A01_Announcement_MC_BAA_POC_update_24_July_2018.doc

United States Army

Communications-Electronics Research, Development and Engineering Center

Aberdeen Proving Ground, MD 21005 Broad Agency Announcement

W56KGU-17-R-MC17*

ADVANCED TECHNOLOGIES TO ACHIEVE EXPEDITIONARY UNINTERRUPTED MISSION COMMAND

COMMAND, POWER & INTEGRATION (CP&I) DIRECTORATE

August 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Part I

Introduction

Part II

General Information

Part III

Scope - Research Interests

Part IV

Research Interest Topics

Part V

Topic Response Requirements

Part VI

Submission Preparation and Format

Part VI I Submissions

Part VIII Full Proposal Evaluation

APPENDIX

A Contract Price Proposal Cover Sheet, SF 1411-1

PART I

INTRODUCTION

This document is a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) sponsored by the U.S. Army Communications Electronics Research, Development and Engineering Center (CERDEC). This BAA will be valid through 28 August 2022, unless sooner terminated at the government’s discretion. This BAA is issued under the provisions of paragraphs 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016 of the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), which provides for the competitive selection of research and development proposals submitted in response to this announcement. Accordingly, full proposals selected for award are considered to be the result of full and open competition and fully compliant with PL 98-369, entitled “The Competition in Contracting Act of 1984”. Solicitation No. W56KGU-17-R-MC17 will be used for this effort. All awards made in accordance with this BAA will be selected via a two-step process. All offerors must submit white papers as detailed in PART VI. After the white papers have been evaluated, only those offerors whose white papers are deemed most beneficial to the Government will be asked to provide a formal full proposal for further evaluation and potential contract award in accordance with PART VIII.

Prospective offerors should note that this BAA is an expression of interest only and does not commit the Government to make an award or pay proposal or white paper preparation costs generated in response to this announcement. For this solicitation, the costs of response preparation are not considered allowable direct charges to any resultant contract or any other contract. No contract award will be made unless appropriated funds are available.

Proposals will be considered from all organization’s interested in conducting scientific research. This includes colleges and universities, non-profit research institutions, commercial firms, small business and small disadvantaged business concerns, historically black colleges and universities, and minority business enterprises and institutions. Other prospective offerors include commercial companies, educational institutions, non-profit organizations, and Canadian firms participating in the Defense Sharing Development Program.

All submissions, to include white papers and full proposals, should be directed to Michelle Williams-Gibson, Contract Specialist, 443-861-4613, email: michelle.williams-gibson.civ@mail.mil or Tammy Woodard, Contracting Officer, 443-861-4642, email: tammy.m.woodard2.civ@mail.mil. No contract award will be made unless appropriated funds are available for research and development. Prospective offerors are reminded that only a duly warranted contracting officer may obligate the Government to an agreement involving the expenditure of Government funds.

Questions concerning contractual, cost or pricing, or proposal format matters may be directed to Michelle Williams-Gibson, Contract Specialist, 443-861-4613, email: michelle.williams-gibson.civ@mail.mil or Tammy Woodard, Contracting Officer, 443-861-4642, email: tammy.m.woodard2.civ@mail.mil.

Technical questions shall be directed to the Contract Specialist and/or Contracting Officer. Technical questions will then be forwarded to the technical point of contact (TPOC) responsible for specific research areas of interest under PART IV. Prospective offerors are advised that all communication, prior and after white paper/full proposal submission, shall be routed through either Michelle Williams-Gibson, Contract Specialist, 443-861-4613, email: michelle.williams-gibson.civ@mail.mil or Tammy Woodard, Contracting Officer, 443-861-4642, email: tammy.m.woodard2.civ@mail.mil. No discussions are to be held with offerors by the technical staff after receipt of white paper/ full proposal submission without permission of the Contracting Officer.

There will be no formal Request for Proposals (RFP) or any further solicitation documents issued in regard to this BAA. Interested parties should be alert for any BAA amendments or additional areas of research interests that may be published under this BAA on the Army Single Face to Industry webpage, available at https://acquisition.army.mil/, or on the Federal Business Opportunities (FBO) webpage, available at https://www.fbo.gov/.

PART II

GENERAL INFORMATION

The U. S. Army CERDEC is soliciting proposals under this BAA for the performance of research, development, design, and testing that directly supports advancement of battlefield technologies in the area of Expeditionary uninterrupted Mission Command. The aim of this BAA is to discover technical approaches to improve and enhance current and future expeditionary capabilities, flexibility, and responsiveness in line with CERDEC’s strategic vision for enhancing soldier capabilities to operate in a symmetric and unsymmetrical environment.

CERDEC’s plan is to support multiple and potentially multiphase efforts that pursue the design, development, integration, and demonstration of critical and enabling technologies and systems attributes pertaining to Expeditionary uninterrupted Mission Command. Proposed efforts will primarily be of time, material, and services with aims at resolving technical barriers as identified under PART IV.

