Skip to content

Design Review

LMU/COICP Example

Design Review Example

Record the LMU/COICP design review for LMU-COICP-DES-001, including scenario coverage, findings, acceptance decision, implementation carry-forward actions, and downstream testing implications.

ES-105 Review Design Decision

Project

LMU Campus Operations and Incident Coordination Platform

Document control

Field Value
Artifact owner COICP Product Engineer
Primary reviewers Architecture Review Board chair, IT security reviewer, AI reviewer, Compliance reviewer, Campus Safety liaison
Status Accepted with carried-forward actions
Last updated 2026-07-06
Related Engineering Stage ES-105 — Design
Project workspace target docs/project-workspace/design/design_review.md

Design context

Field Value
Source architecture package ES-104 — Architecture
Design baseline produced LMU-COICP-DES-001
Implementation baseline expected next LMU-COICP-IMPL-001
Integrated baseline expected later LMU-COICP-INT-001
Release candidate expected later LMU-COICP-RC-001
Downstream release posture Internal engineering review only
Planned downstream review environment LMU-COICP Internal Engineering Review Environment
Planned downstream dataset Spring Semester Synthetic Incident Dataset
Planned downstream synthetic records 421
Planned downstream reviewer accounts 24
Planned downstream review window March 18–22, 2026
AI Incident Summary Deferred / disabled
Operational pilot Not approved

Scenario coverage review

Scenario Design Coverage Finding
COICP-SYN-001 Information Commons leak create incident, evidence event sufficient for implementation
COICP-SYN-118 Damen Hall water leak handoff, owner change, evidence timeline, future review package evidence failure behavior must be verified
COICP-SYN-204 Mertz Hall door access issue Residence Life access scope, denied export role matrix must be tested
COICP-SYN-219 Cudahy Science HVAC outage status update, closure rationale, evidence event invalid transition risk must be tested
COICP-SYN-322 emergency-related safety concern emergency-boundary block and redirection wording requires Campus Safety confirmation
COICP-SYN-407 Mundelein Wi-Fi disruption ownership and IT handoff scenario useful but not required for first increment

Findings

ID Finding Severity Action Owner Status
DRF-001 COICP-SYN-118 handoff evidence depends on reliable EvidenceEvent writes. High Carry to implementation and ES-109 TC-007. COICP Product Engineer / ARB chair Open
DRF-002 Residence Life and Facilities role boundaries are clear but require matrix testing. Medium Carry to implementation and ES-109 access tests. IT security reviewer Open
DRF-003 AI Incident Summary disabled behavior is clear. Medium Preserve feature-disabled state through implementation and release. AI reviewer Open
DRF-004 COICP-SYN-322 emergency-boundary behavior is designed, but final wording needs Campus Safety approval. Medium Carry to implementation and testing. Campus Safety liaison Open
DRF-005 Closure rationale for COICP-SYN-219 is designed, but status transition rules require implementation detail. Medium Define transition table in implementation readiness. COICP Product Engineer Open
DRF-006 Review package for COICP-SYN-118 should be deferred until evidence timeline stabilizes. Medium Defer export implementation if needed. ARB chair / Product Engineer Open

Review decision

Accepted with carried-forward actions. The design package is specific enough for ES-106 Implementation Readiness.

Continue to Design Readiness Summary

Summarize the ES-105 package and decide whether implementation readiness can begin.

Open Design Readiness Summary →