Skip to content

Stewardship Plan

LMU/COICP Example

Stewardship Plan Example

Assign LMU/COICP stewardship owners, review cadences, risk ownership, monitoring continuity, decision points, governance updates, and next-cycle accountability for RC-001.

ES-114 Plan LMU Stewardship Ownership

Example purpose

This artifact defines the stewardship plan for LMU/COICP after the RC-001 internal engineering review.

Stewardship is the mechanism that prevents lessons from disappearing and prevents the project from drifting into pilot before the evidence supports it.

Project

LMU Campus Operations and Incident Coordination Platform

Document control

Field Value
Artifact owner LMU COICP Product Owner
Primary reviewers Product Engineer, Campus Operations lead, IT security reviewer, AI reviewer, Compliance reviewer, Architecture Review Board chair, Campus Safety liaison
Status Accepted for next-cycle stewardship
Last updated 2026-07-06
Related Engineering Stage ES-114 — Stewardship
Project workspace target docs/project-workspace/stewardship/stewardship_plan.md

Stewardship owners

Area LMU Owner Responsibility Review Cadence
Product scope COICP Product Owner Maintain internal-review boundary and approve scope changes. Each review cycle
Evidence trust Architecture Review Board Chair Own evidence write failure learning, handoff evidence gaps, and verification routing. Until B-001 and B-004 close
Access control IT Security Reviewer Own role matrix and denied-action verification. Until B-002 closes
Workflow integrity Product Engineer Own status transition fix and handoff workflow repair. Until B-003 and B-004 close
Campus Operations usability Campus Operations lead Own intake and closure rationale feedback. Each design cycle
Emergency boundary Campus Safety Liaison Own warning-language review and emergency scenario retest. Until B-008 closes
AI governance AI Reviewer Keep AI disabled and define future readiness requirements. Each release cycle
Data governance Compliance Reviewer Maintain sample-data-only rule and cleanup expectations. Each review cycle

Stewardship decision points

  • Re-run ES-107 after status validation and handoff evidence fixes.
  • Re-run ES-108 after implementation fixes are integrated.
  • Re-run ES-109 after evidence failure test support exists.
  • Re-run ES-109 after access matrix tests are created.
  • Re-run ES-110 before any operational pilot.
  • Re-run ES-111 and ES-112 if operational scope expands.
  • Keep AI disabled unless a future full AI readiness cycle approves it.

Governance updates needed

  • Define sensitive-data cleanup procedure.
  • Define retention expectations before production-like data.
  • Define AI readiness requirements before AI summary work resumes.
  • Define pilot approval criteria.
  • Define minimum evidence requirements for cross-office handoff.
  • Define emergency-boundary wording standard.

Stewardship decision

The project remains in stewardship while the next remediation and verification cycle begins.

Continue to Next-Cycle Recommendations

Route the next engineering cycle back to the correct ETIS stages.

Open Next-Cycle Recommendations →