It is anticipated that proposals submitted in response to this BAA would range in scope of effort from study/analysis type work with limited data and hardware/software deliverables to larger efforts for component developments, techniques, and demonstrations with breadboard and/or prototype style deliverables. The Government realizes that varying technical/scientific approaches will be employed by potential offerors.

The Government anticipates use of a Cost-Plus-Fixed-Fee (CPFF) type of contract in connection with this BAA. The Government reserves the right to alter the type of contract. Offerors may propose alternate contract types providing that the alternative is supported in the proposal. Alternative contract types, if proposed by the offeror, will be negotiated before award.

To be eligible for award of a contract, all prospective offerors, with the exception of other governments, including state and local government agencies, must meet certain minimum standards pertaining to financial resources, adequacy of accounting systems, ability to comply with performance schedules, prior record of past performance, integrity, organizational structure, experience, operational controls, technical skills, facilities and equipment. For additional information and guidance concerning qualifications and standards for responsibility of prospective contractors, please refer to Part 9 of the FAR.

There are certain post-employment restrictions on former federal officers and employees (Section 207 of Title 18, United States Code). If a prospective offeror believes a potential conflict of interest may exist, the situation must be brought to the attention of the Contracting Officer before expending time and effort in proposal preparation.

Offerors shall make their proposals valid for at least 180 days. The Government reserves the right to make an award at any time during the life of this BAA. The Government also reserves the right to fund all, some, one, or none of the full proposals received under this BAA.

The Government shall consider Contractor Teaming Arrangements, as set forth in FAR Subpart 9.6, or Defense Research and Development Pools as set forth in FAR Subpart 9.7.

The Government requires that prospective offerors prepare and submit white papers in accordance with instructions in PART VI prior to preparing a full proposal. This will assist prospective offerors in avoiding the expense of preparing a full proposal that may not be selected for award under this BAA. Format and submission preparation requirements are further explained under PART VI.

All white papers and full proposals will be reviewed and responded to regardless of its final disposition. Once again, the Government will not be responsible for any costs associated with the preparation and delivery of submissions.

PART III

SCOPE – RESEARCH INTERESTS

Program Description(s):

The U.S. Army CERDEC CP&I Directorate has the mission of research, design, development, initial acquisition, integration, demonstration, and testing of a variety of experimental, inventory, commercial-off-the-shelf and other electronic Command, Control, Communications, and Computers Intelligence, Surveillance, and Reconnaissance (C4ISR) systems for a variety of Army missions.

The goal is to support CERDEC’s Strategic Thrust for Battlefield Technology Application by providing technical and operational capabilities that makes the planning and execution of battlefield operations as responsive, flexible, expeditionary, and successful as other aspects of U.S. Warfighting. Proposed technical approaches may apply to operations both before and after the cessation of hostilities. This announcement emphasizes approaches that address the very different challenges presented by urban fighting and dramatically enhance war fighter capabilities; for example, the ability to interact, maneuver, and operate under a time constrained environment. These changes should generally result in lower casualties, lower collateral damage, and the effective use of combat power.

In order to achieve the capabilities described above, CP&I Directorate will pursue the design, development, integration, and demonstration of critical and enabling technologies and system attributes pertaining to citied areas of interest. Offerors should emphasize radical concepts that may contain high technical risk, but if enabled, would have commensurate high military payoff. The Government is not interested in extensions to existing CERDEC programs or minor improvements to operational capability. Rather, CERDEC is seeking innovative concepts that will provide either an entirely new military capability or will enhance existing capability by orders of magnitude (based on demonstrable relevant metrics).

Offerors should be prepared to support the technical feasibility of their concept or idea, and then be prepared to demonstrate and discuss successive phases leading toward technology development. Offerors should also be prepared to propose a base effort supporting the technical feasibility of their concept or idea, and to propose pre-priced options or subsequent phases that further lead toward technology development. It is envisioned that the effort proposed will have a base effort of 12 months and two (2) option periods of 12 months. Offerors should not propose total efforts exceeding 36 months.

PART IV

RESEARCH INTEREST TOPIC ONE (1)

Research Interest: Command Applications of Machine Learning Division: CERDEC, CP&I Directorate, Mission Command Capabilities Division OBJECTIVE: The objective of this topic is to study the applicability of Machine Learning technologies and other appropriate artificial intelligence techniques in support of Mission Command in constrained operational environments. The Army desires the same decision making superiority over adversaries in complex, contested, and dense urban settings that it holds in conflicts in open settings without imbedded civilian populations and infrastructure. Machine Learning capabilities that find patterns in large heterogeneous datasets and improve the speed and accuracy of data-driven decision tools used by Commanders in operational environments are desired.

