HR001120S0007-Amendment-02.pdf

Summary of Amendment 2: The purpose of this amendment is to close the BAA effective 2 May 2020.

As noted on Page 45 of the BAA, proposals received after the initial 9 March 2020 deadline may be received and evaluated after the initial round of selections have been completed, potential proposers were warned that the likelihood of available funding is greatly reduced for proposals submitted after the initial closing date deadline. The initial round selections have been completed, and no funding remains available. Accordingly, no further proposals will be reviewed and the BAA is being closed.

Broad Agency Announcement

Secure Advanced Framework for Simulation and Modeling

(SAFE-SiM)

DARPA Adaptive Capabilities Office (ACO)

HR001120S0007

16 January 2020

AMENDMENT 2

As amended on 1 May 2020

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description II. Award Information III. Eligibility Information IV. Application and Submission Information V. Application Review Information VI. Award Administration Information VII. Agency Contacts VIII. Other Information

Appendix A—Government Furnished Equipment…………………….………Attached separately

Appendix B—SECRET Classified Addendum…….…..See Section IV.A.2. for more information

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

Federal Agency Name – Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Adaptive Capabilities Office (ACO) Funding Opportunity Title – Secure Advanced Framework for Simulation and

Modeling (SAFE-SiM) Announcement Type – Initial Funding Opportunity Number – HR001120S0007 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) – Not applicable Dates o Posting Date: 16 January 2020 o Proposers Day: 21 January 2020 o FAQ Submission Deadline: 24 February 2020, 1 PM Eastern Time o Proposal Due Date and Time: 9 March 2020, 1 PM Eastern Time o BAA Closing Date: 2 May 2020 o Estimated period of performance start: 1 August 2020

The DARPA Adaptive Capabilities Office (ACO) is developing an all-domain, Multi- Level Security (MLS) enabled Modeling and Simulation (M&S) environment to perform mission-level M&S for senior-level military decision makers, technology developers, and acquisition professionals for use in concept of operations (CONOP) development, force structure composition, resource allocation, and targeted technology insertion.

The amount of resources made available under this BAA will depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds.

Multiple awards are anticipated.

Anticipated funding type: 6.2.

Types of instruments that may be awarded -- Procurement contract or other transaction.

Agency contact o Points of Contact The BAA Coordinator for this effort can be reached at:

HR001120S0007@darpa.mil

DARPA/ACO

ATTN: HR001120S0007

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114

A&AS Advisory and Assistance Services ACO Adaptive Capabilities Office AFSIM Advanced Framework for Simulation and Modeling AIS Automated Information Security AMD Advanced Micro Devices AO Agreements Officer ATO Approval-to-Operate BAA Broad Agency Announcement BMC2 Battle Management Command and Control C&A Certification and Accreditation C2 Command and Control CAGE Commercial and Government Entity CAS Cost Accounting Standards CDR Classified Document Registry CDS cross-domain solution CFDA Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers CIO Chief Information Officer CONOP Concept of Operations COTS commercial off-the-shelf CPFF Cost Plus Fixed Fee DARPA Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency DCAA Defense Contract Audit Agency DCMA Defense Contract Management Agency DFARS Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement DoD Department of Defense EAAGLES Extensible Architecture of the Analysis and Generation of Linked Simulations EM electro-magnetic EW electronic warfare FAR Federal Acquisition Regulation FCL Facility Clearance Level FFRDC Federally Funded Research and Development Corporation FOC full operational capability FOCI Foreign Ownership Control and Influence FSO Facility Security Officer FTRT faster-than-real-time GUI graphical user interface HPC high performance computing HSR Human Subjects Research IA Information Assurance IC Intelligence Community ICAM Identity, Credential, and Access Management IOC Initial Operational Capability IP Intellectual Property IT Information Technology ITASE Integrated Treat Analysis and Simulation Environment ITWA Interdivisional Work Transfer Agreements

JSE Joint Simulation Environment JSIG Joint Special Access Program Implementation Guide M&S Modeling and simulation MLS Multi-level security MSIE Modeling and Simulation Integrated Environment NCDSMO National Cross Domain Strategy and Management Office NGTS Next Generation Threat System NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology NSDD National Security Decision Directive OCI Organizational Conflict of Interest OneSAF One Semi-automated Forces OPSEC Operational security OT Other Transaction PCO Procuring Contracting Officer PI Principal Investigator POC proof of concept RAM random-access memory RMF Risk Management Framework RtB Raise the Bar SAFE-SiM Secure Advanced Framework for Simulation and Modeling SAM System for Award Management SAP Special Access Program SAPCO Special Access Program Control Officer SAR Special Access Required SCG Security Classification Guide SCI sensitive compartmented information SETA Scientific Engineering Technical Assistance SSO Special Security Office TA technical area TS Top Secret USPS U.S. Postal Service WAWF Wide Area Work Flow

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

This publication constitutes a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) as contemplated in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016 and 2 CFR § 200.203. Any resultant award negotiations will follow all pertinent law and regulation, and any negotiations and/or awards for procurement contracts will use procedures under FAR 15.4, Contract Pricing, as specified in the BAA.

