Skip to main content
Comply Defense
Category: Governance Roles

Sector Risk Management Agency

Also known as:
Simply put

A Sector Risk Management Agency (SRMA) is a federal agency designated to lead government efforts to protect a specific critical infrastructure sector, such as commercial facilities. Each of the critical infrastructure sectors has an SRMA responsible for coordinating with the owners and operators in that sector to help manage risks and improve security. The Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) publishes the list of designated SRMAs and provides supporting resources.

Formal definition

A Sector Risk Management Agency (SRMA) is a federal agency designated under U.S. law (6 U.S.C. 652a) as responsible for leading, coordinating, and supporting the security and resilience efforts for a designated critical infrastructure sector. As of the applicable guidance, CISA identifies an SRMA for each of the 16 critical infrastructure sectors originally established under Presidential Policy Directive 21 (PPD-21). The SRMA designation generally governs which agency is at the forefront of government efforts to protect a given sector, including coordinating with sector owners and operators on risk management and protective activities. Readers should note that SRMA roles and designations continue to evolve; frameworks such as the SRMA Maturity Model (CSC 2.0) address identifying SRMA gaps and guiding investment, and current SRMA responsibilities and designations should be verified against the governing statute and current official sources.

Why it matters

The Sector Risk Management Agency designation determines which federal agency leads government efforts to protect a given critical infrastructure sector, so it directly shapes who owners and operators coordinate with on risk management and protective activities. Because each of the 16 critical infrastructure sectors identified under PPD-21 has a designated SRMA, the model creates a defined point of federal leadership and accountability for sector security and resilience rather than leaving responsibility diffuse across the government.

For compliance and security professionals, the SRMA framework matters because it channels resources, coordination, and protective guidance to the entities that own and operate infrastructure. CISA offers resources to help owners and operators manage risks, improve security, and support the implementation and execution of protective programs, and knowing the correct SRMA for a sector helps organizations identify the right federal partner and available support.

SRMA roles and designations continue to evolve, and gaps in SRMA capabilities can affect how effectively a sector is supported. Work such as the SRMA Maturity Model (CSC 2.0) is aimed at identifying SRMA gaps and guiding investment, reflecting ongoing attention to whether SRMAs are equipped to fulfill their statutory responsibilities. Because these designations and responsibilities can change, readers should verify current SRMA assignments and duties against the governing statute (6 U.S.C. 652a) and current official CISA sources rather than relying on a static list.

Who it's relevant to

Critical Infrastructure Owners and Operators
Organizations that own or operate assets within a critical infrastructure sector should identify their designated SRMA as the lead federal partner for coordination on risk management and protective activities. The SRMA is a primary channel for accessing CISA-supported resources intended to help manage risks and improve security.
Federal Agency Sector Leads and Coordinators
Personnel at agencies carrying SRMA responsibilities need to understand their statutory role under 6 U.S.C. 652a for leading, coordinating, and supporting security and resilience efforts within their designated sector, as well as their relationship with CISA and with sector owners and operators.
Compliance Officers and Security Managers
Professionals responsible for aligning organizational security programs with federal expectations benefit from knowing which SRMA governs their sector and what supporting resources CISA makes available. They should verify current SRMA designations against official sources, since designations and responsibilities continue to evolve.
Policy Analysts and Infrastructure Resilience Planners
Those assessing the effectiveness of critical infrastructure protection may reference efforts such as the SRMA Maturity Model (CSC 2.0), which is aimed at identifying SRMA gaps and guiding investment to enhance national critical infrastructure resilience.

Inside SRMA

Statutory Designation
The term Sector Risk Management Agency was established in federal law to designate the agency responsible for coordinating critical infrastructure security and resilience activities within a specific critical infrastructure sector. Readers should verify the current authorizing statute and any implementing directives, as the designation replaced earlier terminology.
Sector-Specific Responsibility
An SRMA is assigned to a defined critical infrastructure sector and generally serves as the day-to-day federal interface for that sector, coordinating risk management activities across public and private stakeholders within its scope.
Coordination Function
SRMAs typically facilitate information sharing, support risk assessments, and coordinate with sector partners, other federal agencies, and CISA, which serves in a national coordinating role. The specific division of responsibilities depends on the sector and applicable directives.
Relationship to Broader Federal Structure
An SRMA operates within a wider federal critical infrastructure protection framework and does not act in isolation. Its authorities, scope, and reporting relationships are defined by governing law and policy that the reader should confirm against current authoritative sources.

