BAA 10-15 Writing Sample

White Paper (Human Factors-BAA-10-15) Page 1 of 13
APPENDIX B - White Paper Format (Human Factors Project Proposal Form)
HUMAN FACTORS PROGRAM PROJECT PROPOSAL FORM (White Paper)
Name of Project
GIS-enabled Emergency Operations Social Network Analysis Game
(GEOSNAG)
Requirement Addressed (500 words or less) (Reference Technology Focus Area[s])
GEOSNAG (GIS-enabled Emergency Operations Social Network Analysis Game) transforms
mock disaster drills and emergency preparedness (EP) exercises into a familiar interactive game
activity that can be played by any willing community participant. GEOSNAG applies innovative
software design and data mining protocols modeled from MMP (Massively Multi-Player) and
open source game development. Engaging diverse community members, businesses,
neighborhoods, open source software developers, and individuals in the design and testing of
emergency simulation will provide emergency managers and civic planners, and government
officials interactive, repeatedly, refreshed data about the community game participants and
associates within the social network. As the participants engage each other in the EP game, they
are streaming information about their social networks into databases to create better visual,
logistical displays of community members and resources. The players are the individuals,
businesses, and organizations that emergency management agencies serve and protect.
Simulated play of EP scenarios will allow communities to “practice disasters” at reduced costs
compared to live simulations as well as improve performances during a live simulation. Self-
registered gamers, or software users, will rapidly populate and refresh social network databanks.
The players from neighborhood block watch groups, faith-based organizations, home care
settings, and home-based businesses automatically report the social network profile and GIS
location while playing the EP simulation games using their cell phones or personal computers.
Google maps and GIS social network data can be updated as players provide information.
Executing thousands of emergency simulations will provide a rich database for analysts to mine
as well as establish outreach communications links for emergency service providers. Social
Network Analysis (SNA) tools linking GIS data to stable, evolving, and vulnerable social
networks will facilitate understanding of the various characteristics and complexities throughout
the communities. Emergency Service Providers can connect directly–see, hear, and talk–with
individuals and organizations as needed, increasing the accuracy of social network mapping.
Game development technology nurtures community involvement while testing the efficacy,
usability, and preferences of the users. It also invites open source developers to simplify and
enhance user interfaces. The continuous recycled and renewed data stream created in a play-test-
train-prefect scenario and establishes a scalable, customizable development methodology, which
can radically capitalize untapped resource by enlisting legions of volunteer testers and
developers. The EP games provide a real-time knowledge exchange vehicle among emergency
management agencies and the general population, changing the way future disaster simulations
will be developed. As game participants and open source developers enrich the data repositories
with pertinent up to date social network profiles, disaster management plans can be formulated

