Skip to content

Planning Readiness Summary

LMU/COICP Example

Planning Readiness Summary Example

Build the LMU/COICP planning baseline around concrete scenarios that flow into Architecture and later stages.

ES-103 Readiness Architecture Handoff

Example purpose

This artifact is part of the ES-103 — Planning package for the LMU Campus Operations and Incident Coordination Platform. It keeps planning tied to realistic LMU business problems rather than generic categories.

Project

LMU Campus Operations and Incident Coordination Platform

Document control

Field Value
Artifact owner COICP Product Engineer
Primary reviewers COICP Product Owner, Architecture Review Board chair, IT security reviewer, AI reviewer, Compliance reviewer, Campus Safety liaison
Status Accepted for ES-103 planning baseline
Last updated 2026-07-06
Related Engineering Stage ES-103 — Planning
Project workspace target docs/project-workspace/planning/planning_readiness_summary.md

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

Readiness decision

Decision: Ready to proceed to Architecture with scenario-specific carry-forward actions.

The planning package is ready because it defines the business problems Architecture must model:

  • COICP-SYN-001 Information Commons leak intake;
  • COICP-SYN-118 Damen Hall Facilities handoff;
  • COICP-SYN-204 Mertz Hall Residence Life access;
  • COICP-SYN-219 Cudahy Science HVAC closure;
  • COICP-SYN-322 emergency-boundary rejection;
  • COICP-SYN-407 optional IT ownership extension.

Architecture handoff

Scenario Architecture Must Model
COICP-SYN-001 create workflow, current state, INCIDENT_CREATED evidence
COICP-SYN-118 Facilities handoff, owner/status changes, evidence timeline, future review package
COICP-SYN-204 Residence Life scoped access, denied export, protected data
COICP-SYN-219 status progression, closure rationale, invalid transition risk
COICP-SYN-322 emergency-boundary block/redirect and optional scope-warning evidence
COICP-SYN-407 optional IT ownership/handoff extension without ITSM scope expansion

Major decisions carried forward

  • The six scenario set is the architecture scenario set.
  • AI Incident Summary is deferred/disabled through RC-001.
  • Downstream review is internal engineering review only.
  • Spring Semester Synthetic Incident Dataset is the data boundary.
  • 24 approved reviewer accounts are the review-account boundary.
  • Operational pilot is not approved.
  • Emergency-related input must not become normal COICP workflow.

Major risks carried forward

Risk Scenario Target Stage
Evidence write failure COICP-SYN-118 / 219 Architecture → Design → Testing → DEF-003
Role matrix incomplete COICP-SYN-204 Architecture → Design → Testing → DEF-002
Invalid transition COICP-SYN-219 Design → Testing → DEF-001
Emergency-boundary wording weak COICP-SYN-322 Architecture → Design → Testing → DEF-004
AI accidentally enabled all RC-001 Architecture → Testing → Release → Governance
Internal review mistaken for pilot all Release → Deployment → Governance
Synthetic-data cleanup unresolved all Operations → Monitoring → Governance

Continue to Architecture

Move to the next planning artifact while preserving the same LMU scenario-driven flow.

Open Architecture →