Architecture for Integrating Federal Databases into a Unified State Monitoring Perimeter

Authors

  • Pratikkumar Chaudhari

Keywords:

Federal databases, unified state monitoring perimeter, data governance, integration architecture, DAMA-DMBOK, metadata, data lineage

Abstract

The article examines the strategic relevance of database integration amid fragmented regulatory data, cross-agency dependence, and a growing demand for evidence-based public oversight. Its purpose is to develop a theoretical model and target architecture that connect governance arrangements, metadata management, data quality rules, lineage requirements, and platform design within a single supervisory system. The study proceeds from the premise that effective state monitoring depends on semantically aligned, traceable, and standardized data flows across heterogeneous federal and departmental sources. The novelty of the article lies in the proposed model and architecture of a unified state monitoring perimeter grounded in DAMA-DMBOK principles and adapted to regulatory banking practice. The main conclusions show that integration should be organized through a layered architecture including source systems, an integration layer, a harmonization layer, a quality and lineage control layer, and a unified analytical platform functioning as a Single Source of Truth. The article also demonstrates that federated data governance with centralized standards provides the institutional basis for accountability, coherence, and supervisory use of integrated data. The article will be useful for researchers, public administrators, financial regulators, and designers of state information systems.

Author Biography

  • Pratikkumar Chaudhari

    Project Management Analyst, Datics Inc., 13717 S. Route 30, Unit 105B, Plainfield, IL - 60544

References

[1] M. Janssen, P. Brous, E. Estevez, L. S. Barbosa, and T. Janowski, “Data governance: Organizing data for trustworthy Artificial Intelligence,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 37, no. 3, p. 101493, Jul. 2020, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2020.101493.

[2] N. Bagherifam, S. Naghdi, V. Ahmadian, A. Fazlzadeh, and M. Baghalzadeh Shishehgarkhaneh, “Digital Regulatory Governance: The Role of RegTech and SupTech in Transforming Financial Oversight and Administrative Capacity,” International Journal of Financial Studies, vol. 13, no. 4, p. 217, Nov. 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijfs13040217.

[3] F. Bartolomucci, E. Ramalli, and V. M. Urbano, “Integrated governance in data ecosystems: A conceptual framework consolidating collaborative and data governance,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 43, no. 1, p. 102107, Mar. 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2026.102107.

[4] B. M. V. Bernardo, H. S. Mamede, J. M. P. Barroso, and V. M. P. D. dos Santos, “Data governance & quality management—Innovation and breakthroughs across different fields,” Journal of Innovation & Knowledge, vol. 9, no. 4, p. 100598, Oct. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jik.2024.100598.

[5] V. Ribeiro, J. Barata, and P. R. da Cunha, “Modeling inter-organizational business process governance in the age of collaborative networks,” Electronic Markets, vol. 34, p. 51, Oct. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12525-024-00730-2.

[6] M. Abbasi, P. Váz, J. Silva, F. Cardoso, F. Sá, and P. Martins, “Unified Data Governance in Heterogeneous Database Environments: An API-Driven Architecture for Multi-Platform Policy Enforcement,” Data, vol. 11, no. 3, p. 54, Mar. 2026, doi: https://doi.org/10.3390/data11030054.

[7] “Guide on effective risk data aggregation and risk reporting,” ECB Banking Supervision, 2024. Available: https://www.bankingsupervision.europa.eu/ecb/pub/pdf/ssm.supervisory_guides240503_riskreporting.en.pdf

[8] C. Berg, “Interoperability,” Internet Policy Review, vol. 13, no. 2, Apr. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.14763/2024.2.1749.

[9] A. C. Widlak and R. Peeters, “A theory of the infrastructure-level bureaucracy: Understanding the consequences of data-exchange for procedural justice, organizational decision-making, and data itself,” Government Information Quarterly, vol. 42, no. 2, p. 102021, Mar. 2025, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.giq.2025.102021.

[10] E. Kalampokis, N. Karacapilidis, D. Tsakalidis, and K. Tarabanis, “Understanding the Use of Emerging Technologies in the Public Sector: A Review of Horizon 2020 Projects,” Digital Government: Research and Practice, vol. 4, no. 1, pp. 1–28, Jan. 2023, doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/3580603.

[11] I. Mitzutani, G. Ramanathan, and S. Mayer, “Semantic data integration with DevOps to support engineering process of intelligent building automation systems,” BuildSys ’21: Proceedings of the 8th ACM International Conference on Systems for Energy-Efficient Buildings, Cities, and Transportation, pp. 294–297, Nov. 2021, doi: https://doi.org/10.1145/3486611.3492413.

[12] K. Gierend, “Provenance Information for Biomedical Data and Workflows: Scoping Review,” Journal of Medical Internet Research, vol. 26, p. e51297, Aug. 2024, doi: https://doi.org/10.2196/51297.

Downloads

Published

2026-06-02

Issue

Section

Articles

How to Cite

Pratikkumar Chaudhari. (2026). Architecture for Integrating Federal Databases into a Unified State Monitoring Perimeter. International Journal of Computer (IJC), 57(1), 449-461. https://ijcjournal.org/InternationalJournalOfComputer/article/view/2532