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is soliciting innovative proposals in the following technical areas:

Design and development of an integrated architecture for theater-wide, multi-domain, mission level modeling and simulation (M&S), from seafloor to space, including cyber and EM spectrum capabilities. The system should leverage existing threat, friendly, and other representative models for exploring adaptive warfighting architectures and concept development that uses existing and future representative models developed for use in AFSIM, NGTS, and ITASE at a minimum.

Design and development of an intuitive user interface that enables military analysts the ability to easily interact with the M&S architecture described above and rapidly construct, alter, and run theater-wide, mission level scenarios within system of system constructs.

Development and integration of advanced analytic and visual tools that support senior-level military decision makers, technology developers, and acquisition professionals for use in concept of operations (CONOP) development, force structure composition, resource allocation, and targeted technology insertion.

Development and integration of hardware and/or software solutions that enable Multi- Level Security (MLS) capabilities within the M&S architecture. These should provide the ability to ingest M&S-specific data up to and including SECRET, TOP SECRET, SCI, and Special Access (SAP) classification levels through external network connections, rapid reconfiguration of the classification level of the M&S computing environment, and dynamically tailoring M&S analytical results to varying levels dependent upon the appropriate access level of multiple end users.

Proposed research should investigate innovative approaches that enable revolutionary advances in science, devices, or systems. Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

A. Program Vision

1. Motivation for the DARPA SAFE-SiM Program

Over the past few decades, the effective projection of military power has become increasingly dependent on complex combinations of capabilities resident in all domains in order to achieve combined effects not possible from individual platforms or service domains.

Current Department of Defense (DoD) and Intelligence Community (IC) modeling and simulation architectures are not suited to rapidly provide decision support analysis to senior decision makers, technology developers, and acquisition professionals.

The combination of effects created by systems in or delivered through all domains, from the seafloor to space, including those via cyber and the electromagnetic spectrum, dictates a different approach to concept development. In the past the delivery of effects could be described by linear ‘kill chains’ with a single execution path, this new level of complexity demands an understanding of ‘kill webs’—complex representations of effect chains with multiple possible paths. Existing M&S architectures are not designed to handle this complexity rapidly enough to support the responsive analysis demanded by the DoD.

Creating an M&S architecture to support these types of analyses presents several unique challenges. First, existing simulation architectures are typically used to represent limited domains or mission areas. While they may excel single domains, they are not well suited to characterize interactions across domains. This is particularly acute in the cyber and EM spectrum. Second, creating mission-level scenarios is time consuming and requires specialized training, which greatly limits the utility for producing rapid responsive analysis.

Third, multi-domain kill-webs present a factorial increase in possible inter-relationships that will test the limits of current analytic approaches as well as the ability to visualize the complex analytical results. Finally, current M&S architectures are limited in their ability to import, process, and disseminate M&S data at multiple classification levels in a timely, responsive manner.

2. Program Goals

The SAFE-SiM program seeks to build a government owned and controlled, faster-than-real time M&S capability that enables the conduct of theater-wide, mission level M&S for rapid analysis supporting senior-level decisions for CONOP development, force structure composition, resource allocation, and targeted technology insertion. This system should be able to leverage existing representative red, blue, and gray (other entities in the environment) models that have been created by organizations across the DoD, IC, and industry, as well as support the use of future models produced by these entities to the maximum extent possible.

These include models developed for use in AFSIM, NGTS, and ITASE at a minimum.

Specifically, SAFE-SiM should do this through the creation of

a. A constructive M&S architecture that is able to:

(1) Conduct theater-wide, multi-domain, mission level M&S, from seafloor to space, including cyber and EM spectrum capabilities

(2) Leverage existing threat, friendly, and other representative models developed for AFSIM, NGTS, and ITASE for advanced kill web concept development and exploration

b. An intuitive user interface that enables:

(1) Rapid scenario construction and alteration

(2) Dynamic kill web assembly and discovery

(3) System and system-of-systems behavior modification

(4) Advanced visualization capabilities that support rapid and flexible CONOP development

c. A suite of analytical tools enabled by advanced visualization capabilities that allows broad analysis of data produced by the M&S architecture, including:

(1) Supporting trade space exploration

(2) Performing optimization based on mission priorities

(3) Assessing mission effectiveness

(4) Identifying potential technology development opportunities

(5) Financial and logistical analysis for force structure decisions

d. Multi-Level Security capabilities that enable:

(1) The ingest of SECRET, TOP SECRET, SCI, and Special Access Program M&S data from external network sources

(2) Rapid reconfiguration of the M&S computing environment security level

(3) The ability to tailor of the classification of analytical results to the appropriate access level of multiple, independent end-users

In support of these goals, the program pursues four technical areas (TAs), which are described in detail in Section B.1. below:

1. Modeling and Simulation Architecture

2. Scenario Configuration Tool

3. Analytical Tools

4. Multi-Level Security

e. Proposal Track Structure

(1) All proposers MUST propose to TA-1, TA-2, and TA-3 at a minimum. As such, the SAFE-SiM program will accept proposals in two tracks:

(a) Track A proposals that address all four (4) technical areas

(b) Track B proposals that address only TA-1, TA-2, and TA-3.

