Advanced Decision Support for First Responder Command and Control

From: Innovation, Science and Economic Development Canada

The closing date for this challenge was extended to February 7, 2019.

The Department of National Defense (DND) is seeking a solution that will provide innovative, advanced real-time decision support solutions for civilian municipal, provincial, and federal (Royal Canadian Mounted Police and DND) first responder command personnel (police, fire and paramedic) during critical incidents such as: active shooters, rural-urban wildfires, infrastructure collapse, natural disasters and large public order events where multiple jurisdictions and agencies work together. While there are many components and sub-occupational groups involved in critical incidents, the emphasis for this challenge is on developing promising tools related to the cognitive-behavioral aspects of the command function. The solutions should improve the probability of making good decisions during high risk events, while reducing the cognitive load of incident command personnel.

Sponsoring Department: Department of National Defence (DND) Defence Research and Development Canada Centre for Security Science

Funding Mechanism: Contract

Opening date: December 6, 2018
Closing date: February 7, 2019, 14:00 Eastern Standard Time

Please refer to the tender notice for this challenge on Buy and Sell

Phase 1 award recipients

Challenge

Problem Statement

During critical incidents and events, first responder leadership makes time sensitive decisions which draw upon: disparate organizational information technology supports; myriad data, information and intelligence from human and digital sources; and an array of sensors from the environment. The tempo, volume and variety of decision inputs can overwhelm responder leadership when deciding to: use non-lethal / lethal force, detain citizens, reduce/enhance the mobility of people/goods/services in the community, and deploy scarce resources to mitigate the harmful effects of known and unknown threats and hazards to the community.

In many instances joint command structures need to be mobilized in keeping with doctrine such as the Incident Command System (ICS) and other local command, control and coordination (C3) structures. The problem space described draws upon insights from Canadian responders as captured in the Canadian Next Generation First Responder Preliminary Capability Assessment conducted on behalf of Defence Research and Development Canada. Similar responder capability gap work conducted by contributing members of the International Forum to Advance First Responder Innovation (an organization of international government leaders focused on enhancing and expanding the development of affordable, innovative technology for first responders worldwide — have also cast light on the need to improve the capability maturity level of unified command and control decision supports. The Department of National Defense (DND), through Defence Research and Development Centre for Security Science, is seeking a solution that will help first responders to ad support the cognitive-behavioral aspects of real-time incident command. The primary client groups are the sub-set of responders designated as incidents commanders and other key leadership positions in the civilian first responder space where the cognitive load during critical events is substantial.

Desired Outcomes and Considerations

The anticipated solutions should go beyond current offerings such as computer-aided-dispatch (CAD) integration applications, predictive analytics and tools that may not adequately support the cognitive-behavioral aspects of real-time incident command. Decision support tools and architectures should be innovative, and where appropriate, draw upon approaches and solutions such as: military concepts related to battlefield management, the 'virtual battlefield space' and other solutions developed for non-responders (eg: medicine, aviation, industry, and athletics). The solutions should improve the probability of making good decisions during high risk events, while reducing the cognitive load of incident command personnel. Solutions developed should support at least one of the critical incident use cases depicted in theProblem Statement Summary. It is suggested that applicant/bidder for improved real time C3 decision supports recognize relevant training and development considerations while framing proposals

Essential (Mandatory) Outcomes

Proposed solutions must:

Position responder leadership to leverage some aspect of advanced natural language processing in a real time environment to interpret voice and/or text information and support decision-making;
Position responder leadership to leverage the capture and interpretation of one or more 'internet of things (IoT) sensors; and/or data and information from front line (non-command) responders and agency databases, and/or data and information from 'smart cities' and/or the community at large.
Distill knowledge from previous similar events and approved doctrine into contextually relevant insight for first responder incident command while minimizing cognitive load on key decision makers.
Improve the probability of making good decisions during high risk events, while reducing the cognitive load of incident command personnel.

Additional Outcomes

Proposed solutions should:

Position responder leadership to leverage emerging; location based broadband enabled communications services.
Leverage capabilities such as: artificial intelligence, machine learning, advanced analytics, augmented reality, and live, virtual and constructive synthetic environments.

Background and Context

The intended users of the solution are primarily civilian first responders — police officers, fire fighters, paramedics and other 'operators' - who are normally clients of the Canadian Safety and Security Program (CSSP) administered by Defence Research and Development Canada (DRDC), in partnership with Public Safety Canada. The CSSP aims to strengthen Canada's ability to anticipate, prevent/mitigate, prepare for, respond to, and recover from acts of terrorism, crime, natural disasters, and serious accidents through the convergence of Science and Technology (S&T) with policy, operations and intelligence.