from robust SNA. Any citizen can become a key player in securing community resiliency.
Summary of Technical Approach & Project Activity (2,500 words or less)
GEOSNAG uses open design development in a game application, integrating a continuum of
relational interactions, simulations, and operations. Project development is lead by a team of
experts from the related fields of Social Networking, the Game Industry, GIS Mapping and
Analysis, Emergency Management, and Community-based service organizations.
GEOSNAG takes advantage of several trends:
 Massively multi-participant voluntary enterprises, connected by electronic media, offer
radical improvements in experimenting with software and organizations. Current
successes range from the scientific experiments of the Protein Folding Game Project1
to
the elaborate economies and guilds of World of Warcraft.2
These games are often
supplemented by social networking sites where players naturally congregate to share
information.3
This approach test the quality HSI (Human System Integration) using
human competitive qualities that are advantages in the game environment.4
 The recent Census demonstrated that the participation of an educated and engaged
workforce can result in systemic improvements if a mechanism exists to collect and mine
grassroots-level developments.
 Self-registrations as an effect means of data acquisition.
 Cellphone apps for iPhone, Android and other mobile phone models are becoming
sufficiently ubiquitous to form an alternative information flow into Emergency
Management Centers.
 Cloud-centric computing frees local devices from specified physical servers.5
 Web 3.0 designs combining information from disparate sources.6
 Open Sourcing empowers communities to identify problems within emergency planning
programs and development and submit fixes, which may then be studied for inclusion
within official distributions.7
 Open ID systems (common user identifier) empower individuals and organizations to
carry their identifications from device to device.8
GEOSNAG combines these trends into an online mobile application in which players adopt the
role of EP staff, community leaders, or themselves, involved in disaster preparedness and
recovery planning for real or simulated localities. GIS maps are displays as parts of the EP staff
resources kit. In its simplest form, GEOSNAG simulates a single town or county, with a small
number of types of physical resources (e.g. roads), a few need-based relationships (e.g.
caregivers to elderly or disabled persons) and a couple of choices of representation of social
relationships, (e.g. hub-and-spoke; hub-and-road; rocket arc.) Players establish EP plans (sets of
directives to be give to each other and to any roles played by the computer). GEOSNAG then
initiates an emergency, such as eliminating a physical resource, e.g. a bridge. The players are
rewarded for rapidly restoring the needs-based relationships, for example, accurately assessing a
social need and re-directing resources to ensure, let’s say, food delivery to homebound
individuals. The game can grow in complexity by adding needs, relationships, locations and
interface types as the players learn more about their surrounding environment and its
vulnerabilities. The block-watch leading may catalog which houses are vacant and which

automobiles haven’t been moved for months, how many doctors live in his surrounding five
blocks.
Emergency Managers can request scenarios to be run many times, with different persons taking
different roles, executing different contingencies, and if desired communicate directly with the
player/tester. Data is immediately captured for analysis. Every scenario, location, play, user
action and profile is recorded into GEOSNAG’s database for research. GEOSNAG also surveys
gamers to better understand their in-game choices. Upon the findings and recommendations of
analysts, GEOSNAG staff periodically releases new or improved interfaces, locations and other
features. The information circle creates an environment of continuous planning improvement.
GEOSNAG will test different methods of representing social relationships onto geographic
representations in a way that promotes effective decision-making. Successful players will
identify interfaces that contribute to success by using/testing the interfaces. This permits system
developers to experiment with new interface styles as technology advances.
The GEOSNAG application carefully separates data from software. Managers may control
sensitive information about communities to a restricted set of players, such as civil employees,
but leave open the information about invented locations to promote scenario testing. The
software will allow volunteer developers to create enhancements, either through open APIs or
open source itself. Experience with massively multiplayer online enterprises, such as WOW,
suggests that, if given the chance, some players will develop improved interfaces and donate
them to the community in exchange for prestige. Naturally, implementation of any such change
into disaster management systems would be evaluated through a rigorous gate-keeper security
and quality assurance process. From time to time, GEOSNAG administrators move elements of
the game version of GEOSNAG that has been adequately tested, and determined to be an
improvement, into secured emergency management facilities, completely separate from the

game. This enables actual emergency management staff to use a variety of software that has been
tested both by the volunteer community, and by conventional methods.
Justification & Potential Benefits/Outcomes of Project (750 words or less)
Potential Benefits:
1. Open Development: GEOSNAG meets the DHS-S&T challenge for disruptive technologies
(i.e., disrupting the normal evolutionary technological development process) with a technical
approach that opens an inexpensive gateway to individuals from all walks of life–some
professionals and some volunteers–to directly effect repeat testing, product improvement,
community education, preparedness validation, and data acquisition.
2. Social Network Participation: GEOSNAG radically improves the tools by which
Emergency managers can recruit social networks to their EP plans, analyze them, simulate their
execution, experiment with alternatives, utilize them in emergencies, and therefore better protect
their citizens. It will also test whether software and EP simulations can be tested rapidly and
thoroughly through organized volunteer citizen involvement by means of online games. This is a
natural extension of concepts demonstrated in the Protein Folding Projecti
and the complex
social activities devised by World of Warcraft guilds, which include the unpaid development of
specialized software to supplement official game interfaces. GEOSNAG puts this natural human
competitiveness and desire for achievement to work testing EP scenarios, examining which
representations of social networks in EP situations are most effective, and encouraging
grassroots development of add-on software and plans.