Track Description Track A Responsible for Modeling and Simulation

Architecture (TA-1), Scenario Configuration Tool (TA-2), Analysis Tools (TA-3), and Multi-Level Security (TA-4)

Track B (no MLS) Responsible for Modeling and Simulation Architecture (TA-1), Scenario Configuration Tool (TA-2), and Analysis Tools (TA-3)

DARPA offers the following additional guidance regarding the desired solution space to assist proposers in developing their initial SAFE-SiM concepts and scoping their efforts.

DARPA encourages and welcomes teaming.

The resultant solution is desired to have the ability to leverage operationally representative red, blue, and gray models that have been created across the DoD, IC, and industry, including models developed for use in (at a minimum) AFSIM, NGTS, and ITASE. These models can be either run in their native form or a translated form that performs in a representative manner.

DARPA is interested in architectures and computer software approaches that use data and software available to the Government with no less than Government Purpose Rights as set forth in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) Clauses 252.227-7013 and 252.227-7014 (or similar for Other Transactions).

DARPA anticipates that the system created in SAFE-SiM will continue to operate under DARPA direction at the conclusion of the development program, and will also transition to one or more transition partners in the DoD, IC, and industry. As such, DARPA is interested in solutions that take a full-life cycle-approach from development through fielding and sustainment, although the sustainment phase will not be specifically addressed with this

BAA.

Capabilities of interest include, but are not limited to:

1. Modeling and Simulation capabilities (TA-1):

Faster-than-real time constructive simulation with hundreds of thousands

(100,000s) of entities

i. Entities are defined as any representation in the simulation that has functions or behaviors that are modeled. For example, a single platform such as an aircraft constitutes an entity, as do the subsystems on the aircraft such as the radar. The aircraft may also be part of a larger formation, which also constitutes an entity if the behavior of the larger formation is also modeled.

Approaches that can support the faster-than-real-time execution of models of different levels of fidelity within a single simulation

Higher-order behavior model development tools that enable the rapid composition of system-of-system behaviors, as well as the capability to rapidly implement externally developed battle management command and control (BMC2) behaviors and algorithms

Strategies and approaches for developing and implementing standardized models, including the ability to leverage legacy models such as but not limited to; AFSIM, NGTS, and ITASE

Innovative approaches for integrating new and legacy models into modular components that can dynamically interact within the simulation architecture

Innovative framework structures or computing techniques that improve simulation performance

2. Graphical User Interface (GUI) capabilities (TA-2):

Intuitive, non-technical user-focused interfaces Easy, rapid scenario construction Feedback to the user regarding scenario complexity impact on simulation runtime The ability to alter the fidelity of a scenario based on analytic approach in order to achieve a desired simulation runtime that makes the user aware of trades in analytic performance

Automated constellation (seafloor to space) and network building The ability to play back simulations, stop at a chosen point, alter aspects of the scenario, and run a new simulation using the new scenario as a starting point

3. Analytical capabilities (TA-3):

Flexible approaches to conduct value-based trade space analysis Innovative data storage, recall, processing, and analysis tools and techniques Innovative visualization technologies and methods Suites of analytical tools that support mission effectiveness evaluation in the context of force structure exploration, concept development and evaluation, and identification of opportunities for technology development or targeted technology insertion

Value Optimization capability for mission value and cost exchange

4. MLS capabilities (TA-4):

Strategies and approaches to address MLS including technology as well as policy solutions

Persistent, multi-level data storage that supports faster-than-real time modeling and simulation

Network isolation and transfer solutions to enable rapid ingress of all-domain data and dissemination of results across any and all applicable classified networks

Approaches to assure data will not be cross-contaminated during computation or storage

Middleware and standard, open APIs to interface the simulation environment with MLS enabled security components

Integration with existing Identity, Credential, and Access Management (ICAM) solutions to ensure compliance with DARPA’s security authorization system

Tools for rapid sanitization to support secure reconfiguration or cleanup spills Novel uses of emerging artificial intelligence and machine learning capabilities in pursuit of intelligent classification of data

B. Program Description

1. Program Technical Focus Areas

a. Technical Area 1 (TA-1): Modeling and Simulation Architecture

Description

This technical area focuses on the development of the M&S architecture to execute the scenarios built through the Scenario Configuration Tool developed under TA-2 and produce data for the analysis conducted with the analytical tools implemented in TA-3.