Common questions

Answers to the questions practitioners most commonly ask about SRMA.

Does a Sector Risk Management Agency have regulatory authority to compel cybersecurity requirements on entities in its sector?
Not inherently. The SRMA role is primarily one of collaboration, coordination, and support rather than blanket regulatory authority. An SRMA facilitates risk management, information sharing, and sector coordination, but any binding regulatory authority generally derives from separate statutes, sector-specific regulations, or an agency's own regulatory mission rather than from the SRMA designation itself. Readers should confirm whether a specific requirement stems from the SRMA function or from a distinct regulatory authority held by that agency.
Is the Sector Risk Management Agency the same thing as CISA for all critical infrastructure sectors?
No. CISA serves as the national coordinator for critical infrastructure security and resilience and is itself designated as the SRMA for certain sectors, but SRMA responsibilities are distributed across multiple federal agencies depending on the sector. Different sectors have different designated SRMAs, and CISA's national coordination role is distinct from the sector-specific SRMA function that a given department or agency performs. Readers should verify the currently designated SRMA for a particular sector against the applicable authoritative source.
How do I determine which SRMA is responsible for my organization's sector?
SRMA designations are assigned by sector, so identification generally begins with determining which critical infrastructure sector an organization falls within, then confirming the currently designated agency for that sector. Because designations and sector definitions can be adjusted over time, the reader should consult the current official designations rather than relying on prior assignments, and confirm any edge cases where an entity may relate to more than one sector.
What is the practical relationship between an SRMA and the entities it supports?
The relationship is generally collaborative, centering on activities such as sharing threat and risk information, coordinating incident response support, providing sector-specific guidance, and facilitating public-private engagement. The nature and formality of this relationship can vary by sector and by whether the SRMA also holds separate regulatory authority over the entity, so organizations should confirm the specific expectations and any voluntary versus mandatory elements applicable to their situation.
How does engagement with an SRMA relate to an organization's existing compliance obligations under frameworks such as FISMA or CMMC?
SRMA engagement generally operates alongside, rather than in place of, an organization's distinct compliance obligations. Requirements arising from statutes or programs such as FISMA for civilian agency systems or DoD contractual requirements typically remain governed by their own authorities. Working with an SRMA does not automatically satisfy those separate obligations, and organizations should treat sector risk coordination and formal compliance requirements as related but independent, verifying each against its governing source.
How should an organization incorporate SRMA guidance into its risk management process given that much of it may be non-binding?
Because a significant portion of SRMA output is advisory or collaborative rather than mandatory, organizations generally treat it as input to their broader risk management activities rather than as a fixed control set. It can inform threat awareness, prioritization, and coordination planning, but the reader should distinguish voluntary guidance from any binding requirement and confirm the status of each item against current authoritative sources before relying on it for compliance decisions.

Common misconceptions

The SRMA and CISA are interchangeable, and one performs the same role as the other.
These are distinct roles. An SRMA is designated for a specific sector, while CISA generally serves a national coordinating function across sectors. Their responsibilities are complementary rather than identical, and the precise boundaries should be verified against the governing statute and directives.
SRMA coordination responsibilities impose the same mandatory compliance obligations as control-based frameworks such as the RMF or FISMA requirements.
SRMA activities are primarily coordination and risk management functions for a critical infrastructure sector and should not be conflated with the specific control baselines or authorization requirements that apply to federal information systems. Applicability of any given requirement depends on the system, sector, and governing authority.
The SRMA designation is a new concept unrelated to prior federal critical infrastructure roles.
The SRMA designation reflects evolving terminology within federal critical infrastructure policy and replaced earlier terminology. Practitioners should confirm the current authorizing text rather than assuming continuity or a clean break with prior roles.

Best practices

Identify the specific critical infrastructure sector and confirm which agency is designated as its SRMA before assuming coordination responsibilities or reporting lines.
Verify the current authorizing statute and implementing directives, since the SRMA designation and terminology have evolved and may be updated.
Distinguish SRMA coordination functions from the national coordinating role performed by CISA, and route sector-specific and cross-sector matters accordingly.
Do not treat SRMA coordination activities as equivalent to control-based compliance obligations; confirm which requirements actually apply to your systems and sector.
Consult current official sources to confirm the precise scope, authorities, and reporting relationships of the relevant SRMA rather than relying on outdated terminology or assumptions.