The CSSP invests in, among other things, developing capabilities that help responders to conduct operations safely and effectively. Related CSSP project investments are intended to foster improvements to detection and decontamination technologies, forensic techniques, personal protective equipment, explosives countermeasures, and associated standards and processes. The Centre for Security Science undertakes to identify remaining S&T capability gaps where the CSSP and other federal investments may be positioned to help.

Despite advances in information and communications technology (ICT) supports and associated improvements in doctrine such as the National Incident Management System- developed by the US Federal Emergency Management Agency — first responder leadership report gaps in abilities to function effectively in unified command, control and coordination environments.

Recent analysis conducted for the US Department of Homeland Security — Project Responder 5 (PR5)- revealed that while responders believed while command, control and communications capabilities are improving, "breakdowns in establishing unified command often occur during large-scale incidents and can significantly hinder effective response operations". This capability is one of the highest prioritized capability needs by the responders that participated in PR5. Canadian counterparts have articulated similar capability gaps during Canadian Safety and Security Program engagement activities with key leaders.

After action reports, public inquiries, legal proceedings, and other post-event processes often reveal opportunities for improving decision-making during subsequent events. Accordingly, individual and organizational challenges associated with skills perishability for incident commanders in the first responder services is of paramount importance. For instance, in some jurisdictions the number of structural fires has been reduced such that the new cohort of firefighters may be hard pressed to acquire the depth of experience of the previous cadre of responders. Similarly, police incident commanders in Canada responding to critical events such as armed barricaded persons take a 'critical incident command course' at the Canadian Police College. Training and development limitations at the national and local levels as well as the low frequency of critical events make it difficult for command personnel to stay as current as they would like to be.

Maximum value and travel

Maximum Contract Value:

Multiple contracts could result from this Challenge.

The maximum funding available for any Phase 1 Contract resulting from this Challenge is $200,000.00 CAD (plus tax) including shipping, travel and living expenses, as applicable, for up to 6 months.

The maximum funding available for any Phase 2 Contract resulting from this Challenge is $1,000,000.00 CAD (plus tax) including shipping, travel and living expenses, as applicable, for up to 2 years. Only eligible businesses that have completed Phase 1 could be considered for Phase 2.

This disclosure is made in good faith and does not commit Canada to contract for the total approximate funding.

Travel:

For Phase 1, it is anticipated that two meetings may require the successful bidder(s) to travel to the location identified below:

Kick-off Meeting: Ottawa, Ontario

Final Review Meeting: Ottawa, Ontario.

Eligibility

Solution proposals can only be submitted by a small business that meets all of the following criteria:

for profit
incorporated in Canada (federally or provincially)
499 or fewer full-time equivalent (FTE) employees^{Footnote *}
research and development activities that take place in Canada
50% or more of its annual wages, salaries and fees are currently paid to employees and contractors who spend the majority of their time working in Canada^{Footnote *}
50% or more of its FTE employees have Canada as their ordinary place of work^{Footnote *}
50% or more of its senior executives (Vice President and above) have Canada as their principal residence^{Footnote *}

Application guide

Evaluation Criteria

The official source of the Evaluation Criteria for this challenge is the Government Electronic Tendering System (Buy and Sell) (https://buyandsell.gc.ca/procurement-data/tender-notice/PW-18-00846769)

In the event of a discrepancy between the information below and the information published on Buy and Sell, Buy and Sell will take precedence.

Part 1: Mandatory and Minimum Pass Mark Criteria

Proposals must meet all mandatory criteria (Questions 1a and 2) and achieve the minimum pass mark for Question 3 in order to be deemed responsive and proceed to Part 2.

