70RSAT25RFI000037 CAD-to-CAD RFI.pdf

RFI: 70RSAT25RFI000037

REQUEST FOR INFORMATION

Department of Homeland Security (DHS)

Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate

CAD-to-CAD Interoperability Compliance / Conformance

NOTE: THIS IS A REQUEST FOR INFORMATION (RFI) ONLY. This Request for Information (RFI) supports the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate’s efforts to conduct market research in support of computer-aided dispatch (CAD) -to-CAD Interoperability Compliance / Conformance testing for the Office of Mission and Capability Support (MCS).

This RFI is for planning purposes only and shall not be construed as an obligation on the part of the Government. This is NOT a Request for Quotations or Proposals. No solicitation document exists, and the Government may or may not issue a formal solicitation as a result of the responses received to this RFI.

The Government will not pay for any response or demonstration expenses. All costs incurred responding to this RFI will be solely at the interested party's expense. Failure to respond to this RFI will not preclude participation in any future solicitation. Any information received will become the property of the Government and will not be returned to the submitter. Interested parties are responsible for adequately marking proprietary or sensitive information. Government technical experts drawn from staff within DHS and other federal agencies may review responses. The Government may use selected support Contractor personnel to assist in the review of the RFI responses. These support Contractors will be bound by appropriate non-disclosure agreements to protect proprietary information.

I. INTRODUCTION:

The purpose of this RFI is to perform market research and to identify qualified and interested sources with the capability and experience in providing services identified in the RFI.

II. BACKGROUND:

Computer-aided dispatch (CAD) systems are an integral part of emergency response. Public safety personnel rely on CAD systems to track incidents, dispatch personnel based on location information, and send relevant information to these dispatched personnel, among other things.

CAD-to-CAD interoperability is vital to successfully respond to incidents that require a unified response from multiple jurisdictions or public safety (Fire/Law Enforcement/ Emergency Medical Services (EMS)) disciplines. Without interoperable systems, personnel are incapable of efficiently sharing information and leveraging the CAD system’s full capabilities, costing incident responders precious time.

Most CAD technology in use today by first responders was not developed to be interoperable with other systems and no communication or data exchange standards are currently in widespread use.

Given this premise, existing CAD systems were designed to meet jurisdictional needs, therefore each is unique as they’re tailored to address needs at the local level. As these systems are migrated or upgraded to conform with the emergence of 5G, there is no single approach or methodology for implementation of CAD systems and thus each implementation may not be fully interoperable or compatible, therefore creating challenges with sharing information across these critical systems.

As a result, situational awareness may suffer, and operational inefficiencies may be introduced that negatively impact the optimum response to an incident. In addition, improvised interoperability may be achieved by developing custom interfaces that can be very costly to develop and maintain.

Current challenges include having nothing to evaluate interoperability between CAD systems.

DHS S&T sponsored research has resulted in the development of a CAD-to-CAD Interoperability Functional Specification, Technology Solution Description, and other artifacts that can be potentially leveraged to develop a CAD-to-CAD interoperable testing approach that will encourage and ensure better reliability and consistency across the ecosystem.

Figure 1. CAD-to-CAD Information Sharing Context The ultimate objective is to address the lack of data communications that are interoperable between different first responder’s disciplines and systems. This is envisioned through a supportive stakeholder community, who will develop an agreed upon standards-based approach for a comprehensive testing program to ensure program implementation. This may be accomplished through one or more entities in association with a governing oversight body. The existence and use of the testing program will drive progressive industry behavior toward actions that reduce unacceptable risk to public safety by significantly increasing the availability of demonstrably interoperable systems. Alternatively, the objective is NOT to identify, select, and drive compliance to only a single industry standard.

Applicable NAICS codes: 541990 (primary), 517810, 541715, 541690, or 541611

Applicable PSC: AJ11

III. OBJECTIVES SCOPE:

The high-level objectives of the CAD-to-CAD Interoperability Compliance / Conformance testing project include:

1) Propose and implement a CAD-to-CAD interoperability compliance and conformance testing methodology that can be scaled nation-wide.

2) Collaborate with CAD Stakeholders and foster industry understanding and support throughout the project. Stakeholders include Emergency Communication Centers (ECCs) and Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs) at the state, local, tribal, and territorial levels, DHS, the Department of Transportation, the CAD industry community, representative associations, and organizations (including first responder groups), and the critical presence of public safety representatives from across the country.

3) Define appropriate technical means for conducting interoperability testing, including but not limited to defining and evaluating standards-based interoperability, developing testing use cases and solutions, and conducting pilots to validate these capabilities.

4) Recommend a comprehensive, sustainable, market-based business model to implement and govern interoperability testing that ensures long-term financial viability and does not rely on perpetual government funding or subsidy.

IV. QUESTIONS FOR INDUSTRY:

Industry Landscape, Market Dynamics, and Demand

1. What is the current state of the CAD-to-CAD interoperability market? Who are the key players and what technologies are they offering?

2. Are there any existing testing methodologies or standards in place for CAD-to-CAD interoperability? If so, what are their limitations and how do they fall short of addressing the current needs?

3. What are the biggest challenges that first responders and public safety agencies currently face due to lack of interoperability between CAD systems?

4. Is there sufficient market demand for a self-sustaining CAD-to-CAD interoperability testing program? Can the existing and potential user base (CAD vendors, public safety agencies, etc.) be quantified along with their willingness, or ability, to pay?

5. What are the potential economic benefits of improved interoperability for stakeholders?

6. What challenges do you foresee that would hinder implementation or widespread adoption of the testing program among all relevant stakeholders, including CAD vendors, first responders, public safety agencies, and government organizations?