DESCRIPTION: Data-driven decision tools rely on models and software that consume real-time operational data to provide predictions, alerts, and recommendations. Developing models to analyze data to help Commanders and Staff make better decisions more quickly is challenging. The process of perception, comprehension, and projection of higher meaning of data occurs repeatedly, with decisions and actions taken driving future solider and team decisions. Higher order understanding and insights can be difficult to develop or support with software algorithms, as the mental processes individuals follow can show variation from person to person. Additionally, data not tied to the physical world (e.g., terrain, weather, munitions, strength of enemy forces, network availability, etc.) can be difficult to assess for mission impact. Data from sensors and soldier-worn devices, along with data from red and gray networks and social media, all have potential relevance for Mission Command and its associated warfighting functions. Individual and group context can be important. Data that are traditionally thought of as “intelligence data”, if analyzed quickly for impact on tactical missions, may also be relevant. Key characteristics aspects of the available data - Volume, Velocity, Variety, Veracity and Value – must be considered. This topic is centered on improving Mission Command by moving from a “small data” paradigm to one where “big data” improves team synchronization and performance.

Machine Learning technology and other appropriate artificial intelligence techniques are promising path forward for the development of data-driven decision support for Mission Command. Models and the software associated with them rely on data sets, typically large and accessible, to adjust the model and tune the data processing software to improve performance. The outputs, of course, are measurable and provide feedback. Having training data that are consistent with the data available during system operation is critical to the software’s performance. The tactical, urban operational environment is also characterized by limited computing power, limited and low bandwidth networks, rapidly changing threats, and complex engagements; all of those challenges and their impacts on Machine Learning should be considered.

This effort will research the use of Machine Learning and other appropriate artificial intelligence techniques in tactical environments and develop technical artifacts and insights that address its shortcomings in those settings. Key areas of study include:

- An architecture that enables the collection of data, processing by Machine Learning algorithms, and dissemination of results

- Reference implementations of key aspects of that architecture

- Feasibility of training a general model on a large dataset from many sources (e.g., high echelon), and then tailoring it to a smaller dataset from a specific source (e.g., low echelon)

- Setting up a lab environment that enables quick integration of off-the-shelf Machine Learning, and testing it for a specific use

- Feasibility of expanding the data inputs to avoid small datasets that limit the operational accuracy of machine learning

- Verification and validation of models and software

- Leveraging and incorporating human learning

- Assessment of using different types of machine learning (e.g., supervised learning, unsupervised learning, reinforcement learning, and neural networks)

- A framework including standards, as well as implementation and design guidance

- The research and technical approach must consider:

-What kinds of machine learning technologies and other appropriate artificial intelligence techniques are best suited given the range of Army mission command problems?

-Where should the machine learning technologies and other appropriate artificial intelligence techniques components reside in the system architecture?

-How should the Army maintain and evolve the decision aids developed now and into the future?

PART IV

RESEARCH INTEREST TOPIC TWO (2)

Research Interest: Command of Autonomous Teams Division: CERDEC, CP&I Directorate, Mission Command Capabilities Division OBJECTIVE: Support Army initiatives to integrate Robotics and Autonomous Systems (RAS) and Manned Unmanned Teaming (MUM-T) with Mission Command Information Systems (MCIS) and doctrine allowing commanders’ the ability to plan, monitor and incorporate RAS into formations and missions.

DESCRIPTION: Currently fielded RAS, especially at company or below, are not integrated into the mission command structure, but designed to be tele-operated or used with waypoint navigation. However the Army RAS are expected to migrate from tele-operated to semi-autonomous and fully autonomous in the out years. There is currently no technology that allows for the creation and distribution of digital plans from solider operated Mission Command Information Systems (MCIS) to RAS. MCIS do not currently update RAS world models with relevant situational awareness and understanding (SA/SU) to improve the decision making of the RAS. Current MCIS systems are not able to adequately represent the abilities and limitations of planned RAS to the soldiers. These challenges represent a significant capability gap that hinders the command and supervision of RAS by soldiers, manned unmanned teaming and sharing SA/SU between RAS and MCIS.

Further analysis on the impact of RAS on the operations process and the development of new technologies to fully integrate RAS into the mission command structure is needed to incorporate the teaming of manned/unmanned systems as a critical force multipliers. This will ultimately enable a better understanding of a commander's intent and mission goals to match tactical behaviors to mission needs allowing an increased level of autonomy by RAS. Greater SA/SU can be brought to the tactical edge through the development of software tools and services which improve the ability to monitor, share mission plans and update situational awareness information with RAS in order to facilitate increased autonomy and mission complexity.

Mission plans and situational awareness information must be provisioned for the unique capabilities brought by specific RAS as well as heterogeneous teams of humans and robots. Bidirectional information flows will be needed to allow MCIS to provide planning information and SA/SU to RAS and vice versa as well as the ability to allow RAS to request information or ask questions in order to complete the mission or clarify the commander’s intent.