Mandatory and Minimum Pass Mark Criteria (Applicant/Bidder's proposal must address)
Question	Evaluation Schema
1 a. Scope Describe your proposed solution and how it responds to the challenge. Include in your description the scientific and technological basis upon which your solution is proposed and clearly identify how your solution meets all of the EssentialOutcomes (if identified) in the Desired Outcomes and Considerations section in the Challenge Notice.	Mandatory - Pass/Fail Pass The Applicant/Bidder's proposed solution is clearly articulated, within the scope for the challenge and addresses all Essential Outcomes (if identified) in the Challenge Notice. Fail There is little or no evidence that the proposed solution is likely to meet the challenge. OR The proposed solution is articulated as out of scope for the challenge. OR The proposed solution does not address all Essential Outcomes listed in the challenge. OR The proposed solution is poorly described and does not permit concrete analysis.
2. Current Technology Readiness Level (TRL) Indicate the current TRL of your proposed solution. (Drop Down Menu of the Application/Bid Submission Form) Describe the research and development activities that have taken place to bring the proposed solution to the stated TRL.	Mandatory - Pass/Fail Pass: The Applicant/Bidder has demonstrated that the proposed solution is currently between TRLs 1 and 4 (inclusive), and provided justification by explaining the research and development (R&D) that has taken place to bring the solution to the stated TRL. Fail: The Applicant/Bidder has not provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate that the current TRL is between 1 to 4 (inclusive) including: There is insufficient/no evidence provided for TRL judgment. The solution involves the development of basic or fundamental research. The solution is at TRL 5 or higher. Insufficient/unclear/no justification explaining the R&D that took place to bring the solution to the stated TRL. The explanation simply paraphrases the description of a given TRL level.
3. Innovation Describe the novelty of your solution and how it advances the state-of-the-art over existing technologies, including competing solutions.	Point Rated with Minimum Pass Mark The minimum pass mark for this criteria is 4 points. 0 points/Fail: The Applicant/Bidder has not demonstrated that the proposed solution advances the state-of-the-art over existing technologies, including available competing solutions; OR The stated advancements are described in general terms but are not substantiated with specific, measurable evidence. 4 points: The Applicant/Bidder has demonstrated that the proposed solution offers one or two minor improvements to existing technologies, including available competing solutions, that have potential to create competitive advantages in existing market niches. 6 points: The Applicant/Bidder has demonstrated that the proposed solution offers three or more minor improvements to existing technologies, including available competing solutions, that together are likely to create competitive advantages in existing market niches; OR The Applicant/Bidder has demonstrated that the proposed solution offers one significant improvement to existing technologies that is likely to create competitive advantages in existing market niches 8 points: The Applicant/Bidder has demonstrated that the proposed solution offers two or more significant improvements to existing technologies, including available competing solutions that are likely to create competitive advantages in existing market niches and could define new market spaces; OR The Applicant/Bidder has demonstrated that the proposed solution can be considered a new benchmark of state of the art that is clearly ahead of competitors and that is likely to define new market spaces

Part 2: Point-Rated Criteria

Proposals that do not achieve the overall minimum score of at least 55 points out of a possible 110 points (50%) will be declared non-responsive and given no further consideration.

The overall minimum score is determined by adding the Applicant/Bidder's scores from the following questions together (1b, 3, 4-13).