3. Secure Development/Increased Capacity: GEOSNAG maintains a wall between the game
environment and the operational environment of Emergency Planning, both by means of
securing actual data and by controlling the access software. However, in a large emergency, the
servers and other systems running the game environment can be lent to the operational system as
needed, thus providing reserve capacity.
4. Increased Community Awareness, Education, and Training: GEOSNAG popularizes the
importance and nature of EP, encouraging local participation in and support of Emergency
Planning. Training materials built into GEOSNAG (e.g. videos explaining emergency food
distribution) can double as training for out-of-game educational purposes.
Specific Aims:
1. Gain Social Network Data from the Homebound Population: GEOSNAG team initially
intends to implement the application to gain information about the home care community.
Experience learned from Katrina and other disaster verifies that persons needing home care
services are especially vulnerable to the disruption of normal social networks.
2. Gain Social Network Data from the Home Caregiver Community: Home Caregivers,
volunteer and professionals are key personnel in the care of the vulnerable homebound
community members. Caregiver organizations often wish to have plans for catastrophes, but
need resources assisting in formulating EP plans.
3. Gain Data regarding Human-Animal Social Networks. Caregiver communities exist in
nearly every setting, rural and urban, across our nation and are especially prevalent among tribal

and immigrant populations. Many caregiver communities have vital emotional and sometimes
economic ties with animals, pets and livestock. Effective EP Plans include the effects of disasters
on animals in relations to their human companions.
Anticipated Outcomes:
1. Scalable, visually-oriented mobile applications for “in the field” updates.
2. Improved accuracy and usability of GIS visual displays.
6. Rapidly developed EP MMP simulation game.
3. Extensive ongoing community involvement in both game and EP.
4. Frequently executed EP scenarios and updated relationship databanks for SNA.
5. Reinforced community social networks, e.g. supporting Block Watch and Neighborhood
groups.
List of Tasks and Schedule (From Contract Award Date) (1,000 words or less)
Phase I: Concept Development and Case Study
All months calculated from Contract Award Date (CAD)
P1.T1 Concept Development
P1.T1.1 Develop Concept of Operations (CONOPS) (CAD to Month 2)
P1.T1.2 Draft Project Development Plan (PDP) (Month 2)
P1.T1.3 Comparative Analysis of Tools (CAT) (Month 2 to Month 3)
P1.T1.4 Technical Specifications (including H S I SubSpec) (Month 2 to Month 5)
P1.T1.4 Assess Integration Compatibility & Challenges (Month 4 to Month 5)
P1.T1.5 Identify Requirements for Integration With Other Tools (RIWOT) (Month 6)
P1.T1.6 Specification for Network Model Population & Maintenance (Month 6 to Month 7)
P1.T1.7 Public Acceptance / Privacy Issue Identification & Mitigation (Month 1 to Month 7)
P1.T1.8 Cost Estimates (Month 6 to Month 8)
P1.T1.9 Complete Concept Development Report (CDR) (Month 8)
P1.T2 Case Study
P1.T2.1 Select SNA program (Month 2 to Month 3)
P1.T2.2 Select Case (locale, network) (Month 3 to Month 4)
P1.T2.3 Actor Identification & Database Population Methodology (Month 4)
P1.T2.4 Actor Relevance Criteria (Month 5)
P1.T2.5 Identify & Characterize Links (Month 5)
P1.T2.6 Upscaling & Refinement Methodology (Month 6)
P1.T2.7 Human System Interface (H S I ) Factors (Month 6 to Month 7)
P1.T2.8 Draft Complete Case Study (Month 7 to Month 8)
P1.T3 Identify User Population for Interactive Requirements Analysis, Development, Risk
Mitigation, HSI + Usability Testing (Month 6 to Month 9)
---------------------------
Phase II: Develop Tools and Components
All months calculated from Start of Phase, Assumed To Be Contract Award Date Plus 9 Months
P2.T1 Accrue User Population (Month 1 to Month 1)
P2.T2 Develop Social Network Analysis Tool
P2.T2.1 Develop / Acquire Node Registration Capability(Month 1 to Month 2)

