R 291431Z APR 20 MID510001152670U
FM CNO WASHINGTON DC
INFO CNO WASHINGTON DC
PASS TO OFFICE CODES:
FM CNO WASHINGTON DC//N7//
INFO CNO WASHINGTON DC//N7//
MSGID/GENADMIN/CNO WASHINGTON DC/N7/APR//
SUBJ/NAVY ANALYTIC STUDIES PROGRAM FY21 - CALL FOR STUDY TOPICS//
REF/A/DOC/CNO/CNO GUIDANCE FOR POM-22/NOTAL//
REF/B/DOC/CNO/FRAGO 01/2019: A DESIGN FOR MAINTAINING MARITIME
RMKS/1. This message solicits study topics for the FY21 Naval Analytic
Studies Program (NASP). Sponsors requesting CNO funding for analytic studies
via the NASP must submit O6/GS-15 level topic inputs to OPNAV N7 POCs no
later than 5 June 2020, followed by final principal-endorsed inputs NLT 26
a. The list of NASP study sponsors (drawn from Echelon 1 and 2
organizations) is provided at paragraph 10. Echelon 2 sponsors are
responsible for consolidating and forwarding any inputs from lower echelons.
b. Required information for study topic submissions is provided at
c. OPNAV N7 POCs are provided at paragraph 12.
2. The NASP process described here represents a significant shift from the
FY20 process, designed to instill greater strategic focus and prioritization
of NASP-funded studies. As such, this message should be reviewed in its
entirety. Additionally, due to COVID-19 mitigation measures the FY21 NASP
process will be conducted virtually, as described below.
3. Background: The FY21 NASP provides central funding for analytic studies
into research problems of strategic importance to Navy decision-makers at the
Echelon 1 and 2 levels.
4. Strategic Focus: NASP study topics must be directly relevant to the
CNO's strategic guidance, and must generate actionable findings on timelines
that support key Navy decision processes. Sponsors shall specify in their
topic submissions which CNO-directed strategic focus area(s) each study is
designed to address.
a. NASP studies shall be targeted primarily at the Key Operational
Problems (KOPs), Key Service Problems (KSPs), and Leverage Points identified
in CNO Guidance for POM-22 (Ref A). This classified document can be obtained
from the OPNAV N7 points of contact listed in paragraph 12.
b. NASP study topics may also be derived from CNO FRAGO 01/2019: A
Design for Maintaining Maritime Superiority (Ref B), or may be designed to
support the continuing development of naval service operational concepts
including Distributed Maritime Operations (DMO), Expeditionary Advanced
Basing Operations (EABO), Littoral Operations in a Contested Environment
(LOCE), Operational Logistics in a Contested Maritime Environment, and naval
contributions to Joint warfighting concepts.
c. Explicit justification of each study topic's strategic relevance is
necessary for a study's inclusion in the NASP, and will be a primary
consideration in the study's prioritization among NASP candidate studies.
d. In contrast to previous years' NASP processes, the FY21 NASP build
will begin with a 1-to-n prioritization of study topics, rather than an
apportionment of NASP funds across sponsors prior to topic approval.
Sponsors will have the opportunity to review and comment on the
prioritization at the working level prior to Flag-level review and approval.
(1) Because this is a significant process change from FY20 and
previous NASP cycles, each sponsor is guaranteed that their top priority
study will be funded as long as it has a substantial strategic justification.
(2) In addition, sponsors should identify any discrete, unique
analytic requirements historically funded via the NASP for specific
consideration in the FY21 funding prioritization process. Note that this
does not guarantee funding in the FY21 NASP, which will continue to be
predicated on strategic relevance as described above.
e. Nothing here constrains sponsors' ability to fund desired analysis
using their own discretionary budgets.
5. Decision Relevance: Sponsors must specify in their submissions what
decision points their studies are designed to support. These decisions could
include program milestones, budget submissions, planning for major war games,
Fleet exercises and experiments, etc. In every case, the request must
identify the target decision date and demonstrate the feasibility of
completing the requested study in time to inform the decision.
6. Resources: The estimated funding level for the FY21 NASP is roughly $40M
(subject to the ongoing PB21 process), including approximately $15M budgeted
for studies executed by the Center for Naval Analyses (CNA), the Department
of the Navy's Federally Funded Research and Development Center (FFRDC).