The development of a reference architecture and implementations that include the data structures and services to enable dissemination to and execution of the plan by unmanned assets is desired. That architecture should also provide technical guidance for autonomous status updates back to the commanding entity. Trust in the unmanned systems, as well as an appropriate level of human involvement in targeting decisions, are goals as the unmanned systems work progresses. Key aspects of increased autonomy include the development of software that clearly communicates status of all sensors and settings, as well as any available contextual information. The architecture should also inform the development of intelligent drone swarms focused on the commander’s intent.

PART IV

RESEARCH INTEREST TOPIC THREE (3)

Research Interest: Rapid Decision Making for Tactical Mission Command Division: CERDEC, CP&I Directorate, Mission Command Capabilities Division OBJECTIVE: The objective of this topic is to enable the commander and staff increased levels of Situation Awareness (SA) in urban warfare, and to thereby make better decisions more quickly. In future urban environments, the ability to transmit and process data, which often comes in high volume and high velocity, to inform Mission Command decisions is critical. Close-in tactical sensor data collected in real-time in these high intensity conflicts have a direct impact on the targeting and maneuver aspects of Mission.

DESCRIPTION: Future urban warfare scenarios that are being studied will pose new challenges, with many current Army technological advantages over adversaries being obfuscated by the environment. The Army needs the ability to operate effectively in urban areas with dense red and gray populations, and to create the processing, exploitation, and dissemination, coupled with intuitive targeting, to overwhelm adversary C2 and OPTEMPO. The data that comes from a network of collectors and sensors, some of which will be soldier-worn, will be both voluminous and high-velocity, challenging existing analysis capabilities, in an environment where quick analysis will often be critical.

Much of the data will be related to developing a physical picture of the conflict area, and some will enable soldiers to more quickly find and target the enemy. The impact of that data on the ability of the commander and staff to collaborate and coordinate activity in support of Mission Command needs to be assessed. Additionally and critically, there are relevant data in gray networks and social media that need rapid evaluation. The relationship of Cyber Electromagnetic Activities (CEMA) to Mission Command, as well as the relationship to Mission Command of data collected both before and during enemy engagements as part of Intelligence Preparation of the Battlefield, also need to be considered. Also critical is identifying the key Mission Command themes in the processing, exploitation, and dissemination of data – for example, information pertaining to key command information and intelligence requirements. An integrated sensor and data architecture, as well as an integrated visual ensemble, are important technical components.

The automatic collection and assessment of individual and group context, as well as the development of adaptive decision models, are topics of interest. Modelling and Simulation to represent and mature these decision models needs to be done. Those models will be part of the delivery of Situation Awareness information to the Commander and Staff. Various techniques, including artificial intelligence, to drive the decision cycle are of interest. The ability of commander and staff to update the decision models and recommendations is critical. The decision models should also adapt over time as they are exercised.

PART IV

RESEARCH INTEREST TOPIC FOUR (4)

Research Interest: Predictive Visualizations for Rapid Decision Making Division: CERDEC, CP&I Directorate, Mission Command Capabilities Division OBJECTIVE: The goal of this topic is to research and develop visualization techniques to limit the cognitive burden when making difficult operational decisions. The visualization techniques should enable soldiers at all echelons to make better decisions more quickly though the initial focus will be Company and below in support of the small unit. The technology developed will help soldiers to use all information in the mission command network most effectively by ensuring the data and the way it is presented at any point in time are in alignment with the soldiers’ cognitive requirements and contextual framework.

DESCRIPTION: As the military transitions to providing soldiers with information superiority, information overwhelms the soldier with multiple systems that manipulate the same data in inconsistent formats, stress, temporal constraints and static user interfaces that are not tailored to changes in battlefield situations. Existing mission command tools have limited effectiveness when presenting the impacts of decisions to military commanders. When making a decision an operator must reason through multiple sets of changing data, weigh this information within the context of the current plan, and thoroughly understand the current operating environment. Much of this information contains more detail than is required, received from many different sources (human and sensor), and is presented in a variety of modes (text, voice, image). This highly detailed information is not aligned with human cognitive capabilities when presented to the soldier. Further research and development of new technologies to provide mission contextual visualizations to address information abundance to tailor and present knowledge to the solider/teams that speed decision making at the tactical edge.

This effort will develop design guides and software that can predict visualization needs and apply filtering, aggregation and approximation techniques in real time based on context, mission and role for adaptive information presentation to individuals and teams. A solider centered design will allow mission command applications to be aware of the point and role in the mission, communication/network status and then act upon that information to efficiently and effectively transmit or present information while also optimizing the shared resources of the host information system. A predictive visualization should also encompass a design guide for visualizing mission command decisions through an investigation of current academic, commercial and military visualization techniques. The design guide will include human cognition factors and provide instructions for implementing decision visualization capabilities. Ultimately leading to the development of software that presents decisions and suggested courses of action to a commander, allowing them to understand the primary impact as well as the second and third order effects of decisions. The software tool will be flexible enough to allow customization based on operational context and commander traits, thus providing greater understanding of impacts and faster decision making.