Feedback on Requirements Document

7. Having read the Statement of Objectives (SOO) (attached), would your organization consider itself qualified to perform this work? Why or why not?

8. Having read the SOO, would your organization be likely to respond to an RFP for this work? Why or why not?

9. Does the SOO define the requirement without limiting innovation? Is there anything you feel should be added, deleted, or changed about the SOO to allow for innovation while clearly defining the requirement?

10. What specific types of CAD systems should the testing program focus on? (e.g., specific vendors, functionalities, etc.)

11. What types of scenarios and data exchange formats should be used in the testing program to ensure comprehensive coverage of real-world use cases?

12. What levels of conformance and performance should the testing program aim to achieve?

13. What is the most effective scope for the program in terms of tested functionalities and types of CAD systems? Balancing comprehensiveness with practicality is crucial to ensure manageable testing and user uptake.

Budget and Timeline

14. In your opinion, what is an appropriate timeline and budget to perform the work outlined in the SOO?

15. Based on the SOO, what do you feel is an appropriate labor mix for the effort? Please provide the reasoning behind the suggested labor mix.

16. Do your rates align with the Bureau of Labor Statistics for these or similar labor categories?

Past Experience and Qualifications

17. Describe your company’s experience in performing similar work:

a. Describe your experience in developing and implementing testing programs for complex information technology (IT) systems, preferably in the public safety domain.

b. Describe your experience collaborating with disparate stakeholders, industry associations, and technology providers.

c. Describe your experience establishing self-sustaining programs.

d. Describe your experience recommending/establishing governance of testing programs.

e. Describe your experience testing the interoperability of diverse systems.

f. Describe your specific experience with testing against existing or emerging CAD-to-

CAD interoperability standards.

18. What relationships does your company currently have with CAD stakeholders, public safety related associations, and potential partners such as technology providers?

19. Provide references of past clients or projects where you have successfully implemented similar testing programs.

20. Describe the expertise and qualifications of your team members who would be involved in the testing program.

V. SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS

Responses shall be a maximum of 25 pages and shall include a cover letter with the following information:

1) Response to RFI Notice 70RSAT25RFI000037.

2) Company Legal Business name and Physical address.

3) Business size/socio-economic category under NAICS Codes: 541990 (primary), 517810, 541715, 541690, or 541611

4) Company points of contact including phone numbers and email addresses.

5) A no more than 25-page comprehensive response that addresses the 20 questions delineated above.

6) Identify if your firm currently holds any Best-in-Class (BIC) vehicles (e.g., OASIS, GSA

GWAC, GSA MAS contracts, etc.), to include the applicable contract number.

Submissions shall be made using Microsoft Office applications. Font shall not be smaller than 12-point Times New Roman. Please provide your response to this RFI no later than 5:00 p.m.

Eastern Time on November 1, 2024 to the DHS Headquarters Office of Procurement Operations (OPO) Contracting Officer (CO) Jennifer Koons at jennifer.koons@hq.dhs.gov; Contract Specialist Mariaah Daniel at mariaah.daniel@hq.dhs.gov; and Contracting Officer’s Representative (COR) William “Dante” Bundy at william.bundy@hq.dhs.gov, with courtesy copies to eileen.rubin@hq.dhs.gov, sridhar.kowdley@hq.dhs.gov, and norman.speicher@hq.dhs.gov.

VI. INDUSTRY DAY

The Government may hold an Industry Day for this requirement. Details regarding an Industry Day will be provided at a later time.

Note:

The Government reserves the right to hold one-on-one meetings as a result of responses received from this RFI as part of its market research. Meetings may be held with companies who provide comprehensive and relevant responses to the topic and questions in this notice.

mailto:jennifer.koons@hq.dhs.gov mailto:mariaah.daniel@hq.dhs.gov mailto:william.bundy@hq.dhs.gov mailto:eileen.rubin@hq.dhs.gov mailto:sridhar.kowdley@hq.dhs.gov mailto:norman.speicher@hq.dhs.gov

Background material and other references to be considered for inclusion -

Figure 1 - Direct CAD-to-CAD

Figure 2 - CAD-to-CAD Using Enterprise Service Bus

Figure 3 - CAD-to-CAD Using Enterprise Service Bus

The technical solution is driven by the operational and technical requirements, as well as the input received from the field on what is needed to develop a standards-based CAD-to-CAD interoperable solution. The approach promotes the consistent use of the industry standards detailed in the CAD-to-CAD functional specifications deliverable. CAD-to-CAD interoperability can be achieved by consistently using the data model and the National Information Exchange

Model (NIEM) standard to map data within the different CAD systems for consistent taxonomy and web services for two or more CAD systems to communicate securely within the bounds of policies like Criminal Justice Information Service (CJIS) or Health Insurance Portability and

Accountability Act (HIPAA). The service interface and the data model can also be used to build executable software that interacts with CAD systems directly, via Enterprise Service Bus (ESB) and/or via an Interoperability Hub and at the same time ensuring the key policies are always enforced and each transaction is logged in near real time and audited when needed.

Using the standards identified in the CAD-to-CAD functional specifications supports interoperability among the CAD systems regardless of where the CAD is hosted (i.e., on-premises, cloud only, or hybrid mode) and how CAD systems interact, whether via Direct CAD-to-CAD, CAD-to-CAD using an ESB, or CAD-to-CAD using the Interoperability Hub that connects to CAD systems directly. By using industry standards, agencies will also see reduced time and costs in implementation, enhancements, and ongoing maintenance.