Successful implementation of this technical area should produce an M&S architecture that is able to leverage representative models developed for use in AFSIM, NGTS, and ITASE (at a minimum), enabling mission-level interactions between representative models developed for all of these frameworks/simulation environments. The desired M&S environment should include all physical domains from seafloor to space, including cyber and EW effects that support mission level simulation execution of hundreds of thousands (100,000s) of entities faster-than-real time at varying levels of fidelity.

Architectures developed under Track A will support the implementation of MLS as described in TA-4.

Subject areas falling under TA-1 consist of:

(1) Architecture/framework design and integration: The ability to leverage existing DoD and IC simulation architectures and frameworks in a single M&S architecture

(2) All domain model interaction and behavior: Seamless interaction between models in all environments from seafloor to space including cyber and EW effects, including representative behavior at the sub-system, system, and system-of-systems levels.

(3) Theater-wide, mission level, faster-than-real time simulation: The ability to execute representative models across a large geographical area at a level of fidelity appropriate to mission-level M&S

b. Technical Area 2 (TA-2): Scenario Configuration Tool

Description

This technical area focuses on the development of both the tool and user interface that enable the rapid construction and flexible manipulation of theater-wide, mission level scenarios for execution in the M&S environment constructed under TA-1. Successful implementation of this technical area should produce a tool with advanced visualization capabilities that enables a user to rapidly configure new scenarios, access and alter stored scenarios, construct situationally adaptable kill webs, and alter system and system-of-systems performance parameters and behaviors. The tool should provide feedback to the user regarding the impact on scenario size, fidelity, or complexity on simulation run time and analytic performance. The tool is desired to be accessible through an intuitive GUI that enables a user who is not an expert in the construction of scenarios, representative models, or system behaviors in any of the legacy M&S frameworks or architectures (i.e.

AFSIM, NGTS, etc.) to rapidly configure a scenario to meet flexible analytical requirements. The tool will support the implementation of the MLS goals described in TA-4 by ensuring that users cannot gain access to data or information for which they are not authorized.

Subject areas falling under TA-2 consist of:

(1) Scenario construction: The ability to rapidly construct theater-wide scenarios, alter saved scenarios, and pause the playback of a previously executed scenario, alter conditions within the scenario, and start a new scenario with those alterations as new starting conditions

(2) Kill web construction and behavior definition: Support for CONOP development and exploration through the ability to compose kill webs with systems across all domains from seafloor to space regardless of whether the system representative models are derived from different simulation frameworks or architectures (e.g.

AFSIM, NGTS, etc.), and the ability to flexibly define behaviors for Red, Blue, and Gray systems, platforms, and systems of systems. Also, the ability to enable through automation the exploration of optimal employment options or modes for systems and systems-of-systems.

(3) Advanced visualization and user interface: Intuitive methods of scenario setup and manipulation, alternative visualization modes of kill webs and systems-of-systems, such as platform-based, communication-based, or nodal depictions.

c. Technical Area 3 (TA-3): Analytical Tools

Description

This technical area focuses on the development of analytical tools that support senior-level decision making regarding the conduct of trade space exploration and optimization based on mission priorities or other values, assessment of mission effectiveness and technology development opportunities, and financial and logistical analysis in support of force structure decisions. Successful implementation of this technical area should produce a suite of analytical tools that is able to adapt to a wide range of possible analytic inquiries, as well as institute a flexible framework that allows for the inclusion of additional tools that may be developed to support specific analytic questions.

Subject areas falling under TA-3 consist of:

(1) Performance evaluation: Performance assessment tools should allow for the assessment of mission effectiveness from the individual platform to the system-of-systems level

(2) Concept exploration: The ability to show linkages, dependencies, and shared functionality across systems and systems-of-systems in order to evaluate the functionality and performance of composable kill webs, as well as identify areas for further exploration and analysis

(3) Optimization: The ability to define the range of optimal solutions regarding force structure composition by exploring and evaluating the complex trade space that exists between component-level force structure decisions and higher-level stakeholder value areas, such as battlespace effect creation, domain dominance, or cost

(4) Advanced data visualization: The ability to visualize results and analysis in ways that are clear and intuitive and that may reveal unanticipated relationships or correlation leading to greater understanding of system or system-of-systems performance results or behavior

d. Technical Area 4 (TA-4): Multi-Level Security

Description

This technical area focuses on the development of graduated MLS capabilities that enable the secure import, processing, and export of M&S-specific data and data types.

Successful implementation of this technical area will facilitate the secure transfer of M&S data at all levels of classification from SECRET through TOP SECRET, SCI, and SAP into the M&S environment from secure external network connections, the rapid reconfiguration of the security level of the M&S architecture, and, through automation, the dynamic classification of analytical results to the access level appropriate to a given end user. These capabilities should be implemented without adversely impacting the overall performance of the M&S system in terms of execution speed, etc.

Subject areas falling under TA-4 consist of:

(1) Import of M&S data and data types through secure network connections:

Solutions are desired that focus on cross-domain solutions (CDS) to enable the transfer of M&S-specific data and data types from externally connected network sources at all levels of classification from SECRET through TOP SECRET, SCI, and SAP. These CDSs are desired to be compliant with the National Cross Domain Strategy and Management Office’s (NCDSMO) Raise the Bar (RtB) initiative.