P2.T2.2 Develop / Acquire Social Relationship Registration Capability (Month 3 to Month 4)
P2.T2.3 Develop / Acquire Social Network Analysis Capability (Month 5 to Month 6)
P2.T2.4 Demonstrate Local Operability (Month 8 to Month 9)
P2.T2.5 Demonstrate Regional Integration (Month 9 to Month 10)
P2.T2.6 Demonstrate Nationwide Integration (Month 10 to Month 11)
P2.T3 Develop Baseline Data Acquisition Method (BDAM)
P2.T3.1 Define Baseline Data of Social Networks (Month 1 to Month 2)
P2.T3.2 Comparative Analysis of Existing COTS - GOTS for BDAM (Month 2 to Month 4)
P2.T3.3 Acquire or Develop BDAM per Comparative Analysis (Month 5 to Month 7)
P2.T3.4 Test & Deliver BDAM (Month 7 to Month 9)
P2.T4 Develop / Select GUI Modeling/Simulation Mapping & Decision Support Tool (MDST)
P2.T4.1 Define Decision Support Requirements (Month 1 to Month 3)
P2.T4.2 Define Social Networking and GIS Maps Integration Requirements (Month 1 to Mo-3)
P2.T4.3 Develop / Select Social Network Mapping Tool (Month 3 to Month 6)
P2.T4.4 Integrate Social Network and GIS Maps (Month 7 to Month 8)
P2.T4.5 Integrate Maps and Decision Support (Month 7 to Month 9)
P2.T5 Security Test & Evaluation (STE)
P2.T5.1 Submit Gold Source (Month 11)
P2.T6 Administration & Oversight (Month 1 to Month 12)
---------------------------
Phase III: Integrate Components; Demonstrate Model/Prototype
P3.T1 Demonstrate Integrated Model/Prototype
P3.T1.1 Ongoing Environmental Support; Population of SNAT db via BDAM & Player Usage
(Month 1 to Month 12)
P3.T1.2 Integrate MDST with SNAT/BDAM (Month 1 to Month 4)
P3.T1.3 Demonstrate Integration of Components: Local (Month 3 to Month 4) P3.T1.4
Demonstrate Integration of Components: Regional (Month 5 to Month 6)
P3.T1.5 Demonstrate Integration of Components: Nationwide (Month 7 to Month 8)
P3.T2 Demonstrate RIWOT Compliance
P3.T2.1 Accrue RIWOT Resources for Integration Testing (Month 1 to Month 2)
P3.T2.2 Demonstrate RIWOT: Local (Month 2 to Month 4)
P3.T2.3 Accrue RIWOT Resources for Integration Testing (Month 5 to Month 7)
P3.T2.4 Demonstrate RIWOT: Nationwide (Month 8 to Month 9)
P3.T3 Demonstrate Upgrade/Expansion Potential & Compliance
P3.T3.1 Identify System Expansion Points(SEP) (Month 1 to Month 3)
P3.T3.2 Develop Expansions (Month 4)
P3.T3.3 Exercise SEP (install/test/deinstall upgrade/expansions) (Month 4 to Month 5)
P3.T4 Security Test & Evaluation of Expansions and Remediations
P3.T4.1 Submit Expansion/Remediation Gold Source (Month 5)
P3.T5 Administration & Oversight (Month 1 to Month 12)
---------------------------
Phase IV: Option Year(s)
P4.T1 Maintain Existing System (Month 1 to Month 12)
P4.T2 Add Game Features Quarterly (Month 1 to Month 12)