PART IV

RESEARCH INTEREST TOPIC FIVE (5)

Research Interest: Emerging Mission Command

Division: CERDEC, CP&I Directorate, Mission Command Capabilities Division

OBJECTIVE: CERDEC CP&I Directorate is interested in empowering agile and adaptive commanders and leaders at all echelons for network-aware mission command through integrated and intuitive decision support capabilities encapsulating staff-level expertise across the full spectrum of operations. The objective of this effort will be to leverage or create the necessary decision support services, intuitive visualizations and natural user interfaces (NUI), and agile infrastructure and integration techniques between the Programs of Record (POR) within the Command and Control, Network Operations, Cyber Operations, and Networked Fires and Effects communities to improve situational awareness and understanding leading to decisive action. The target payoff is reduced Soldier decision cycle time and data overhead, optimized network transport configuration and performance through mission characterization, increased small-unit time critical targeting capability, and delivering incremental and evolving capabilities to POR customers. This effort will integrate solutions with the CERDEC Space and Terrestrial Communications Directorate (S&TCD) and the Armament Research, Development and Engineering Center (ARDEC) Weapons and Software Engineering Center (WSEC).

DESCRIPTION: As the Army adapts to incorporate Multi-Domain Battle concepts, there is a great emphasis on decentralized execution. However, leaders are constrained in making timely decisions at the lowest practical echelon because there is limited or no staff-level expertise, a lack of integrated decision support capabilities, and limited situational awareness (SA), all of which combine to slow the overall operations process. At the lower echelons, where the commander or leader does not have support staff, Soldiers may be tasked with performing staff-level functions (such as Intelligence Officer, Operations Officer, etc.). However, they may have limited training and experience in performing those functions using the available tools. The tactical edge needs focused decision support tools encapsulating staff expertise that intuitively provide relevant, fused information to improve SA and ensure operational adaptability to changing priorities. The tools should provide the user with the expertise and experience that is available in higher echelon staff elements in order to accomplish the assigned tasks, as well as train the user to perform the tasks and leverage the available tools more effectively through operational use of the tools. The overarching theme is to increase the unit effectiveness within the existing troop complement. Technical approach will consider how organizations obtain information, comprehend & process information, accumulate & internalize information and to make decisions and execute those decisions and its impact to software tools to aid organizational decision-making.

PART IV

RESEARCH INTEREST TOPIC SIX (6)

Research Interest: Infrastructure Technologies Enabling Mission Command

Division: CERDEC, CP&I Directorate, Mission Command Capabilities Division

OBJECTIVE: CERDEC CP&I Directorate is interested in developing infrastructure technologies that enable Mission Command computer systems to be lighter, smaller, more maintainable, simplified for ease of use and more easily adapted to new and/or emerging conditions on the battlefield. As used here, infrastructure technologies are those that are not specific to the military domain or a particular military discipline. These technologies may encompass both computer software (such as databases) and hardware (such as display capabilities).

DESCRIPTION: To this end, CP&I is interested in advanced technologies that address the following challenges: (1) enabling truly common data services via lightweight and flexible technologies that are scalable and adaptable to host multiple “schema” simultaneously; (2) data mediation that is rapidly adaptable, easily tested and verified, and easy to configure and operate; (3) advanced display and controls technologies that allows transparent user/system interaction to facilitate problem solving/decision-making/ situation awareness/ while operable in demanding environments, including soldier-borne, mounted, and command-post; (4) network-aware software interfaces that enable applications to tailor their behavior to the available network capability.

PART IV

RESEARCH INTEREST TOPIC SEVEN (7)

Research Interest: Logistics Application

Division: CERDEC, CP&I Directorate, Mission Command Capabilities Division

OBJECTIVE: Provide an enhanced capability for Mission Command’s logistical functions by providing a running estimate and commander's combat effectiveness through the automated collection, rollup, aggregation and analysis of sensor data and manual reporting.

DESCRIPTION: The enhanced Mission Command’s logistical function shall provide the ability for JBC-P software to ingest and display fuel, ammunition, and health/maintenance status data from vehicle/platforms while in transit. A Mission Command Concept of Operations (CONOPS) should test the JBC-P logistics software ability to allow commanders to determine if a platform is ready for a particular mission, or if the platform requires resupply or maintenance. Demonstration must ensure the logistics status data is distributed from the JBC-P system to the commander, and to the Network Operations Center (NOC) or S4 designated location. The logistics app(s) should provide functionality for inventory tracking, reporting, rollup, aggregation and dissemination of the logistics picture. Use cases are required and must take into account the Common Operating Environment (COE) requirements for Command Post, mounted and dismounted, relating to the VMF 6017C specification as a message interchange format. With change set C, Use Cases should include a number of existing and new messages sent over the air, including K04.18-31 Sensor Data Link messages, K07.9 Supply Point/Area Status Report Messages, a K07.13 Platform Status Report Message, a K07.14 Platform Service Alert Message, and a K08.1 Prepositioned Supply Report Message. These messages should either be logistics related or be populated using sensors on the vehicle.