(2) Rapidly reconfigurable M&S security environment: The ability to rapidly and securely transition the M&S environment from processing and producing data at a given level of classification to a different level of either higher or lower classification without having to physically reconfigure the computing environment.

(3) Tailored, dynamic data classification: Automated decision processes that will process M&S data at all levels of classification from data generation through analysis and dynamically tailor the classification of M&S output and analysis results to the particular clearance and authorization level of individual users, regardless of the classification of the data used in the M&S environment.

2. Program Phase Structure

The SAFE-SiM program is structured in two distinct phases—Phase 1 (Base - 12 months) and Phase 2 (Option - 16 months). During Phase 1, performers will develop a Proof of Concept (POC) system that they will demonstrate in the MSIE facility at the end of the phase. Performers will provide an end of phase report Word document that concisely summarizes the effort conducted, technical achievements, and remaining technical challenges, as well as all software artifacts (source code, libraries, executables, etc.) 30 calendar days after the Proof of Concept Demonstration. During Phase 2, performers will produce and demonstrate an Initial Operational Capability (IOC) system. Following this demonstration, a performer(s) will develop and demonstrate a Full Operational Capability (FOC) system. Full costing is required for Phases 1 and 2. The number of performers may decrease at each major milestone based upon results, technical progress, or the availability of funding.

The SAFE-SiM phases are structured to allow performers to demonstrate structured capability advances in their M&S architectures and as such, the amount of computing resources available for each demonstration system are intentionally limited. The overarching intent is to initially develop capability, then prove that the capability can scale and adapt to more demanding mission requirements, while also integrating graduated MLS capability (for Track A performers). The specific capabilities desired and the system limitations are outlined in the sections below.

a. Phase 1—Proof of Concept

(1) OBJECTIVE: Develop an all-domain, faster-than-real-time M&S environment that can

(a) Execute a mission-level simulation including all physical domains

i. Undersea

ii. Surface (land/sea)

iii. Air

iv. Space

(b) Allow models from three distinct M&S architectures (AFSIM, NGTS, and ITASE) to dynamically interact and be correlated in either native or translated representative form

(c) Construct, alter, and visualize mission-level simulations

(d) Perform basic mission-level analysis capabilities

i. Ability to answer “What happened?”

(e) (Track A only) Protect classified data including Unclassified, SECRET, TOP SECRET, SCI, and SAP/SAR

Phase 1 - Base Phase 2 - Option 12 months 16 months

Proof of Concept

Demo

FOC

Demo

IOC

Demo

10 months 6 months

(2) SYSTEM HARDWARE LIMITATIONS:

(a) Hardware

i. 16 AMD cores (or equivalent)

ii. 128GB RAM maximum

(b) Performance (See definitions in the notes to Table 1 below)

i. Track A and Track B

1. Speed: Threshold: 10x FTRT

Goal: 20x FTRT

2. # of entities: Threshold: 1,000

Goal: 10,000

3. Simulated mission duration: Threshold: 2 hours

Goal: 4 hours

4. Model fidelity: Appropriate for mission-level simulation

ii. Track A only

1. # Security Classifications: Threshold: 2

Goal: 4

2. # Security Compartments & Releasabilities: Threshold: 100

Goal: 1,000

3. New Classification Accuracy: Threshold: 85%

Goal: 95%

4. Time for 5GB M&S Data Ingestion: Threshold: 2 hours

Goal: 30 minutes

5. Time for 5GB M&S and Analytic Data Dissemination: Threshold: 2 hours

Goal: 30 minutes

Performers will develop the Proof of Concept system at a location and on hardware of their choosing (within the limits described above) and conduct the Proof of Concept Demonstration in June of 2021 at DARPA’s MSIE facility on DARPA hardware, fully described in Appendix A—Government Furnished Equipment at the end of this document.

(3) Proof of Concept Demonstration

(a) Performers should design, build, and execute two (2) materially distinct mission-level scenarios with models provided by DARPA in either their native or translated representative form

(b) DARPA will provide

i. At least 10 UNCLASSIFIED platforms each from AFSIM, NGTS, and

ITASE

ii. Mission objectives

iii. A Red threat laydown and gameplan

(c) Performers should

i. Design and execute a mission plan to achieve the mission objectives that is comprised of no fewer than 400 platforms, including at least 10 models provided by DARPA, that demonstrates interactions between models in all domains

ii. Demonstrate a basic functional user interface that allows the user to change the configuration of designed simulations, either adding or deleting platforms, and successfully run the new scenario

iii. Demonstrate basic mission-level analysis capabilities using the data generated by the simulations that will enable analysts to determine “What happened?”

iv. Demonstrate the ability to visualize 2D and 3D scenario playback and system performance overlays

v. (Track A only) Demonstrate a data storage architecture that enables the ability to appropriately store and retrieve both ingested and produced data at all levels of classification, including UNCLASSIFIED, SECRET, TOP SECRET, SCI, and SAP/SAR, i.e. provide the body of evidence

b. Phase 2—Operational Capability

Performers will implement their system on DARPA’s reference hardware at the MSIE location and conduct the Initial Operational Capability (IOC) demonstration (described in section B.2.b(1)) ten (10) months after the beginning of Phase 2, and will conduct the Final Operational Capability (FOC) Demonstration (described in section B.2.b(2)) six (6) months later at the conclusion of the program. The number of performers may decrease at each major milestone based upon results, technical progress, or the availability of funding.

