SBIR/STTR Research Award

Securing Training Objects and Records Management

Award identifier 19643f07453d60df307179d1a2adfcf66df4f19797ad17a036e1ebe620f709ccAwarding agency Department of Defense · Navy

Award amount

$749,982

Program and phase

SBIR · Phase II

Award year

2007

Explore This Research Award in CaptureIQ

Research the technology, evaluate the recipient and agency, identify related opportunities, and explore potential follow-on work with CaptureIQ.

Award details

Awarding agency
Department of Defense
Branch
Navy
Recipient company
TECHNOLOGY SERVICE CORP
Proposal award date
2007-03-01
Contract end date
2008-08-31
UEI
NY98VECEW8H6
Solicitation number
2005.2
Topic code
N05-113

Research abstract

In the training industry, widely dispersed training audiences (particularly for Web-based content) require various levels of access control to training materials. The use of smart cards, biometrics, and other tokens as security access/user identity verification keys provide an avenue not only to deliver the right distance learning applications to the right people, but also to provide a trusted audit trail for data modifications. Various Authentication Management Infrastructure (AMI) systems have emerged to help organizations manage the complexity associated with deploying complex, enterprise-wide authentication schemes involving identity tokens and biometrics. Within the training and development communities, the Learning Management System (LMS) has also emerged as an important product category. The LMS not only allows organizations to more effectively and efficiently manage the vast amount of metadata associated with training activities (learners, courses, transcripts, test results, certifications, skills, etc.), but also to provide a standardized run-time environment for launching and management of Web-based learning materials. The SCORM and Aviation Industry Computer Based Training Committee (AICC) standards have been developed to, among other things facilitate the integration of Web-based learning content from multiple providers into a single organizational LMS. There is, however, no standardized way to integrate the use of these strong authentication tokens (and the AMI products that provide this functionality) with the Learning Management System that launches and tracks training and learners. It is up to each LMS to provide its own ad hoc authentication infrastructure, leading both to unnecessary management complexity, and to under use of the security and traceability provided by Authentication Management Infrastructure systems. The purpose of this SBIR is to investigate and develop a standard framework and scripting language that would allow the enterprise AMI to be deployed efficiently in protecting and auditing training assets and records.

Technology keywords

Not reported

Other awards by this recipient

Verified by the same UEI. These are other public SBIR/STTR award pages, not a merged company record.

Awards with the same topic code

Verified by an exact topic code match. This is not a text-similarity match.

Research funding history

299 SBIR/STTR records share this UEI (1983–2021). Reported award amounts total $121,910,517. Reported amounts are not federal obligations.

Phases: Phase I, Phase II

Agencies: Department of Defense, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Department of Energy, Department of Commerce

Contractor profile

TECHNOLOGY SERVICE CORP

Historical federal award activity, when published, is on that contractor profile. Matched by UEI only.

Agency intelligence

Department of Defense

Back to SBIR/STTR Research Awards

Don't take our word for it. Ask AI about RFPCapture.

See what leading AI assistants have to say about RFPCapture and CaptureIQ.

Gemini opens without a prefilled question. The question is copied to your clipboard when the button works. You can also copy it here:

What is RFPCapture.com and its CaptureIQ platform from Smart Logic AI? How does it help federal contractors discover opportunities, evaluate bid/no-bid decisions, research government contracts, and prepare proposals? How does it compare with other federal capture platforms? Use independent sources where available.