P4.T3 Other Activities / Deliverables Contingent Upon Results of Prior Phases
Cost of Each Task/Total Project Cost
P1.T1 Concept Development
P1.T1.1 Develop Concept of Operations (CONOPS) $11,700
P1.T1.2 Draft Project Development Plan (PDP) $5,200
P1.T1.3 Comparative Analysis of Tools (CAT) $7,800
P1.T1.4 Technical Specifications (including H S I SubSpec) $18,200
P1.T1.4 Assess Integration Compatibility & Challenges $5,200
P1.T1.5 Identify Requirements for Integration With Other Tools (RIWOT) $5,200
P1.T1.6 Specification for Network Model Population & Maintenance $5,200
P1.T1.7 Public Acceptance / Privacy Issue Identification & Mitigation $9,100
P1.T1.8 Cost Estimates $5,200
P1.T1.9 Complete Concept Development Report (CDR) $2,600
P1.T2 Case Study
P1.T2.1 Select SNA program (e.g. UCINET) $5,200
P1.T2.2 Select Case (locale, network) $6,500
P1.T2.3 Actor Identification & Database Population Methodology $1,300
P1.T2.4 Actor Relevance Criteria $1,300
P1.T2.5 Identify & Characterize Links $1,300
P1.T2.6 Upscaling & Refinement Methodology $1,300
P1.T2.7 Human System Interface (H S I ) Factors $1,300
P1.T2.8 Draft Complete Case Study $2,600
P1.T3 Identify User Population for Interactive Requirements Analysis, Development, Risk
Mitigation, HSI + Usability Testing $650
Travel: $2,000
Phase I Cost $98,850
---------------------------
P2.T1 Accrue User Population $32,500
P2.T2 Develop Social Network Analysis Tool (SNAT-GEOSNAG Player Registration & Profile)
P2.T2.1 Develop / Acquire Node Registration Capability $91,000
P2.T2.2 Develop / Acquire Social Relationship Registration Capability $65,000
P2.T2.3 Develop / Acquire Social Network Analysis Capability $52,000
P2.T2.4 Demonstrate Local Operability $78,000
P2.T2.5 Demonstrate Regional Integration $78,000
P2.T2.6 Demonstrate Nationwide Integration $130,000
P2.T3 Develop Baseline Data Acquisition Method (BDAM)
P2.T3.1 Define Baseline Data of Social Networks $78,000
P2.T3.2 $Comparative Analysis of Existing COTS - GOTS for BDAM $78,000
P2.T3.3 Acquire or Develop BDAM per Comparative Analysis $130,000
P2.T3.4 Test & Deliver BDAM $130,000
P2.T4 Develop / Select GUI Modeling / Simulation Mapping & Decision Support Tool (MDST)
P2.T4.1 Define Decision Support Requirements $39,000

P2.T4.2 Define Social Networking and GIS Maps Integration Requirements $39,000
P2.T4.3 Develop / Select Social Network Mapping Tool $208,000
P2.T4.4 Integrate Social Network and GIS Maps $104,000
P2.T4.5 Integrate Maps and Decision Support $104,000
P2.T5 Security Test & Evaluation (STE)
P2.T5.1 Submit Gold Source $6,500
P2.T6 Administration & Oversight $312,000
Travel: $4,000
Estimated Phase II Cost $1,759,000
P3.T1 Demonstrate Integrated Model/Prototype
P3.T1.1 Environmental Support; Populate SNAT db via BDAM & Player Usage $234,000
P3.T1.2 Integrate MDST with SNAT/BDAM $208,000
P3.T1.3 Demonstrate Integration of Components: Local $117,000
P3.T1.4 demonstrate Integration of Components: Regional $117,000
P3.T1.5 Demonstrate Integration of Components: Nationwide $117,000
P3.T2 Demonstrate RIWOT Compliance
P3.T2.1 Accrue RIWOT Resources for Integration Testing $78,000
P3.T2.2 Demonstrate RIWOT: Local $91,000
P3.T2.3 Accrue RIWOT Resources for Integration Testing $87,750
P3.T2.4 Demonstrate RIWOT: Nationwide $39,000
P3.T3 Demonstrate Upgrade/Expansion Potential & Compliance
P3.T3.1 Identify System Expansion Points (SEP) $91,000
P3.T3.2 Develop Expansions $117,000
P3.T3.3 Exercise SEP (install/test/deinstall upgrade/expansions) $104,000
P3.T4 Security Test & Evaluation of Expansions and Remediations
P3.T4.1 Submit Expansion/Remediation Gold Source $6,500
P3.T5 Administration & Oversight $312,000
Travel: $4,000
Estimated Phase III Cost 1,723,250
---------------------------
Phase IV: Option Years
P4.T1 Maintain Existing System $507,000
P4.T2 Add Game Features Quarterly $741,000
P4.T3 Other Activities / Deliverables Contingent Upon Results of Prior Phases--unknown
Estimated Phase IV Cost $1,248,000
=====================
Total Estimate Project Cost Assuming Option Years: $4,821,700
Breakout and Categorization of Costs
Labor: $3,885,700
Capital Equipment: $ 0
Travel: $ 10,000

