BAA DARPA-BAA-10-93.pdf

Broad Agency Announcement

Prophecy

Defense Sciences Office (DSO)

DARPA-BAA-10-93

SEPTEMBER 23, 2010

Contents I. Funding Opportunity Description II. Award Information III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants B. Cost Sharing/Matching

IV. Application and Submission Information A. Address to Request Application Package B. Content and Form of Application Submission

1. Security and Proprietary Issues

2. Abstract and Proposal Information

3. Submission Instructions

4. Proposal Abstract Format

5. Full Proposal Format

6. Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal

7. Volume II, Cost Proposal – {No Page Limit}

C. Submission Dates and Times

1. Proposal Abstract Date

2. Full Proposal Date

D. Intergovernmental Review E. Funding Restrictions

V. Application Review Information A. Evaluation Criteria B. Review and Selection Process

VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

A. Award Notices B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

1. Meeting and Travel Requirements

2. Human Use

3. Animal Use

4. Publication Approval

5. Export Control

6. Subcontracting

7. Electronic and Information Technology

8. Employment Eligibility Verification

C. Reporting D. Electronic Systems

1. Central Contractor Registration (CCR)

2. Representations and Certifications

3. Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF)

4. i-Edison

VII. AGENCY CONTACTS

VIII. OTHER INFORMATION

A. Intellectual Property

1. Procurement Contract Proposers

B. Non-Procurement Contract Proposers – Noncommercial and Commercial Items (Technical Data and Computer Software) C. All Proposers – Patents

1. All Proposers – Intellectual Property Representations D. All Proposers – Teaming

APPENDIX A

APPENDIX B

Part I: Overview Information

• Federal Agency Name – Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Defense Sciences Office (DSO)

• Funding Opportunity Title – Prophecy

• Announcement Type – Initial Announcement

• Funding Opportunity Number – Broad Agency Announcement DARPA-

BAA-10-93

• Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) – 12.910

Research and Technology Development

• Dates o Posting Date: September 23, 2010 o Proposal Abstract Due Date: October 28, 2010 o Proposal Due Date: January 4, 2011

• Concise description of the funding opportunity - DARPA seeks to achieve the ability to successfully predict the natural evolution of any virus, via platforms and algorithms which are capable of monitoring rare advantageous viral events and incorporating numerous environmental factors.

• Anticipated individual awards – Multiple awards are anticipated.

• Types of instruments that may be awarded – Procurement contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or other transaction.

• Agency contact

Points of Contact:

The BAA Technical POC is Michael Callahan, who can be reached at E-mail: DARPA-BAA-10-93@darpa.mil

The BAA Administrator for this effort can be reached at:

DARPA/DSO

ATTN: DARPA-BAA-10-93

3701 North Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22203-1714

Solicitations can be viewed at:

Web: http://www.darpa.mil/dso/solicitations/solicit.htm

Teaming Information (See Section VIII.D.) can be viewed at:

Web: http://teaming.sainc.com/prophecy/ mailto:DARPA-BAA-mailto:DARPA-BAA-10-93@darpa.mil http://www.darpa.mil/dso/solicitations/solicit.htm http://teaming.sainc.com/prophecy/

Part II: Full Text of Announcement

I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency often selects its research efforts through the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) process. The BAA will appear first on the FedBizOpps website, http://www.fedbizopps.gov/, and Grants.gov website at http://www.grants.gov/. The following information is for those wishing to respond to the

BAA.

DARPA is soliciting research proposals to develop technologies that predict natural viral evolution. Proposed research should investigate approaches that enable advances in science, devices, or systems. Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

A large number of emerging pathogens impacting human and animal health are viruses.

Many of these pathogens, particularly RNA viruses, are characterized by a high mutation rate that allows for rapid adaptation to a changing environment. Viral adaptation was recently illustrated in the 2009 H1N1 pandemic when oseltamivir-resistant influenza emerged and spread throughout many regions resulting in clinical and virologic failure of this common antiviral agent. In addition to single base pair mutations, many viruses undergo more widespread genetic events (e.g. rearrangements, reassortments) that significantly alter the viral genome. These changes can produce virions capable of evading existing vaccine-acquired and convalescent immunity. For example, recombination among different norovirus strains results in switching of antigenic capsid coat proteins. It is postulated that this recombination allows new viruses to evade pre-existing host immunity. Underlying these genetic events are the selective pressures that promote viral evolution such as local ecologies, drug and immune pressure (including herd immunity), viral competition for permissive hosts, and many other factors. The determination of these complex interactions between viruses and viral reservoirs as well as vectors and hosts is essential to understanding the mechanisms that drive viral evolution.