Point-Rated Criteria (Applicant/Bidder's proposal to address)
Question	Evaluation Schema
1b. Scope Describe how your proposed solution addresses the Additional Outcomes (if identified) in the Desired Outcomes and Considerations section in the Challenge Notice. If no Additional Outcomes are identified in the Challenge Notice, Bidders/Applicants will receive 10 points	Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the solution will address any of the Additional Outcomes. 0 points Information provided clearly demonstrates that the solution will address some (<50%) of the Additional Outcomes. 5 points Information provided clearly demonstrates that the solution will address most (50% or more) of the Additional Outcomes. 8 points Information provided clearly demonstrates that the solution will address all (100%) of the Additional Outcomes. 10 points
4. Phase 1 Science and Technology Risks Identify potential scientific and/or technological risks to the successful development of the proof of concept and how they will be mitigated in Phase 1?	Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the Applicant/Bidder has considered potential risks and mitigation strategies and/or information provided contains significant gaps. 0 points Information provided demonstrates that the Applicant/Bidder has considered some potential risks and associated mitigation strategies but there are minor gaps in risks and/or associated mitigation strategies. 5 points Information provided clearly demonstrates that the Applicant/Bidder has sufficiently considered the risks and defined associated mitigation strategies. 10 points
5. Benefits to Canada Describe the benefits that could result from the successful development of your solution. Applicants/Bidders should consider the potential benefits using the following three categories: Innovation Benefits: Expected contribution towards the enhancement or development of new industrial or technological innovations. Assessment factors could include: potential spillover benefits, creation of intellectual property, impact on productivity of the new technology, etc. Economic Benefits: Forecasted impact on the growth of Canadian firms, clusters and supply chains, as well as its expected benefits for Canada's workforce. Assessment factors could include: number of jobs created, number of high-paying jobs, project-related revenue growth, etc. Public Benefits: Expected contribution to the broader public, including inclusive business and hiring practices (e.g., gender balance), investment in skills and training and environmental best practices. Assessment would consider the degree to which the Applicant/Bidder demonstrates that the solution is expected to generate social, environmental, health, security or other benefits to Canada. Assessment factors could include: solution-related environmental benefits, investment in local communities and solution-related impact on Indigenous communities.	Innovation Benefits Benefit not identified or insufficient claim of benefit. 0 points Benefit has marginal increment or limited justification. 1.5 points Benefit is significant and well justified. 3 points Economic Benefits Benefit not identified or insufficient claim of benefit. 0 points Benefit has marginal increment or limited justification. 1.5 points Benefit is significant and well justified. 3 points Public Benefits. Benefit not identified or insufficient claim of benefit. 0 points Benefit has marginal increment or limited justification. 1.5 points Benefit is significant and well justified. 3 points
6. Phase 1 Project Plan Demonstrate a feasible Phase 1 project plan by completing the table. Include: Project milestones; project activities under each milestone; time required to complete each milestone (e.g., days, weeks and/or months); (Indicate if any milestones and activities will be completed concurrently) total time required to complete the project; and key success criteria. Note: Phase 1 cannot exceed 6 months and TRL 4.	Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate a feasible project plan for Phase 1 and/or the project plan exceeds the maximum duration indicated in the Challenge Notice. 0 points Project plan for Phase 1 is conceivably feasible but not clearly demonstrated and/or includes gaps. 5 points Information provided clearly demonstrates a feasible project plan for Phase 1. 10 points
7. Phase 1 Project Risks Identify potential project risks (eg. Human resources, financial, project management, etc) to the successful development of the proof of concept and how they will be mitigated?	Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the Applicant/Bidder has considered potential risks and mitigation strategies and/or information provided contains significant gaps. 0 points Information provided demonstrates that the Applicant/Bidder has considered some potential risks and associated mitigation strategies but there are minor gaps in risks and/or associated mitigation strategies. 5 points Information provided clearly demonstrates that the Applicant/Bidder has sufficiently considered the risks and defined associated mitigation strategies. 10 points
8. Phase 1 Implementation Team Demonstrate how your project implementation team has the required management and technological skill sets and experience to deliver the project plan for Phase 1 by completing the table. A member of the implementation team can have more than one role. Include the labour rates and level of effort for each member. A day is defined as 7.5 hours of work, exclusive of meal breaks. The labour rates and level of effort will be reviewed as part of the evaluation for Question 10.	Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the project team has the required management and technological skill sets and experience to deliver the Phase 1 project plan. 0 points Information is provided but there are minor gaps in required management and/or technological skill sets and/or experience to deliver the Phase 1 project plan. 5 points Information provided clearly demonstrates that the project team has the required management and technological skill sets and experience to deliver the Phase 1 project plan. 10 points
9. Inclusivity If your business were to receive funding from Innovative Solutions Canada, describe what actions (e.g., recruitment strategy, internships, co-op placements, etc.) might be taken in Phase 1 to support the participation of under-represented groups (e.g., women, youth, persons with disabilities, Indigenous people, visible minorities) in the research and development of the proposed solution.	No description and/or concrete examples of actions provided that would be taken to encourage greater participation of under-represented groups. 0 points A description and concrete examples of actions to encourage greater participation of under-represented groups provided. 3 points
10. Phase 1 Financial Proposal Demonstrate a realistic financial proposal for the Phase 1 project plan by completing the table.	Insufficient information provided and/or information provided significantly lack credibility. Does not demonstrate a realistic financial proposal for the Phase 1 project plan. 0 points Information is provided but some costs appear to be either over or under estimated for the Phase 1 project plan. 5 points Information provided contains credible elements to clearly demonstrate a realistic financial proposal for the Phase 1 project plan. 10 points
11. Phase 1 Financial Controls, Tracking and Oversight Describe the financial controls, tracking and oversight that will be used to manage the public funds throughout Phase 1.	Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate the Applicant/Bidder's ability to manage public funds in Phase 1. 0 points Information provided is vague and/or contains gaps. The Applicant/Bidder has some controls, tracking and/or oversight in place to manage the public funds in Phase 1. 5 points Information provided clearly demonstrates that the Applicant/Bidder has strong financial controls, tracking and oversight to manage public funds in Phase 1. 10 points
12. Phase 2 Strategy Describe a realistic strategy for the prototype development if selected to participate in Phase 2. Responses should include: anticipated barriers key tasks estimated cost	Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the Applicant/Bidder has contemplated a realistic strategy for the Phase 2 prototype development. 0 points Information provided demonstrates a conceivably realistic strategy for Phase 2 prototype development, however there are gaps and/or the strategy is vague. 5 points Information provided demonstrates that the Applicant/Bidder has a clear and realistic strategy. 10 points
13. Commercialization Approach Describe your overall commercialization approach for the proposed solution. Responses should include: Target markets (excluding Government of Canada) Non-ISC funding sources Transition to a commercially-ready product or service Any other indicators of commercial potential and commercial feasibility	Insufficient or no information provided to demonstrate that the proposed solution has commercial potential. 0 points Some information provided to demonstrate that the proposed solution has commercial potential, however there are gaps in the commercialization approach. 5 points A realistic commercialization approach is provided that demonstrates that the proposed solution has commercial potential. 10 points

Questions and answers

Please refer to the tender notice for this challenge on Buy and Sell.

All incoming questions regarding this specific challenge should be addressed to SIC-ISC@pwgsc.gc.ca

You can also consult the Frequently asked questions about the Innovative Solutions Canada Program.

A glossary is also available.

Language selection

WxT Search form