Indirects: $ 936,000
Estimated Labor Hours: 29,890 Hours
Average Cost per Labor Hour: $ 130/hour
Description of Deliverable(s) and Schedule of Delivery
Deliverable 1: CONOPS Document (CAD + 2 Months)
Deliverable 2: PDP (CAD + 2 Months)
Deliverable 3 Comparative Analysis of Tools (CAT)Report (CAD + 3 Months)
Deliverable 4 Deliverable: SNA Program Selection (CAD + 3 Months)
Deliverable 5: MOA with Case Participants (CAD + 4 Months)
Deliverable 6: Actor Identification & Database Population Specification (CAD + 4 Months)
Deliverable 7: Technical Specifications (Including H S I Sub-Specification) (CAD + 5 Months)
Deliverable 8: Integration Challenges Technical Specifications (CAD + 5 Months)
Deliverable 9: Actor Relevance Criteria Specification (CAD + 5 Months)
Deliverable 10: Social Network Link Specification (CAD + 5 Months)
Deliverable 11: Upscaling & Refinement Methodology Plan (CAD + 6 Months)
Deliverable 12: Requirements/Integration w/Other Tools (RIWOT)Specification (CAD + 6Mos)
Deliverable 13: Specification/Network Model Population & Maintenance (NMPM) Plan (CAD +
7 Months)
Deliverable 14: Public Acceptance / Privacy Issue (PAPI) Identification & Mitigation Plan
(CAD + 7 Months)
Deliverable 15: Human System Interface (H S I ) Factors Report (CAD + 7 Months)
Deliverable 16: Cost Estimates (CAD + 8 Months)
Deliverable 17: Complete Concept Development Report (CDR) (CAD + 8 Months)
Deliverable 18: Case Study (CAD + 8 Months)
Deliverable 19: Identification of User Population for Interactive Requirements Analysis,
Development, Risk Mitigation, HSI + Usability Testing (CAD + 8 Months)
Deliverable 20: User Population Definition & MOAs (CAD + 8 Months)
---------------------------
Deliverable 1: User Participation Agreements (CAD + 10 Months)
Deliverable 2: Testable Node Registration Environment (CAD + 11 Months)
Deliverable 3: BDSN Definition Specification (CAD + 11 Months)
Deliverable 4: Decision Support Specifications (CAD + 12 Months)
Deliverable 5: Requirements Document & Models (CAD + 12 Months)
Deliverable 6: COTS/GOTS Comparison (CAD + 13 Months)
Deliverable 7: Testable SN Relationship Environment (minimally playable game)(CAD+13Mos)
Deliverable 8: Testable SNA Environment (Playable SN/EP Game/Simulation)(CAD +15 Mos)
Deliverable 9: Social Network Mapper (CAD + 15 Months)
Deliverable 10: BDAM Environment (CAD + 16 Months)
Deliverable 11: GIS Mapper Integrated with SN Mapper (CAD + 17 Months)
Deliverable 12: Integrated Decision Support Environment/Game (CAD + 18 Months)
Deliverable 13: BDAM Test & Acceptance (CAD + 18 Months)
Deliverable 14: Local Test & Acceptance (CAD + 18 Months)