Current antiviral agents and vaccines are designed to protect against viruses that are already endemic, virulent, and medically-significant to human or animal health.

Traditional medical countermeasures, and in particular vaccines, are developed in response to well-characterized reference viruses which may not represent the dominant circulating virus strains. Today’s antiviral therapy research and development cycle is reactive in posture, requiring months (for vaccines) or years (for small molecule inhibitors) to counter newly emerging viruses. With the exception of limited influenza viral forecasting based on uneven global surveillance, there is at present no reliable capability to predict viral reassortment or mutations responsible for the emergence of new viral strains. An investigative platform to predict mutations and possibly reassortments in advance of their occurrence would provide a capability that would allow the nation to prepare in advance for the emergence of future viral threats.

http://www.fedbizopps.gov/ http://www.grants.gov/

DARPA is soliciting proposals for Prophecy, a new program seeking interdisciplinary solutions to transform today’s vaccine and drug development enterprise from observational and reactive to predictive and preemptive. Prophecy seeks strategies which will focus on identifying viral threats that will emerge as a consequence of advantageous mutations in response to the application of evolutionary pressure(s) upon viruses. The program is a multi-year effort of increasing complexity focused on the development of predictive algorithms of viral evolution that are informed and validated experimentally using high throughput biological platforms that recapitulate relevant virus-host interactions. This BAA describes the general attributes of proposals that are likely to achieve these goals.

Current state-of-the-art biological systems for predicting viral evolution rely on in vitro cell culture using permissive, transformed cell lines. These systems are inadequate for the prediction of viral evolution in natural ecologies because they fail to accurately reproduce intra/inter-host effects. Likewise, current algorithms developed for predicting viral evolution have been hindered by reliance on theoretical or sparse datasets that allow only the most general conclusions to be made. New platforms and strategies are needed to generate datasets necessary for the successful development of algorithms capable of accurately predicting viral evolution.

It is anticipated that Prophecy will result in the development of a multidisciplinary approach to predict viral evolution. This objective will likely be achieved through the integration of a viral evolution platform with an algorithm that predicts mutations which confer an evolutionary advantage to the viral population. Proposers are asked to develop new systems that greatly surpass the “genotype-only” or “functionality-only” measures of evolution, which are currently the standard of practice. Accordingly, new methods are needed to precisely control the numerous potential external pressures and monitor for rare, advantageous viral evolutionary events in a high throughput manner. It is anticipated that the results of these methods will be used to continuously refine a predictive algorithm. The following variables may prove relevant in the development of experimental methods and more accurate predictive algorithms: characterization of the starting virus; population effects; viral fitness; the rate and/or capacity of viral replication; the rate and order of mutation acquisition; viral titer; and the correlation of genotype to phenotype.

Prophecy is a 36-month effort consisting of three phases of escalating complexity which focus on: 1) the development of a viral evolution platform for generating datasets used to build and validate algorithms predictive of viral evolution; 2) the refinement of the platform to include mechanisms capable of controlling multiple selective pressures and accompanying predictive evolutionary models and algorithms; 3) testing and validation of the system and algorithms using multiple selective pressures on at least three closely related virus strains in a “real-world” test. Performers should address all three phases and will need to demonstrate successful completion of milestones for each phase prior to continuing in the program. Details for each of the phases are described below.

Phase I (12 months): The goal of Phase I is to develop a system capable of inducing and monitoring evolutionary change through the application of individual selective pressures (e.g. variable growth conditions, host switching, drug, and host antiviral resistance). The datasets generated from the system will be used to build and continuously inform in an iterative manner the initial predictive models of evolution. Successful prediction methods are expected to incorporate the data, possibly feeding back into the algorithm in real time, and be able to identify the next step(s) in the viral evolutionary trajectory with reasonable confidence. Methods may be adapted from fields such as machine learning, structural equation modeling, statistics such as Bayesian or Indian Buffet, Markov chain Monte Carlo analysis, principle component analysis, bioinformatics, network science, statistical geometry, statistical mechanics, topological data analysis, and other approaches that integrate complex, multi-dimensional datasets. Preexisting datasets, such as archived molecular surveillance data, may be incorporated although care should be taken to ensure the data is both accurate and supportive of the Phase I goals. The proposer’s viral model will be used to guide the viral evolution algorithm(s) and development of the biologically-based “viral evolution” system. The predictive algorithm and experimental system will be tested to confirm the ability to reproducibly predict the genomic, proteomic, and/or functional attributes of the final viral population after the minimum number of passages required for a measurable change in phenotype.

