Planning Example

LMU/COICP Example

Planning Example

Use the LMU/COICP ES-103 planning package to see how accepted requirements become scenario-driven work packages, milestones, roles, risks, dependencies, estimates, review evidence, and readiness for Architecture.

ES-103 Planning Package Start Here

Example AreaLMU/COICP

Current PagePlanning Example

FocusLMU/COICP planning package

UseRead completed ES-103 artifacts

Repository Areadocs/examples/lmu-coicp/planning/

← Back Requirements Readiness Summary

Current Planning Example

Next → Planning Overview

Purpose

This section contains the completed ES-103 — Planning example for the LMU Campus Operations and Incident Coordination Platform.

The planning package turns the accepted Requirements baseline into LMU-COICP-PLAN-001, a scenario-driven plan for Architecture. The plan is not generic and it is not a schedule pretending uncertainty is gone. It plans the concrete business problems that later flow into Architecture, Design, Implementation, Integration, Testing, Release, Operations, Deployment, Monitoring, Stewardship, and Governance.

Planning context

Field	Value
Source requirements package	ES-102 — Requirements and Constraints
Planning baseline produced	LMU-COICP-PLAN-001
Architecture baseline expected next	LMU-COICP-ARCH-001
Design baseline expected later	LMU-COICP-DES-001
Implementation baseline expected later	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

LMU business scenarios planned in ES-103

Scenario ID	Scenario	Business Problem	Planning Decision Needed	Architecture Handoff
COICP-SYN-001	Information Commons ceiling leak near public printer area	Campus Operations needs a fast, low-friction way to create a non-emergency facilities coordination record.	Include as baseline create/intake scenario.	Create workflow, current state, creation evidence
COICP-SYN-118	Damen Hall water leak affecting evening student event setup	Campus Operations must hand off to Facilities without losing accountability or timeline evidence.	Treat as primary handoff/evidence scenario.	Owner change, status change, handoff evidence, future review package
COICP-SYN-204	Residence hall exterior door access issue at Mertz Hall	Residence Life needs scoped visibility without broad export or unrelated incident access.	Treat as access-control and role-scope scenario.	Role model, protected data, denied export
COICP-SYN-219	HVAC outage affecting three evening classrooms in Cudahy Science	Facilities needs status progression and closure rationale after mitigation.	Treat as status-transition and closure scenario.	State model, closure evidence, invalid transition risk
COICP-SYN-322	Emergency-related safety concern mistakenly entered as COICP item	Campus Safety must prevent COICP from becoming emergency dispatch or notification workflow.	Treat as boundary/rejection scenario.	Scope check, emergency warning, blocked normal incident
COICP-SYN-407	Wi-Fi disruption affecting scheduled class check-in in Mundelein Center	Campus Operations and IT need ownership visibility without turning COICP into enterprise ITSM.	Treat as optional IT handoff extension.	Optional owner assignment / handoff extension

Recommended workflow

Planning Overview
      ↓
Work Breakdown Structure
      ↓
Milestones
      ↓
Roles and Responsibilities
      ↓
Risk Register
      ↓
Dependency Map
      ↓
Estimation Record
      ↓
Planning Review
      ↓
Planning Readiness Summary
      ↓
ES-104 Architecture

Repository location

docs/examples/lmu-coicp/planning/

In a project workspace, the comparable evidence would normally live under:

docs/project-workspace/planning/

Example set

01

Planning Overview

Introduce LMU-COICP-PLAN-001, the scenario set, assumptions, work areas, and architecture handoff.

02

Work Breakdown Structure

Decompose realistic LMU scenario work into traceable work packages.

03

Milestones

Define readiness points for scenario selection, roles, evidence, AI deferment, and architecture start.

04

Roles and Responsibilities

Assign LMU-specific ownership for scenario, access, evidence, compliance, AI, and architecture readiness.

05

Risk Register

Record planning risks tied to the six LMU scenarios and downstream defects.

06

Dependency Map

Identify decisions and inputs that Architecture and Design need to stay concrete.

07

Estimation Record

Estimate effort with uncertainty, review time, and evidence-production effort included.

08

Planning Review

Record scenario coverage, findings, and planning acceptance conditions.

09

Planning Readiness Summary

Summarize readiness to begin Architecture with concrete scenario handoff.

Planning Boundary

Planning prepares internal engineering review only. It does not approve operational pilot, production use, real campus incident data, AI Incident Summary, emergency response, or sensitive-record processing.

Begin with Planning Overview

Start by seeing how accepted Requirements become a scenario-driven ES-103 planning baseline.

Open Planning Overview →