PART IV

RESEARCH INTEREST TOPIC EIGHT (8)

Research Interest: Adaptable, Resilient Command Posts

Division: CERDEC, CP&I Directorate, Mission Command Capabilities Division

OBJECTIVE: The goal of this topic is to research, develop and demonstrate Command Posts (CP) technologies, standards, and equipment that supports a simple, modular, survivable, and adaptable CP that supports distributed operations with a small footprint/signature. The Command Post exists wherever the commander and staff are located thus it can be a traditional fixed node, tent, or mounted environment. An effective Command Post is central to support the key functions of the commander and staff. This efforts seeks to provide the infrastructure to ensure the commander has staff have the most efficient equipment, configurations and infrastructure to quickly perform mission tasks and operate in contested environments against near peers.

DESCRIPTION: Current Command Post usage has led to large, overly complex and non-standard equipment interfaces. The current challenges with CPs’ include excessive tear down and setup times, easy to detect command post signatures (footprint/electromagnetic), inefficient power usage, lack of operational adaptability and challenges to provide the right information at the right time. This efforts will focus on the CP technologies and standards that enables an effective command post across multiple phases of the operations and in different operational environments that facilitates the Commanders goals and subsequent organization formalization as it applies to information warfare and organizational decision-making.

This effort shall include a CP node demonstrator that applies integration and modularity standards to the Command Post and demonstrates operational effectiveness in distributed operations and adaptability/resiliency in an Access/Area Denial (A2/AD) environments facilitating how organizations obtain information, comprehend & process information, accumulate & internalize information and to make decisions and execute those decisions. This effort shall include studies, reports and demonstration of small form factor computing hardware and software infrastructure components to enable flexible and modular CPs. Additional studies and standards should include distributed and contested operations study and an implementation strategy touching on: network, power, software, and physical standards for integration into mounted/fixed CP nodes. The utilization of modeling and simulation tools can be used to optimize CP employment.

PART V

TOPIC RESPONSE REQUIREMENTS

REQUIREMENTS TO BE ADDRESSED IN SUBMISSIONS

In addition to the requirements specified in PART VI of the BAA, it is recommended that the following be addressed in submissions if applicable:

· Any expected deliverables, to include:

Hardware

· Quantity

· Cost

· Warranties

· Physical interfaces

· Expected performance parameters

· Documentation/manuals/specifications/etc

Software

· Operating system

· Platform

· Compatibility with existing commercial protocols

· Interoperability with commercial protocols

· APIs

· Portability of Software solutions

· Documentation/manuals/specifications/etc

Reports

· Monthly

· Technical Report

· Final

Reviews

· Kick-off Meeting

· Final Review

· Leveraging from a past or existing DOD research program

· Leveraging commercial technology

· Utilization of Commercial-Off-the Shelf(COTS)/Government-Off-the-Shelf(GOTS)

· Utilization of open systems / open standards

· Proprietary nature of technology or product solution

· Intellectual property rights

· Ability to be integrated with other technologies or into other C2 systems

· Portability of solutions to other DOD platforms

· Potential transition strategies

PART VI

SUBMISSION PREPARATION AND FORMAT

6.1 SUBMISSION INFORMATION AND GUIDELINES.

6.2 Information and Guidelines for Preparation and Submission of White Papers The purpose of the white paper is to permit the submitter to present an explanation of the idea/concept, its technical merit, and military relevance in a cost effective and efficient manner. The submitter should articulate the innovative concept and technology development needed with respect to demonstrable metrics. Offerors should explain in the white paper the feasibility of idea/concept transition to the military, other government agencies or organizations, or other interested users, as applicable. Additionally, offerors should clearly specify the intended demonstrable improvements over current systems, explain transition paths, specify tentative schedules, and provide a rough order of magnitude (ROM) estimate of cost. The submission of the white paper should be used by the offeror to avoid unnecessary expenses often incurred in proposal generation for ideas that may not be of interest to the Government. CP&I Directorate will endeavor to respond to white papers in an expeditious and timely manner.

If CP&I Directorate is interested in your white paper, you will be encouraged by a formal letter to submit a full proposal. The Government’s full proposal request letter may ask the offeror to focus in on a specific concept proposed, or abandon other proposed concepts deemed less valuable by the Government. Offerors in receipt of a white paper approval letter should then expect to proceed to the second step; submitting a full proposal as stated in PART 6.3.