Deliverable 15: Regional Integration Test & Acceptance (CAD + 19 Months)
Deliverable 16: Nationwide Integration Test & Acceptance (CAD + 20 Months)
Deliverable 17: Gold Source (CAD + 20 Months)
Deliverable 18: STE Feedback (CAD + 20 Months)
---------------------------
Deliverable 1: Organizational Agreements & Plans for Testing Interoperability with Other Tools
(CAD + 23 Months)
Deliverable 2: SEP Specifications (CAD + 24 Months) (CAD + Months)
Deliverable 3: Local RIWOT Test & Acceptance (CAD + 25 Months)
Deliverable 4: Sample System Expansions (CAD + 25 Months)
Deliverable 5: Local Test & Acceptance (CAD + 25 Months)
Deliverable 6: MDST interoperating with SNAT (CAD + 25 Months)
Deliverable 7: Gold Source / Expansions (CAD + 26 Months)
Deliverable 8: SEP Test & Approval (CAD + 26 Months)
Deliverable 9: STE Feedback (CAD + 26 Months)
Deliverable 10: Regional Integration Test & Acceptance (CAD + 27 Months)
Deliverable 11: Regional RIWOT Integration Test & Acceptance (CAD + 28 Months)
Deliverable 12: Nationwide Integration Test & Acceptance (CAD + 29 Months)
Deliverable 13: Nationwide RIWOT Integration Test & Acceptance (CAD + 30 Months)
---------------------------
Phase IV: Option Years
Deliverable 1: Support for Existing System (ongoing)
Deliverable 2: Additional Features tbd (ongoing)
Deliverable 3: Other Activities / Deliverables Contingent Upon Results of Prior Phases
(ongoing)
---------------------------
Go / No Go Decision Point(s) for Project Completion &/or Follow-On Work
(150 words or less)
Project Completion and/or Follow-on Decision Point(s): (Criteria at completion of particular
Task or Deliverable (Contract Award Date + X months)
1. GEOSNAG does not require a tradition Go/No Go decision. A benefit of this design is its
scalability up from an initial testing/gaming implementation. Utilization may be introduced
gradually and as appropriate for each EP facility / organization.
2. Subject to approval, Phase 3 Month 11 provides an Integrated Model/Prototype
Demonstration.
3. GEOSNAG is highly granular. It starts small with a single test social network, and grows by
gradually adding social networks, elements of emergency plans and, ultimately, access by
emergency operation centers. The Go/NoGo decisions are “decentralizable,” and may be taken as
appropriate by each node within the Emergency Planning social network.
4. In the event GEOSNAG development is terminated, (“No Go”) its open source base is