(1) Initial Operational Capability

(a) OBJECTIVE: Improve the Phase 1 all-domain, faster-than-real-time M&S environment and demonstrate the ability to

i. Increase the size and scale of the all-domain M&S environment

ii. Increase the simulation runtime speed

iii. Create more complex systems, interactions, and behaviors using classified models

iv. Increase the fidelity of the mission-level models implemented in the environment

v. Reduce the time and complexity necessary for building a functional scenario

vi. Implement more advanced visualization and mission-level analytic capabilities that will enable analysts to determine “Why did that happen?”

vii. (Track A only) Demonstrate the ability to ingest classified M&S-specific data through network connections

Further details on the IOC Objective, Requirements, and Demonstration are provided in Appendix B—SECRET Classified Addendum. See Section IV.A.2. for more information.

(2) Full Operational Capability

(a) OBJECTIVE: Improve the IOC all-domain, faster-than-real-time M&S environment and demonstrate the ability to

(b) Increase the size and scale of the all-domain M&S environment

(c) Increase the simulation runtime speed

(d) Create more complex systems, interactions, and behaviors using classified models

(e) Increase the fidelity of the mission-level models implemented in the environment

(f) Reduce the time and complexity necessary for building a functional scenario via an easy to use scenario configuration tool/manager

(g) Train DARPA designated personnel on use of system

(h) Implement more advanced visualization and mission-level analytic capabilities that will enable analysts to explore “What else could have happened?”

(i) (Track A only) Demonstrate the ability to disseminate classified M&S-specific and analytic data through network connections

Further details on the FOC Objective, Requirements, and Demonstration are provided in Appendix B—SECRET Classified Addendum. See Section IV.A.2. for more information.

3. Deliverables

All proposers awarded procurement contracts or Other Transactions (OTs) will be required to provide, at a minimum, the following deliverables:

a. Any technical papers derived from work funded by the SAFE-SiM program;

b. Documentation for artifacts and algorithms in addition to software, to include commented source code developed under this program. Documentation will be provided no later than at the end of each phase, and as appropriate for test and evaluation;

c. Detailed program management plan must be delivered at the program kick-off meeting, and updated/delivered on a quarterly basis;

d. Annotated slide presentations must be submitted within one week after the program kickoff meeting and after each program event (program reviews, PI meetings, and technical interchange meetings);

e. Quarterly technical status reports detailing progress made, tasks accomplished, major risks, planned activities, trip summaries, changes to key personnel, and any potential issues or problem areas that require the attention of the Government team must be provided within 15 calendar days of the end of each quarter;

f. Monthly financial status reports must be provided within 15 calendar days of the end of each calendar month;

g. A final phase report Word document for each program phase that concisely summarizes the effort conducted, technical achievements, and remaining technical challenges will be due 30 calendar days after the end of each phase; a Final Report at the end of the overall period of performance that summarizes the entire project, as well as, a Software Transition Plan (STrP) providing the information needed for the government to replicate and maintain the SAFE-SiM software; and

h. Provide a user’s guide, training materials, and hands-on live training demonstrations

(2) on how the simulation architecture works, tasks that can be completed, and what to do when encountering software discrepancies.

Documentation of reasoning behind trade-studies, key decisions, and methodology approaches is mandatory. Government and industry standards, as well as, best-practices will be applied to all documentation and software commenting.

4. Program Metrics

Program success will be evaluated against a set of high-level metrics listed in Table 1 below that are oriented toward assessing the performance of the M&S system as a whole and the execution of the mission vignettes described above. It is expected that performers will use these metrics and vignettes to derive and track functional and physical requirements for subsystem development.

Metric # Entities1 Simulation Speed2

Simulated Mission Duration3

# Security Classifications4

(Track A only)

# Security Compartments & Releasabilties5

(Track A only)

New Classification Accuracy6

(Track A only)

Time for 5GB M&S Data Ingestion7,8

(Track A only)

Time for 5GB M&S and Analytic Data Dissemination7,9

(Track A only) Proof of Concept

Threshold 1,000 10x 2 hours 2 100 85% 2 hours 2 hours Goal 10,000 20x 4 hours 4 1,000 95% 30 minutes 30 minutes

Initial Operational Capability

Threshold 10,000 20x 8 hours 3 1,000 95% 30 minutes 30 minutes Goal 20,000 40x 12 hours 4 2,000 99% 10 minutes 10 minutes

Final Operational Capability

Threshold 100,000 25x 24 hours 4 2,000 99% 10 minutes 1 minute

Table 1

1. Entities are defined as any representation in the simulation that has functions or behaviors that are modeled. For example, a single platform such as an aircraft constitutes an entity, as do the subsystems on the aircraft such as the radar. The aircraft may also be part of a larger formation, which also constitutes an entity if the behavior of the larger formation is also modeled.