6.2.1 White Paper Format

White Papers: White papers are to be limited to five (5) pages (single sided, single spaced, size 12 font, Times New Roman) and should identify the specific research interest area addressed, provide a description of the problem(s) that will be solved, a description of the proposed solution, any existing evidence that the proposed solution(s) will be successful, and the relative impact of such a solution(s), should it or they prove successful. No facsimile submissions will be accepted. The white paper should have a cover sheet (not included in the five page limit) addressing the following information or answering the following questions:

1. BAA number (W56KGU-17-R-MC17)

2. Technical area (see PART IV Sections (1), (2), and (3))

3. Lead Organization Submitting Proposal

4. A high level description of the concept, technology or product

5. Expected deliverables

6. Is the proposed technology leveraged from commercial programs?

7. Does the proposed technology or product contain a proprietary solution?

8. Type of business (selected from the following categories): "LARGE BUSINESS,"

"SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS," "OTHER SMALL BUSINESS," "HBCU,"

"MI," "OTHER EDUCATIONAL,” or "OTHER NONPROFIT"

9. Contractor’s taxpayer identification number

10. Other team members (if applicable) and type of business for each

11. White Paper title

12. Technical point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, valid organizational mailing address, telephone, fax, electronic mail

13. Administrative point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, valid organizational mailing address, telephone, fax, and electronic mail.

14. Funds requested from Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) for each phase proposed and the total proposed cost; and the amount of cost share (if any)

15. Date White Paper was prepared

6.2.2 White Paper Evaluation

White papers submitted for research interest topic areas in which funds are not expected to be available may be declined without further review. If funds are anticipated to be available, white papers will be evaluated based on the scientific merit and potential contribution to the U.S. Army CERDEC, CP&I Directorate mission. The scientific merit and relevance to one of the Part III CP&I Directorate mission areas are the most critical factors in determining if an offeror will be invited to submit a full proposal. Other consideration factors include technological project risk, the use of commercial technology, and ROM estimated cost.

6.3 Information and Guidelines for Preparation and Submission of Full Proposals

This section provides guidelines and information needed in preparing a full proposal in response to this Broad Agency Announcement. The full proposal must present the proposed research effort in sufficient detail to allow the CP&I Directorate peer/scientific review team to thoroughly evaluate the scientific merit and relevance of the proposed research. All proprietary data must bear an appropriate restrictive legend. NO classified material shall be submitted for consideration under this BAA.

Offerors are advised that the quality of the information presented in the proposal is significantly more important than the quantity. It is desired that the proposals, as briefly as possible, provide details as to technology, program management, and cost as described in the section entitled ”6.3.1 Full Proposal Format”. Since technical, program management, and cost aspects of an offeror’s submission will be evaluated at the same time, all information should be provided in one (1) volume. The total length of the full proposal shall not exceed twenty-five (25) pages. Technical, program management, and cost information must be provided for the full proposal to be considered for award.

6.3.1 Full Proposal Format

A. General If an offeror’s white paper is considered acceptable by the Government in accordance with PART 6.2.2, it may be asked to submit a full proposal. Full proposals shall be submitted in accordance with the following guidelines:

(1) Transmittal Letter:

On your organization’s letterhead stationary provide:

a. Legal name and address of your organization and Cage Code

b. Type of organization and place of performance

c. Title of the proposed research

d. Period of performance and estimated cost

e. Type of contract proposed

f. Name and title of the Principal Investigator or Project Director

g. Name, title and signature of an official authorized to legally bind the organization

(2) Summary: All proposals shall contain a brief summary describing the proposed program. It should include a concise statement of work (SOW) and a basic approach to be utilized in the effort. This should be unclassified and non-proprietary in nature.

B. Technical The technical portion shall include, but not be limited to:

(1) A detailed background, discussions and/or descriptions relative to the work proposed.

An indication that the offeror understands the topical area should be exhibited.

(2) A clear, concise definition of the program objectives and the approaches to meet them.

(3) A reasonably complete discussion which details the feasibility and the methodology of the proposed approaches and identifies the level of effort to be employed.

Technical uncertainties shall be identified.

(4) Any past performance information for the same or similar work as referenced above in the description of the research interests. Each referenced contract for the past performance section will contain contract numbers and Government points of contact, dollar amounts, period of performance, and services provided.

(5) Proposed innovative approaches, unique capabilities and/or specialized experience should be identified.

C. Program Management This part of the proposal shall address the areas of personnel, facilities, management, structure of the organization, schedule, milestones, and deliverables proposed.

Resumes of key personnel shall be included in this section. If key personnel sever their connection with the organization, or become unable to continue active participation, the Contracting Officer must be immediately notified and the Government has the option to terminate the contract.

Identify any potential conflict of organizational conflicts of interest, including any prior federal employment of research personnel within two years from the date of proposal submission. In the event organizational or personal conflicts of interest are identified, a conflict of interest mitigation plan shall be submitted as part of the offerors proposal.