DARPA is not interested in an evolutionary platform based on the incremental improvement of well-established viral evolutionary models. If pre-existing evolutionary models are used, the proposer must demonstrate innovations or improvements of several orders of magnitude in the state of the art. DARPA recognizes the limitations of existing cell culture systems for the study of viral evolution and therefore seeks platforms that accurately recapitulate more natural representative systems for monitoring virus-host dynamics. Currently, uncontrolled variables in cell culture have altered the trajectory of viral evolution. Examples of in vitro factors that modulate mutation dynamics include variations in growth conditions, mitotic phase of host cell lines, uncertainties of viral fitness, viral population/quasi-species dynamics, and the inability to accurately assess multiple events occurring in culture over successive generations. DARPA also recognizes the limitations of advanced sequencing technologies that may be proposed to characterize viral genomes, and therefore encourages proposers to address these limitations and devise novel approaches that significantly improve the detection of rare genetic events (<0.1%) and the ability to distinguish between true variants and sequencing or sampling errors. Performers should also be cognizant of assumptions, limitations, or variables in their system, as well as methods of analysis that are difficult or impossible to control. These assumptions should be explicitly stated in the proposals and technical reports.

Based on the guidance above, specific deliverables for Phase I include the following:

1. Develop a closed viral evolution platform that is capable of:

a. consistently reproducing natural virus-host interactions,

b. accurate analysis of all relevant genetic events resulting in a change of virus phenotype within the viral evolution platform, and

c. reproducibly evolving a specific phenotype or genotype in the presence of well-defined selective pressures.

2. Describe the evolutionary trajectory of the viral system for individual selective pressure as compared with unchallenged control populations.

3. Develop algorithms that can significantly improve the level of confidence for prediction of all relevant genetic events that occur during viral evolution in response to a single selective pressure. It is expected that these algorithms will be developed using datasets generated from the viral evolution platforms and that appropriate statistical methods will be used to validate the algorithms. Proposers should provide a statistical analysis plan and appropriate standards to assess the performance of proposed algorithms. The robustness and applicability of the statistical analysis plan are important criteria during proposal evaluation.

4. Test the predictive algorithm, viral evolution platform, and statistical metrics by demonstrating a successful, reproducible prediction of evolution of the final viral population after the minimum number of passages required for a measurable change in phenotype using the same primary (starting) population.

Phase II (18 months): The goal of Phase II is to increase the complexity of the prediction algorithms and experimental viral evolution validation systems established in Phase I to include multiple selective pressures simultaneously. Algorithms are expected to evaluate multiple mutations that occur sequentially or simultaneously. The proposer shall suggest their own metrics for success that represent significant advances to the field and should describe a well-substantiated rationale for the ability to achieve the metrics.

The system and algorithm will be tested to demonstrate the ability to reproducibly predict the genomic, proteomic, and/or functional attributes of the ending viral population after a minimum number of passages required for a measurable change in phenotype from the same starting viral population.

The specific deliverables for Phase II based on the guidance above include the following:

1. Demonstrate the capability of the viral evolution platform to accurately reproduce and analyze relevant genetic events resulting in a new phenotype that occur during viral evolution in response to multiple simultaneous (three or more) selective pressures, and describe the evolutionary trajectory of the virus for each test system.

2. Develop an algorithm that is capable of predicting all relevant genetic events that occur during viral evolution in response to multiple simultaneous (three or more) selective pressures. Algorithms must be able to evaluate mutations sequentially and simultaneously. It is expected that these algorithms will be developed using datasets generated from the viral evolution platforms and that appropriate statistical methods will be used to validate the algorithms.

Proposers should provide a statistical analysis plan and acceptable standards to assess the performance of proposed algorithms. The robustness and applicability of the statistical analysis plan are important criteria during proposal evaluation.

3. Test the predictive algorithm, viral evolution platform, and statistical metrics by demonstrating a reproducible, successful prediction of evolution using the same viral starting population. This population will be subjected to multiple selective pressures to confirm the reproducibility of prediction of the final viral population after the minimum number of passages required for a measurable change in phenotype.