2. Simulation speed is number of times faster-than-real-time

3. Simulated mission duration is the real-time execution duration of the simulated mission

4. Classifications = Unclassified, Confidential, Secret, Top Secret

5. Compartments and releasabilities refer to handling caveats, releasability, SAPs, ACCMs, CAPs, etc.

6. (Track A Only) Classification accuracy refers only to newly-determined classification simulation-produced data, not previously labeled data

7. (Track A Only) Time for data ingestion and dissemination refers only to the time it takes to cross the security boundary to either enter or exit MSIE. It does not include any external network performance effects.

8. (Track A Only) M&S data is defined as any data necessary to build and execute a simulation, such as models or scenarios, including (but not limited to) text files, executable code, etc.

9. (Track A Only) Analytic data includes any data produced as a result of analysis performed on simulations run within MSIE, including (but not limited to) 4k

HD video and common word processing, presentation, and spreadsheet products.

II. Award Information

A. General Award Information

Multiple awards are anticipated. The amount of resources made available under this BAA will depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds.

The Government reserves the right to select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of the proposals received in response to this solicitation and to make awards without discussions with proposers. The Government also reserves the right to conduct discussions if it is later determined to be necessary. If warranted, portions of resulting awards may be segregated into pre-priced options. Additionally, DARPA reserves the right to accept proposals in their entirety or to select only portions of proposals for award. In the event that DARPA desires to award only portions of a proposal, negotiations may be opened with that proposer. The Government reserves the right to fund proposals in phases with options for continued work, as applicable.

The Government reserves the right to request any additional, necessary documentation once it makes the award instrument determination. Such additional information may include but is not limited to Representations and Certifications (see Section VI.B.2., “Representations and Certifications”). The Government reserves the right to remove proposers from award consideration should the parties fail to reach agreement on award terms, conditions, and/or cost/price within a reasonable time, and the proposer fails to timely provide requested additional information. Proposals identified for negotiation may result in a procurement contract or other transaction, depending upon the nature of the work proposed, the required degree of interaction between parties, whether or not the research is classified as Fundamental Research, and other factors.

Proposers looking for innovative, commercial-like contractual arrangements are encouraged to consider requesting Other Transactions. To understand the flexibility and options associated with Other Transactions, consult http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions.

In accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 2371b(f), the Government may award a follow-on production contract or Other Transaction (OT) for any OT awarded under this BAA if: (1) that participant in the OT, or a recognized successor in interest to the OT, successfully completed the entire prototype project provided for in the OT, as modified; and (2) the OT provides for the award of a follow-on production contract or OT to the participant, or a recognized successor in interest to the OT.

In all cases, the Government contracting officer shall have sole discretion to select award instrument type, regardless of instrument type proposed, and to negotiate all instrument terms and conditions with selectees. DARPA will apply publication or other restrictions, as necessary, if it determines that the research resulting from the proposed effort will present a high likelihood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies that are unique and critical to defense. Any award resulting from such a determination will include a http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions requirement for DARPA permission before publishing any information or results on the program. For more information on publication restrictions, see the section below on Fundamental Research.

B. Fundamental Research

It is DoD policy that the publication of products of fundamental research will remain unrestricted to the maximum extent possible. National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 189 defines fundamental research as follows:

‘Fundamental research’ means basic and applied research in science and engineering, the results of which ordinarily are published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from proprietary research and from industrial development, design, production, and product utilization, the results of which ordinarily are restricted for proprietary or national security reasons.

As of the date of publication of this BAA, the Government expects that program goals as described herein may be met by proposed efforts for fundamental research and non-fundamental research. Some proposed research may present a high likelihood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies that are unique and critical to defense. Based on the anticipated type of proposer (e.g., university or industry) and the nature of the solicited work, the Government expects that some awards will include restrictions on the resultant research that will require the awardee to seek DARPA permission before publishing any information or results relative to the program.

Proposers should indicate in their proposal whether they believe the scope of the research included in their proposal is fundamental or not. While proposers should clearly explain the intended results of their research, the Government shall have sole discretion to determine whether the proposed research shall be considered fundamental and to select the award instrument type. Appropriate language will be included in resultant awards for non-fundamental research to prescribe publication requirements and other restrictions, as appropriate. This language can be found at http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa.

For certain research projects, it may be possible that although the research to be performed by a potential awardee is non-fundamental research, its proposed subawardee’s effort may be fundamental research. It is also possible that the research performed by a potential awardee is fundamental research while its proposed subawardee’s effort may be non-fundamental research.

