criteria. Not Applicable is an appropriate answer if an item truly doesn't apply to that architecture – there are no adjacent regions, for instance.
General Architecture Scope and Region Description Comments Here
Question Answer Comments a. Is the geographic region of the architecture clearly defined? If so, are the boundaries still accurate and applicable for the next update? b. Has a timeframe for the architecture been defined? If so, is the timeframe adequate to support intended use in planning, programming, and project implementation? c. Has the range of services included in the regional architecture been defined? If so, is the range of services still applicable to the next update?
1/ 6 5/23/2012

Regional ITS Architecture Assessment Checklist d. Are all adjacent/overlapping ITS architectures that should be considered in the next update identified?
General Stakeholders Comments Here
Question Answer a. Are the stakeholders identified in sufficient detail to understand who the players are including agency/department name and jurisdiction? b. Is the stakeholders list up-todate? Is it still commensurate with the anticipated scope of the updated regional architecture? c. Were the key stakeholders all involved in the architecture development process? Will the same stakeholders be involved in the update? d. Was a champion established, either individual or group, to lead the development of the architecture?
Will the same champion lead the update?
General System Inventory Comments Here
Question Answer a. Has a system inventory been defined that includes a list of applicable regional system elements along with descriptions and assigned stakeholders? b. Is the inventory up-to-date? Is it still commensurate with the anticipated scope of the updated regional architecture? c. Have the National ITS
Architecture subsystems and terminators been correctly linked to regional elements? d. Does the inventory take into account all current adjacent or overlapping regional ITS architectures? e. (Optional) Does the inventory appropriately map regionally unique elements to user-defined entities that are described in sufficient detail to understand their function?
General Needs and Services Comments Here
Question Answer
2/ 6
Comments
Comments
Comments
5/23/2012

Regional ITS Architecture Assessment Checklist a. Are transportation needs for the region defined and described? If so, are the documented needs consistent with the current needs of the region? b. Are transportation services, derived from the needs, defined and described? If so, do the documented services still cover the region’s needs? c. Are the services adequately represented in the regional architecture? (e.g., Are services linked to inventory elements?)
General Operational Concept Comments Here
Question Answer a. Has an architecture operational concept been described in sufficient detail to understand the roles and responsibilities of the primary stakeholders in the region in the delivery of ITS services? b. Are the documented roles and responsibilities consistent with current operations strategies of stakeholders in the region? c. Are the roles and responsibilities of the operational concept appropriately reflected in the architecture?
General Functional Requirements Comments Here
Question Answer a. Have high-level functions been defined for each regionally significant element in the architecture? b. Are the requirements unambiguously stated in terms of shall statements or similar language such that the required functions of each system can be easily understood?
General Interfaces/ Information Flows Comments Here
Question Answer a. Are information flows defined between elements with descriptions of the information exchanged and their deployment status (existing, planned, etc.)?
Comments
Comments
Comments
3/ 6 5/23/2012

Regional ITS Architecture Assessment Checklist b. Does the architecture include appropriate linkages to elements outside the region or to elements from overlapping or adjacent regional architectures? c. Does the architecture address the significant integration opportunities implied by the inventory, needs/services, and the operational concept? Are the identified interfaces up-to-date? d. (Optional) Does the architecture consider regionally unique interfaces (defined via user-defined flows) and are they described in sufficient detail to understand their purpose?
General Project Sequencing Comments Here
Question Answer a. Have projects been defined to include the agencies involved, timeframe, and how each is tied to the regional architecture? b. Is the list of projects up-to-date and consistent with ITS projects that are programmed and planned for the region? c. Have the relationships to the regional architecture and the interdependencies between projects been defined? d. Has an initial sequencing of currently defined projects been established? e. (Optional) Have opportunities to coordinate implementation schedules with other transportation improvements been investigated?
General Agreements Comments Here
Question Answer a. Have existing interagency agreements in the region been identified/considered by the regional architecture? Is the list of existing agreements up-to-date? b. Have future agreements been identified to implement the regional architecture and support project interoperability? Is the list of future agreements complete and up-todate?
Comments
Comments
4/ 6 5/23/2012

Regional ITS Architecture Assessment Checklist
General Standards Identification Comments Here
Question Answer a. Has a plan been documented for how ITS standards will be considered, selected, and/or applied across the region? b. Has a listing of ITS standards been generated and tailored that are applicable to the region and projects coming out of the regional ITS architecture? c. Are these standards associated with specific interfaces (information flows or interconnects)? d. Do the important/relevant ITS standards appear to be identified?
Comments
General Using the Regional ITS Architecture Comments Here
Question Answer Comments a. Is the architecture output presented in a way that is understandable to a variety of audiences, including the public and decision-makers? b. Is there a detailed description for incorporating and using the regional
ITS architecture in the regional and/or statewide planning process?
Does the description reflect your current Concept of Use? c. Are planners using the regional
ITS architecture as described? If not, why not? d. Is the relationship between the regional ITS architecture and the project implementation process well defined? Does the documentation reflect your current Concept of Use? e. Are project sponsors accessing and using the regional ITS architecture as described? If not, why not?
General Maintenance Plan Comments Here
Question Answer Comments
5/ 6 5/23/2012

Regional ITS Architecture Assessment Checklist a. Is there a specific documented plan for maintaining the architecture, including how changes are evaluated, who is involved, what configuration control processes are in place, and when/how often updates are made? b. Have the various reasons for updating the architecture been addressed (project updates, new requirements or initiatives, etc.)? c. Is there a plan for communicating changes in the architecture to stakeholders? d. Have the responsibilities of the various stakeholders or groups been well defined with respect to architecture maintenance? e. Is configuration control being used for the architecture outputs
(e.g. version numbering schemes, naming conventions, date/time stamps, etc.)? f. Has the architecture been updated per the plan, periodically and/or consistent with scheduled
LRTP updates?
6/ 6 5/23/2012