Phase III (6 months): The goal of this phase is to test and validate the system and algorithm in a DARPA-defined “real world” test using a minimum of three closely related virus strains defined by DARPA, and selective pressures that are to be determined based on Phase I and Phase II outcomes. The proposer shall suggest their own metrics for success that represent significant advances to the field and should describe a well-substantiated rationale for the ability to achieve the metrics. The system and algorithm will be tested with each starting population to demonstrate the ability to reproducibly predict the genomic, proteomic, and/or functional attributes of the ending viral population after a minimum number of passages required for a measurable change in phenotype.

The specific deliverables for Phase III based on the guidance above include the following:

1. Perform a “real world” test of the predictive algorithm and biological validation system using three viral strains closely related to the strain used by the proposer to build the model and multiple selective pressures as demonstrated in Phase II. This system will be tested multiple times with each starting population to demonstrate reproducibility.

2. Develop a research strategy and solicit collaborations from partners, who together will assist in integrating relevant evolutionary forces into post-program predictive viral evolutions systems, as well as applying their predictive methodology to surveillance data from the real world.

II. AWARD INFORMATION

Multiple awards are anticipated. The amount of resources made available under this BAA will depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds.

The Government reserves the right to select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of the proposals received in response to this solicitation, and to make awards without discussions with proposers. The Government also reserves the right to conduct discussions if it is later determined to be necessary. Additionally, DARPA reserves the right to accept proposals in their entirety or to select only portions of proposals for award.

In the event that DARPA desires to award only portions of a proposal, negotiations may be opened with that proposer. The Government reserves the right to fund proposals in phases with options for continued work at the end of one or more of the phases.

Awards under this BAA will be made to proposers on the basis of the evaluation criteria listed below (see section labeled “Application Review Information”, Sec. V.), and program balance to provide overall value to the Government. Proposals identified for negotiation may result in a procurement contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or other transaction depending upon the nature of the work proposed, the required degree of interaction between parties, and other factors. The Government reserves the right to request any additional, necessary documentation once it makes the award instrument determination. Such additional information may include but is not limited to Representations and Certifications. The Government reserves the right to remove proposers from award consideration should the parties fail to reach agreement on award terms, conditions and cost/price within a reasonable time or the proposer fails to timely provide requested additional information.

As of the date of publication of this BAA, DARPA expects that program goals for this BAA may be met by proposers intending to perform 'fundamental research,' i.e., basic and applied research in science and engineering, the results of which ordinarily are published and shared broadly within the scientific community, as distinguished from proprietary research and from industrial development, design, production, and product utilization the results of which ordinarily are restricted for proprietary or national security reasons. Notwithstanding this statement of expectation, DARPA is not prohibited from considering and selecting research proposals that, while perhaps not qualifying as 'fundamental research' under the foregoing definition, still meet the BAA criteria for submissions. In all cases, the contracting officer shall have sole discretion to select award instrument type and to negotiate all instrument provisions with selectees.

III. ELIGIBILITY INFORMATION

A. Eligible Applicants

All responsible sources capable of satisfying the Government's needs may submit a proposal that shall be considered by DARPA. Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Small Businesses, Small Disadvantaged Businesses and Minority Institutions (MIs) are encouraged to submit proposals and join others in submitting proposals; however, no portion of this announcement will be set aside for these organizations’ participation due to the impracticality of reserving discrete or severable areas of this research for exclusive competition among these entities.

Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and Government entities (Government/National laboratories, military educational institutions, etc.) are subject to applicable direct competition limitations and cannot propose to this BAA in any capacity unless they address the following conditions. FFRDCs must clearly demonstrate that the proposed work is not otherwise available from the private sector AND must also provide a letter on letterhead from their sponsoring organization citing the specific authority establishing their eligibility to propose to government solicitations and compete with industry, and compliance with the associated FFRDC sponsor agreement and terms and conditions. This information is required for FFRDCs proposing to be prime or subcontractors. Government entities must clearly demonstrate that the work is not otherwise available from the private sector and provide written documentation citing the specific statutory authority (as well as, where relevant, contractual authority) establishing their ability to propose to Government solicitations.