In all cases, it is the potential awardee’s responsibility to explain in its proposal which proposed efforts are fundamental research and why the proposed efforts should be considered fundamental research.

III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa

All responsible sources capable of satisfying the Government's needs may submit a proposal that shall be considered by DARPA.

1. Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and Government Entities

a. FFRDCs FFRDCs are subject to applicable direct competition limitations and cannot propose to this BAA in any capacity unless they meet the following conditions. (1) FFRDCs must clearly demonstrate that the proposed work is not otherwise available from the private sector. (2) FFRDCs must provide a letter, on official letterhead from their sponsoring organization, that (a) cites the specific authority establishing their eligibility to propose to Government solicitations and compete with industry, and (b) certifies the FFRDC’s compliance with the associated FFRDC sponsor agreement’s terms and conditions. These conditions are a requirement for FFRDCs proposing to be awardees or subawardees.

b. Government Entities Government Entities (e.g., Government/National laboratories, military educational institutions, etc.) are subject to applicable direct competition limitations. Government Entities must clearly demonstrate that the work is not otherwise available from the private sector and provide written documentation citing the specific statutory authority and contractual authority, if relevant, establishing their ability to propose to Government solicitations and compete with industry. This information is required for Government Entities proposing to be awardees or subawardees.

c. Authority and Eligibility At the present time, DARPA does not consider 15 U.S.C. § 3710a to be sufficient legal authority to show eligibility. While 10 U.S.C.§ 2539b may be the appropriate statutory starting point for some entities, specific supporting regulatory guidance, together with evidence of agency approval, will still be required to fully establish eligibility. DARPA will consider FFRDC and Government Entity eligibility submissions on a case-by-case basis; however, the burden to prove eligibility for all team members rests solely with the proposer.

(1) Non-U.S. organizations and/or individuals may participate to the extent that such participants comply with any necessary nondisclosure agreements, security regulations, export control laws, and other governing statutes applicable under the circumstances.

(2) For classified proposals, applicants will ensure all industrial, personnel, and information systems processing security requirements are in place and at the appropriate level (e.g., Facility Clearance Level (FCL), Automated Information Security (AIS), Certification and Accreditation (C&A), and any Foreign Ownership Control and Influence (FOCI) issues are mitigated prior to submission. Additional information on these subjects can be found at http://www.dss.mil.

http://www.dss.mil/

B. Organizational Conflicts of Interest

FAR 9.5 Requirements In accordance with FAR 9.5, proposers are required to identify and disclose all facts relevant to potential OCIs involving the proposer’s organization and any proposed team member (subawardee, consultant). Under this Section, the proposer is responsible for providing this disclosure with each proposal submitted to the BAA. The disclosure must include the proposer’s, and as applicable, proposed team member’s OCI mitigation plan. The OCI mitigation plan must include a description of the actions the proposer has taken, or intends to take, to prevent the existence of conflicting roles that might bias the proposer’s judgment and to prevent the proposer from having unfair competitive advantage. The OCI mitigation plan will specifically discuss the disclosed OCI in the context of each of the OCI limitations outlined in FAR 9.505-1 through FAR 9.505-4.

Agency Supplemental OCI Policy In addition, DARPA has a supplemental OCI policy that prohibits contractors/performers from concurrently providing Scientific Engineering Technical Assistance (SETA), Advisory and Assistance Services (A&AS) or similar support services and being a technical performer. Therefore, as part of the FAR 9.5 disclosure requirement above, a proposer must affirm whether the proposer or any proposed team member (subawardee, consultant) is providing SETA, A&AS, or similar support to any DARPA office(s) under:

(a) a current award or subaward; or (b) a past award or subaward that ended within one calendar year prior to the proposal’s submission date.

If SETA, A&AS, or similar support is being or was provided to any DARPA office(s), the proposal must include:

The name of the DARPA office receiving the support;

The prime contract number;

Identification of proposed team member (subawardee, consultant) providing the support; and An OCI mitigation plan in accordance with FAR 9.5.

Government Procedures In accordance with FAR 9.503, 9.504 and 9.506, the Government will evaluate OCI mitigation plans to avoid, neutralize or mitigate potential OCI issues before award and to determine whether it is in the Government’s interest to grant a waiver. The Government will only evaluate OCI mitigation plans for proposals that are determined selectable under the BAA evaluation criteria and funding availability.

The Government may require proposers to provide additional information to assist the Government in evaluating the proposer’s OCI mitigation plan.

If the Government determines that a proposer failed to fully disclose an OCI; or failed to provide the affirmation of DARPA support as described above; or failed to reasonably provide additional information requested by the Government to assist in evaluating the proposer’s OCI mitigation plan, the Government may reject the proposal and withdraw it from consideration for award.

C. Cost Sharing/Matching

Cost sharing is not required; however, it will be carefully considered where there is an applicable statutory condition relating to the selected funding instrument.