released “into the wild” to form the basis of later efforts.
References/Related Research (500 words or less)
References
1. Cooper S, Khatib F,http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v466/n7307/full/nature09304.html - a2 et
al. Predicting protein structures with a multiplayer online game. Nature 466, 756-760, 5
August 2010.
Foldit. http://fold.it/portal/ Web.
Markoff, John. "In a Video Game, Tackling the Complexities of Protein Folding." The
New York Times - Breaking News, World News & Multimedia. 9 Aug. 2010. Web. 27
Aug. 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/10/science/10gamers.html>.
2. World of Warcraft. Web. <http://www.worldofwarcraft.com/index.xml>.
Yee N. The demographics, motivations, and derive experiences of users of massively
multi-user online graphical environments. Presence: Teleoperators and Virtual
Environments, Vol 15, Iss 3, June 2006.
"Business: World of dealcraft; Video games." Economist. 08 Dec. 2007: 76. eLibrary.
Web. 27 Aug. 2010.
3. Lovell, Nicholas. "Face Facts: Why Facebook Games Can't Be Ignored." Develop. 15
Oct. 2009. Web. 27 Aug. 2010. <http://www.develop-online.net/features/650/Face-facts-
Why-Facebook-games-cant-be-ignored>.
4. Castronova E. Synthetic Worlds: The Business and Culture of Online Games. The
University of Chicago Press, 2005.
5. Balser, Ben. "Focus Enhancements MediaShare." EventDV. 01 Jun. 2010: 14. eLibrary.
Web. 27 Aug. 2010.
6. Hoy, Ted. "Cloud Computing and Web 3.0." Chief Marketer. 9 Nov. 2009. Web. 27 Aug.
2010. <http://chiefmarketer.com/technology/1109-cloud-computing/>.
7. Cole, Dave. "WhiteHouse.gov Releases Open Source Code." The White House. 21 Apr.
2010. Web. 27 Aug. 2010. <http://www.whitehouse.gov/tech>.
8. Thibeau D. Open Trust Frameworks for Open Government: Enabling Citizen
Involvement through Open Identity Technologies. OpenID Foundation, 2009.
<http://openid.net/docs/Open_Trust_Frameworks_for_Govts.pdf>
Related Research
 Geographic Information Systems Providing the Platform for Comprehensive Emergency
Management. ESRI. White Paper. October 2008.
 Dueker, Kenneth S. J.D. White Paper: Community Disaster Network (CDN) A Wireless
Network for Disaster Response and Recovery. Revision: March 10, 2010.
 McDonald, T.J., and Harvey Arnone. Getting the Most Out of GIS in an Emergency
Operations Center:Support for GIS operations using a Situation Status Unit.
 Magsino, Sammantha L., Rapporteur: National Research Council. Applications of Social
Network Analysis for Building Community Disaster Resilience: Workshop Summary.
<http://www.nap.edu/catalog/12706.html>
 Pandey, Bishnu and Kenji Okazaki. Community Based Disaster Management:
Empowering Communities to Cope with Disaster Risks.
 Jill Watson. Creating a Collaborative and Adaptable Non-Profit/ Government Team.

Seattle ESF-6 Group, Seattle Human Services Department.
• Coleman, Timothy. "Smartphones: The Next-Generation Emergency Alert System."
Emergency Management. 13 May 2010. Web. 27 Aug. 2010.
<http://www.emergencymgmt.com/safety/Smartphones-Emergency-Alert-System.html>.
Comments (500 words or less)
To have positive impact, sometimes, old methods need a little shake up or disruption.
The potential for the GEOSNAG approach of citizen involvement, both professional and
volunteer, extends far beyond the EP application. This model reflects the essence of the citizen-
government and public-private relationship. Americans actively participating in the planning
process, making decisions, executing plans and determining the outcomes of their lives is the
core of the American way of life. Drawing on these values, open development and competitive
simulations encourage innovators to design, test and implement GUI and EP plans that help them
“win the game”; GEOSNAG passes the best of breed GUI and plans to Emergency Operations to
consider for implementation.
Also core to American life is community building: historically in person, but now using
technology, through virtual communities. Effective disaster management advances planning
from the strategic overview level to the fine detail, and pushes decision-making out through the
layers of the social framework to grassroots organizations, businesses and individuals.
GEOSNAG maximizes this human potential factor. It empowers residents and neighborhoods to
develop plans, to test their plans, and to have them aggregated into the plans of adjoining higher-
level organizations. This supports local efforts while facilitating regional integration of training-
through-play on emergency information management tools.
GEOSNAG is more than just a game; it is a way to build an interconnected community that helps
one another stay safe.

BAA 10-15 Writing Sample

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

Viewers also liked

Viewers also liked (11)

Similar to BAA 10-15 Writing Sample

Similar to BAA 10-15 Writing Sample (20)

BAA 10-15 Writing Sample