If there are no such potential conflicts of interest, this should be so noted in the proposal.

D. Cost The offeror’s cost proposal shall be prepared in a clear and concise manner that accurately reflects the offeror’s cost estimate for accomplishing the proposed technical effort. Cost data shall include all costs expected during the performance of the contract. All details, broken down by cost element, shall be prepared for each major task ALONG WITH SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION/ RATIONALE. All cost data is subject to Government evaluation and verification.

The cost proposal should include the following elements of cost for the proposed effort.

(1) Direct Labor: The labor categories, number of hours, direct labor rate per hour for each category and totals for each category of the effort.

(2) Materials: An itemized listing of material requirements for the effort. Unless otherwise specified, all materials purchased for performance of the effort are to be delivered to the Government upon completion/termination of the contract.

(3) Travel: Contemplated expenditures for travel, which support the effort.

(4) Other Direct Costs: Costs associated with laboratory usage, computer usage, reproduction, etc.

(5) Costs for Consultants: The number of hours and total costs should be indicated as well as the nature and scope of the service furnished by any consultant. State why a consultant was required to complete the effort.

(6) Cost for Subcontractors: A breakdown of the subcontract amount by cost element and fee must be shown to fully evaluate the proposal.

(7) Indirect Labor Cost: Overhead and general & administrative rates. Indirect cost shall indicate whether the rates used are fixed or provisional. Also indicate the time frames to which the rates are applicable.

(8) Fee: Proposed fee for cost-plus type contracts shall not exceed the statutory limitations imposed by 10 U.S.C. 2306(d), i.e., 15% of proposed costs.

(9) Funding Profile: Since contracts awarded under this BAA may be incrementally funded, the offeror shall include its desired funding profile indicating planned expenditures by calendar quarters.

E. Should Government Furnished Property (GFP) or contractor acquired property be sought to perform the research, the offeror shall provide a list of the property, which distinguishes between GFP and contractor acquired. When possible, the description or title and known or estimated unit and total costs of each item should be shown. When such information is not available, the items should be grouped by class and estimated values indicated. Offerors must provide supporting rationale for all requests of GFP in the proposal.

F. Use of Non-Government Experts. The Army may require non-government technical experts to assist in the evaluation of submissions submitted in response to this topic. Such non-government personnel will be bound by appropriate non-disclosure agreements to protect proprietary and source-selection information. An offeror's submittal shall constitute acknowledgement and acceptance of the Government's potential use of non-government experts for this acquisition.

G. If the amount of the proposal exceeds $650,000, and the offeror is other than a small business concern, the offeror must agree to prepare, submit, and negotiate for incorporation into the contract a plan for subcontracting to small and small disadvantaged businesses for participation in the effort.

H. The Government will reserve the right to conduct a site visit / pre-award survey of any offeror’s facilities before awarding a contract under this BAA.

I. Intellectual Property and Data Rights.

It is the Government’s intention at a minimum to obtain Government Purpose Rights for any HW/SW developed/delivered or data generated as a result of a contract awarded under this BAA. Offerors are encouraged to propose software solutions that are open architecture (API’s, etc.) based without restrictions such as intellectual property rights.

Noncommercial Items (Technical Data and Computer Software)

Proposers shall deliver all software developed under this effort, including but not limited to waveform code, VHDL code, Modeling and Simulation Basis, and Test Software, including both source and executable codes.

Proposers responding to this BAA requesting a procurement contract to be issued under the FAR/DFARS, shall identify all noncommercial technical data, and noncommercial computer software that it plans to generate, develop, and/or deliver under any proposed award instrument in which the Government will acquire less than unlimited rights, and to assert specific restrictions on those deliverables. Proposers shall follow the format under DFARS 252.227-7017 for this stated purpose. In the event that proposers do not submit the list, the Government will assume that it automatically has “unlimited rights” to all noncommercial technical data and noncommercial computer software generated, developed, and/or delivered under any award instrument, unless it is substantiated that development of the noncommercial technical data and noncommercial computer software occurred with mixed funding. If mixed funding is anticipated in the development of noncommercial technical data, and noncommercial computer software generated, developed, and/or delivered under any award instrument, then proposers should identify the data and software in question, as subject to Government Purpose Rights (GPR). In accordance with DFARS 252.227-7013 Rights in Technical Data - Noncommercial Items, and DFARS 252.227-7014 Rights in Noncommercial Computer Software and Noncommercial Computer Software Documentation, the Government will automatically assume that any such GPR restriction is limited to a period of five (5) years in accordance with the applicable DFARS clauses, at which time the Government will acquire “unlimited rights” unless the parties agree otherwise. Proposers are admonished that the Government will use the list during the source selection evaluation process to evaluate the impact of any identified restrictions, and may request additional information from the proposer, as may be necessary, to evaluate the proposer’s assertions.