Photo of Kate M. Growley, CIPP/G, CIPP/USPhoto of Adelicia R. CliffePhoto of Jonathan M. BakerPhoto of Laura J. Mitchell BakerPhoto of Michelle Coleman

On November 15, 2021, the Defense Innovation Unit (DIU) released its Responsible Artificial Intelligence (AI) Guidelines (“RAI Guidelines”) to help contractors and federal officials gauge whether AI technology and programs align with the Department of Defense’s (DoD) Ethical Principles for AI (as we previously reported on here). Specifically, the RAI Guidelines provide a process for all stakeholders involved in AI development (e.g., program managers, commercial vendors, and government partners) to achieve the following goals:

(1) Ensure that the DoD’s Ethical Principles for AI are integrated into all three phases of the technical lifecycle (i.e., planning, development, and deployment);
(2) Effectively examine, test, and validate that all programs and prototypes align with DoD’s Ethical Principles for AI; and
(3) Leverage a process that is reliable, replicable, and scalable across a variety of programs.

The step-by-step process, which is presented as worksheets in the RAI Guidelines, instructs stakeholders on how to properly scope AI problem statements. They also provide detailed guidance on the considerations that stakeholders should keep in mind as they proceed through the planning, development, and deployment phases of AI systems. Those considerations include procedures for identifying who might use the technology, as well as who might be harmed by it, what those harms might be, and how they might be avoided – both before the system is built and after it is deployed.

As the RAI Guidelines note, DIU is the only DoD organization exclusively focused on accelerating the adoption of existing commercial technology across the U.S. military and partners with DoD organizations and “non-traditional” companies to field commercial solutions. According to DIU, although the majority of AI companies it works with are new to doing business with the Federal government, generally they are open to doing business with DIU because of its more agile and “commercial friendly” acquisition processes. Specifically, DIU utilizes other transaction (OT) authority under 10 U.S.C. § 2371b to direct-award prototype agreements, and successful prototypes may result in the direct award of a sole-source follow-on production OT or contract.

According to DIU, it is “actively deploying the RAI Guidelines on a range of projects that cover applications including predictive health, underwater autonomy, predictive maintenance, and supply chain analysis.” Additionally, DIU anticipates continued collaboration with government, industry, academia, and civil society to further develop the RAI Guidelines, and invites stakeholders to provide feedback, comments, or suggested updates.

Crowell & Moring is available to assist companies of all sizes and in all markets navigate the transition from commercial contracting to government contracting efficiently and effectively.

Print:
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn
Photo of Kate M. Growley, CIPP/G, CIPP/US Kate M. Growley, CIPP/G, CIPP/US

Kate M. Growley (CIPP/US, CIPP/G) is a director in Crowell & Moring International’s Southeast Asia regional office. Drawing from over a decade of experience as a practicing attorney in the United States, Kate helps her clients navigate and shape the policy and regulatory…

Kate M. Growley (CIPP/US, CIPP/G) is a director in Crowell & Moring International’s Southeast Asia regional office. Drawing from over a decade of experience as a practicing attorney in the United States, Kate helps her clients navigate and shape the policy and regulatory environment for some of the most complex data issues facing multinational companies, including cybersecurity, privacy, and digital transformation. Kate has worked with clients across every major sector, with particular experience in technology, health care, manufacturing, and aerospace and defense. Kate is a Certified Information Privacy Professional (CIPP) in both the U.S. private and government sectors by the International Association of Privacy Professionals (IAPP). She is also a Registered Practitioner with the U.S. Cybersecurity Maturity Model Certification (CMMC) Cyber Accreditation Body (AB).

Photo of Adelicia R. Cliffe Adelicia R. Cliffe

Adelicia Cliffe is a partner in the Washington, D.C. office, a member of the Steering Committee for the firm’s Government Contracts Group, and a member of the International Trade Group. Addie is also co-chair of the firm’s National Security practice. Addie has been…

Adelicia Cliffe is a partner in the Washington, D.C. office, a member of the Steering Committee for the firm’s Government Contracts Group, and a member of the International Trade Group. Addie is also co-chair of the firm’s National Security practice. Addie has been named as a nationally recognized practitioner in the government contracts field by Chambers USA.

Photo of Jonathan M. Baker Jonathan M. Baker

Jonathan M. Baker is a partner in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office. He practices in the Government Contracts Group.

Jon advises clients on a wide array of government contracts legal issues, including both federal and state bid protests, prime-sub disputes, government contracts…

Jonathan M. Baker is a partner in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office. He practices in the Government Contracts Group.

Jon advises clients on a wide array of government contracts legal issues, including both federal and state bid protests, prime-sub disputes, government contracts due diligence and transactions, regulatory compliance, and contract terminations. Jon’s practice has a notable emphasis on technology-related issues, including counseling clients in the areas of patent and data rights, responding to government challenges to technical data and computer software rights assertions, and litigating cases involving complex and cutting edge technologies. Jon also provides guidance on national security matters, such as National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual compliance and facility and security clearance matters. In addition, Jon has advised clients on local government contract negotiation, internal and government investigations regarding potential False Claims Act issues, and export violations. Jon is also actively involved in the firm’s pro bono program, having litigated prisoner neglect, parental rights termination, and landlord-tenant matters.

Photo of Laura J. Mitchell Baker Laura J. Mitchell Baker

Laura J. Mitchell Baker is a counsel with Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Group in the firm’s Washington, D.C. office.

Laura represents government contractors in litigation and administrative matters, including contract disputes with state and federal entities, suspension and debarment proceedings, mandatory disclosures…

Laura J. Mitchell Baker is a counsel with Crowell & Moring’s Government Contracts Group in the firm’s Washington, D.C. office.

Laura represents government contractors in litigation and administrative matters, including contract disputes with state and federal entities, suspension and debarment proceedings, mandatory disclosures to the government, prime-sub disputes, and False Claims Act investigations. Her practice also includes counseling on federal, state, and local government contracts, government contracts due diligence, and regulatory and compliance matters, as well as conducting internal investigations.

Photo of Michelle Coleman Michelle Coleman

Michelle D. Coleman is a counsel in the Government Contracts Group in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office. Michelle advises clients from diverse industries in connection with contract disputes and other government contract matters, including Contract Disputes Act (CDA) claims and requests for…

Michelle D. Coleman is a counsel in the Government Contracts Group in Crowell & Moring’s Washington, D.C. office. Michelle advises clients from diverse industries in connection with contract disputes and other government contract matters, including Contract Disputes Act (CDA) claims and requests for equitable adjustments, fiscal law questions, prime-sub disputes, and bid protests.