At the present time, DARPA does not consider 15 U.S.C. 3710a to be sufficient legal authority to show eligibility. While 10 U.S.C. 2539b may be the appropriate statutory starting point for some entities, specific supporting regulatory guidance, together with evidence of agency approval, will still be required to fully establish eligibility. DARPA will consider eligibility submissions on a case-by-case basis; however, the burden to prove eligibility for all team members rests solely with the Proposer.

Procurement Integrity, Standards of Conduct, Ethical Considerations, and Organizational Conflicts of Interest

Current federal employees are prohibited from participating in particular matters involving conflicting financial, employment, and representational interests (18 USC 203, 205, and 208.). The DARPA Program Manager for this BAA is Dr. Michael Callahan.

Once the proposals have been received, and prior to the start of proposal evaluations, the Government will assess potential conflicts of interest and will promptly notify the proposer if any appear to exist. (Please note the Government assessment does NOT affect, offset, or mitigate the proposer’s own duty to give full notice and planned mitigation for all potential organizational conflicts, as discussed below.)

All Proposers and proposed subcontractors must affirm whether they are providing scientific, engineering, and technical assistance (SETA) or similar support to any DARPA technical office(s) through an active contract or subcontract. All affirmations must state which office(s) the Proposer supports and identify the prime contract numbers. Affirmations shall be furnished at the time of proposal submission. All facts relevant to the existence or potential existence of organizational conflicts of interest (FAR 9.5) must be disclosed. The disclosure shall include a description of the action the Proposer has taken or proposes to take to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate such conflict. In accordance with FAR 9.503 and without prior approval or a waiver from the DARPA Director, a Contractor cannot simultaneously be a SETA and Performer. Proposals that fail to fully disclose potential conflicts of interests and/or do not have plans to mitigate this conflict will be rejected without technical evaluation and withdrawn from further consideration for award.

If a prospective Proposer believes that any conflict of interest exists or may exist (whether organizational or otherwise), the Proposer should promptly raise the issue with DARPA by sending Proposer's contact information and a summary of the potential conflict by email to the mailbox address for this BAA at DARPA-BAA-10-93, before time and effort are expended in preparing a proposal and mitigation plan. If, in the sole opinion of the Government after full consideration of the circumstances, any conflict situation cannot be effectively mitigated, the proposal may be rejected without technical evaluation and withdrawn from further consideration for award under this BAA.

B. Cost Sharing/Matching

Cost sharing is not required for this particular program; however, cost sharing will be carefully considered where there is an applicable statutory condition relating to the selected funding instrument (e.g., for any Other Transactions under the authority of 10 U.S.C. § 2371). Cost sharing is encouraged where there is a reasonable probability of a potential commercial application related to the proposed research and development effort.

IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

A. Address to Request Application Package

This solicitation contains all information required to submit a proposal. No additional forms, kits, or other materials are needed. This notice constitutes the total BAA. No additional information is available, nor will a formal Request for Proposal (RFP) or additional solicitation regarding this announcement be issued. Requests for same will be disregarded.

B. Content and Form of Application Submission

1. Security and Proprietary Issues

NOTE: If proposals are classified, the proposals must indicate the classification level of not only the proposal itself, but also the anticipated award document classification level.

The Government anticipates proposals submitted under this BAA will be unclassified.

However, if a proposal is submitted as “Classified National Security Information” as defined by Executive Order 13526, as amended, then the information must be marked and protected as though classified at the appropriate classification level and then submitted to DARPA for a final classification determination.

Proposers choosing to submit a classified proposal from other classified sources must first receive permission from the respective Original Classification Authority in order to use their information in replying to this BAA. Applicable classification guide(s) should also be submitted to ensure the proposal is protected at the appropriate classification level.

Classified submissions shall be appropriately and conspicuously marked with the proposed classification level and declassification date. Submissions requiring DARPA to make a final classification determination shall be marked as follows:

CLASSIFICATION DETERMINATION PENDING. Protect as though classified (insert the recommended classification level: (e.g., Top Secret, Secret or Confidential)

Classified submissions shall be in accordance with the following guidance:

Confidential and Secret Collateral Information: Use classification and marking guidance provided by previously issued security classification guides, the Information Security Regulation (DoD 5200.1-R), and the National Industrial Security Program

Operating Manual (DoD 5220.22-M) when marking and transmitting information previously classified by another Original Classification Authority. Classified information at the Confidential and Secret level may be mailed via appropriate U.S.