7. Timeline: The NASP timeline is designed to allow study execution to
commence on 01 October 2020 upon availability of FY21 funding. Key
milestones are listed below (subject to modification due to evolving COVID-19
mitigation measures). Sub-paragraphs list key actions and coordination
occurring after each milestone and prior to the next.
a. 5 June 2020 - Sponsor topic submissions (O6/GS-15 level) due to OPNAV
(1) Prepare submissions using template available from POCs in
paragraph 12. Essential elements of information include:
(A) Study topic
(B) Strategic focus IAW paragraph 4 above
(C) Decision supported by study,
(D) Rank order of each study relative to other submissions by same
(E) Study classification
(F) Rough-order-of-magnitude cost
(G) Proposed analytic methodology (desired quantitative and/or
qualitative approach, milestones, and deliverables)
(H) Requested study provider(s). Note that Government providers
(e.g. Warfare Development Centers) will be selected over FFRDCs, UARCs, and
private contractors unless specific justification is provided. Consult POCs
for additional guidance.
(2) Upon receipt of submissions, OPNAV N72A (Navy Analytic Office) in
coordination with N81 will prepare an initial 1-to-n ranking (flagging each
sponsor's top priority as described in paragraph 4.d.(1)). This process will
include an assessment of analytic provider suitability, analytic tractability
(the study's likelihood of producing relevant results), and proposed analytic
(3) OPNAV N72A will coordinate with sponsor representatives (via the
Navy Analytic Working Group, or NAWG) to refine draft prioritization, refine
inputs as required, and identify and eliminate duplicative study requests.
(4) OPNAV N72A will obtain NAWG comments on draft prioritization prior
to forwarding for O8-level coordination.
(5) During this period, sponsors must prepare detailed Statements of
b. 26 June 2020 - Flag principal-endorsed sponsor inputs due to OPNAV N7
c. 10 July 2020 - O8-level sponsor coordination initiated by OPNAV N7
d. 17 July 2020 - O8-level coordination complete
(1) OPNAV N7 will review results of O8-level coordination and provide
executive guidance to the NAWG for revisions and/or additional coordination
via OPNAV N72A.
e. 10 August 2020 - O9-level sponsor coordination initiated by OPNAV N7
(1) Sponsor leadership will be afforded the opportunity to provide
executive comments and recommendations on the draft study list, including
facilitation of Fleet Commanders' comments.
f. 21 August 2020 - O9-level coordination complete
(1) OPNAV N7 will coordinate adjudication of any unresolved sponsor
g. 1 September 2020 - N7 approval of final study list
(1) OPNAV N72A will forward the approved list to sponsors, who shall
begin the contract development process in order to enable execution beginning
on 01 October 2020.
h. 1 October 2021 - Commence execution
8. Sponsors are responsible for all aspects of study creation, contracting,
SOW development, provider selection (in coordination with OPNAV N72A), and
study execution. Funding will be issued to sponsors in accordance with the
approved FY21 NASP. N72A will track fiscal execution and study progress
throughout the execution year. Sponsors shall conduct in-progress reviews
(IPRs) of each study at least quarterly and shall provide copies of IPR
reports to OPNAV N72A. Keep OPNAV N72A POCs apprised of scheduled IPR dates:
representatives from OPNAV N72A and/or OPNAV N81 may attend IPRs at N7
9. Upon completion of each study, electronic copies of all study products
must be provided to OPNAV N72A for population of an online repository,
subject to any special classification requirements (approved in advance by
10. Sponsor list:
a. Commander U.S. Fleet Forces Command
b. Commander U.S. Pacific Fleet
c. Director, Navy Staff
d. OPNAV N1
e. OPNAV N2/N6
f. OPNAV N3/N5
g. OPNAV N4
h. OPNAV N8
i. OPNAV N9
j. Commander U.S. Naval Forces Europe/U.S. Naval Forces Africa
k. Commander U.S. Naval Forces Central Command
l. Commander U.S. Naval Forces Southern Command
m. Commander U.S. Fleet Cyber Command
n. Commander U.S. Naval Special Warfare Command
o. Commander U.S. Navy Reserve Force
p. Assistant Secretary of the Navy (Research, Development, and
11. Candidate Analytic Providers include Navy and other government
organizations that can conduct analyses (such as the Naval Warfare Centers,
Naval War College, Naval Postgraduate School, N81, and Naval Research
Laboratory), FFRDCs such as the Center for Naval Analyses (CNA), MITRE, and
RAND; University Affiliated Research Centers (UARCs); and private
12. OPNAV N72A Points of Contact:
a. (Primary) Mr. Chris Griffith: email@example.com;
b. Mr. Carlton Hill, Branch Head, Analytic Studies:
firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; 703-697-5420
c. CAPT Thane Clare, Director, Navy Analytic Office (OPNAV N72A):
firstname.lastname@example.org; email@example.com; 571-256-9816
13. Released by VADM Stuart B. Munsch, Deputy Chief of Naval Operations for
Warfighting Development, N7.//