PRM-01.2: Targeted Capability Maturity Levels

There is no evidence of a capability to define and identify targeted capability maturity levels.

C|P-CMM1 is N/A, since a structured process is required to define and identify targeted capability maturity levels.

Project & Resource Management (PRM) efforts are requirements-driven and governed at a local/regional level, but are not consistent across the organization. CMM Level 2 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

• Program/project management is decentralized (e.g., a localized/regionalized function) and uses non-standardized methods to implement secure, resilient and compliant practices.
• IT/cybersecurity personnel identify cybersecurity and data protection controls that are appropriate to address applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual requirements for Project Management (PM).
• The PM function facilitates the implementation of cybersecurity and data privacy-related resource planning controls across the System Development Lifecycle (SDLC) for all projects.
• The responsibility for enforcing cybersecurity and data privacy control implementation is assigned to business / process owners and asset custodians.
• The Chief Information Officer (CIO), or similar function, analyzes the organization's business strategy and prioritizes the objectives and resourcing of the security function, based on broader business requirements.
• IT/cybersecurity personnel develop plans to implement security-related objectives, based on defined capability maturity levels (e.g., SCF C|P-CMM).

Project & Resource Management (PRM) efforts are standardized across the organization and centrally managed, where technically feasible, to ensure consistency. CMM Level 3 control maturity would reasonably expect all, or at least most, the following criteria to exist:

• The Chief Information Security Officer (CISO), or similar function with technical competence to address cybersecurity concerns, analyzes the organization's business strategy to determine prioritized and authoritative guidance for program/project management practices.
• The CISO, or similar function, develops a security-focused Concept of Operations (CONOPS) that documents management, operational and technical measures to apply defense-in-depth techniques across the enterprise with regards to program/project management.
• The CISO, or similar function, leverages a capability maturity model to define and identify targeted capability maturity levels for each of the functions that make up the cybersecurity and data privacy program.
• A Governance, Risk & Compliance (GRC) function, or similar function, provides governance oversight for the implementation of applicable statutory, regulatory and contractual cybersecurity and data protection controls to protect the confidentiality, integrity, availability and safety of the organization's applications, systems, services and data for program/project management.
• A steering committee is formally established to provide executive oversight of the cybersecurity and data privacy program, including program/project management.
• A Project Management Office (PMO), or project management function, enables the centralized-implementation of cybersecurity and data privacy-related resource planning controls across the System Development Lifecycle (SDLC) for all projects.
• The PMO determines the identification and allocation of resources for cybersecurity and data privacy requirements within business process planning for projects and other initiatives.
• Project Management (PM) is centrally-managed across the enterprise to implement cybersecurity and data protection controls as part of the project management lifecycle, with the responsibility for enforcing cybersecurity and data privacy control implementation assigned to business / process owners and asset custodians.
• Subordinate staff and stakeholders are educated on the capability maturity expectations and those targets are used to task individual contributor work activities in an effort to achieve the targeted maturity levels.

See C|P-CMM3. There are no defined C|P-CMM4 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a quantitatively-controlled process is not necessary to define and identify targeted capability maturity levels.

See C|P-CMM4. There are no defined C|P-CMM5 criteria, since it is reasonable to assume a continuously-improving process is not necessary to define and identify targeted capability maturity levels.