Postal Service methods (e.g., (USPS) Registered Mail or USPS Express Mail). All classified information will be enclosed in opaque inner and outer covers and double wrapped. The inner envelope shall be sealed and plainly marked with the assigned classification and addresses of both sender and addressee. The inner envelope shall be address to:

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency ATTN: Defense Sciences Office Reference: DARPA-BAA-10-93 3701 North Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22203-1714

The outer envelope shall be sealed with no identification as to the classification of its contents and addressed to:

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Security & Intelligence Directorate, Attn: CDR

All Top Secret materials: Top Secret information should be hand carried by an appropriately cleared and authorized courier to the DARPA CDR. Prior to traveling, the courier shall contact the DARPA CDR at 571.218.4842 to coordinate arrival and delivery.

Special Access Program (SAP) Information: SAP information must be transmitted via approved methods. Prior to transmitting SAP information, contact the DARPA SAPCO at 703.526.4052 for instructions.

Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI): SCI must be transmitted via approved methods. Prior to transmitting SCI, contact the DARPA Special Security Office (SSO) at 703.248.7213 for instructions.

Proprietary Data: All proposals containing proprietary data should have the cover page and each page containing proprietary data clearly marked as containing proprietary data. It is the Proposer’s responsibility to clearly define to the Government what is considered proprietary data.

Security classification guidance via a DD Form 254, “DoD Contract Security Classification Specification,” will not be provided at this time since DARPA is soliciting ideas only. After reviewing the incoming proposals, if a determination is made that the award instrument may result in access to classified information a DD Form 254 will be issued and attached as part of the award.

2. Abstract and Proposal Information

Proposers are strongly encouraged to submit a proposal abstract in advance of a full proposal. This procedure is intended to minimize unnecessary effort in proposal preparation and review. The time and date for submission of proposal abstracts is specified in Section IV. C. 1. Proposal Abstract Date. DARPA will acknowledge receipt of the submission and assign a control number that should be used in all further correspondence regarding the proposal abstract.

DARPA will respond to proposal abstracts with a statement as to whether DARPA is interested in the idea. DARPA will attempt to reply to proposal abstracts via e-mail within thirty (30) calendar days of receipt. Should a proposer be discouraged from submitting a full proposal, the letter must contain feedback for the proposer regarding the rationale for the decision not to recommend a full proposal be submitted. Proposal abstracts will be reviewed in the order they are received. Early submissions of proposal abstracts and full proposals are strongly encouraged because selections may be made at any time during the period of solicitation. Regardless of DARPA’s response to a proposal abstract, proposers may submit a full proposal. DARPA will review all full proposals submitted using the published evaluation criteria and without regard to any comments resulting from the review of a proposal abstract.

Proposers are required to submit full proposals by the time and date specified in the BAA in order to be considered during the initial round of selections. DARPA may evaluate proposals received after this date for a period up to one year from date of posting on FedBizOpps and Grants.gov. Ability to review late submissions remains contingent on availability of funds.

The typical proposal should express a consolidated effort in support of one or more related technical concepts or ideas. Disjointed efforts should not be included into a single proposal.

Restrictive notices notwithstanding, proposals may be handled, for administrative purposes only, by a support contractor. This support contractor is prohibited from competition in DARPA technical research and is bound by appropriate nondisclosure requirements. Proposals and proposed abstracts may not be submitted by fax or e-mail;

any so sent will be disregarded.

Proposals not meeting the format described in the BAA may not be reviewed.

3. Submission Instructions

For Proposal Abstracts Being Submitted as Hard Copies/On CD-ROM:

An original and 1 copy [in PDF (preferred)] on a CD-ROM shall be submitted.

Upon review, DARPA will provide written feedback on the likelihood of a full proposal being selected and the time and date for submission of a full proposal, which may differ from the originally published date below.

For Proposers Submitting ONLY Full Proposals, Not Abstracts, as Hard Copies/On

CD-ROM:

Proposers not submitting proposal abstracts must submit an original and 1 copy of the full proposal [in PDF (preferred)] on a CD-ROM. Each copy must be clearly labeled with DARPA-BAA-10-93, proposer organization, proposal title (short title recommended).

For Proposers Posting to Grants.Gov:

Proposers may elect to use the Grants.gov APPLY function if the applicant is seeking a grant or cooperative agreement. The APPLY function replaces the proposal submission process that other proposers follow. The APPLY function does not affect the proposal content or format. The APPLY function is electronic; proposers do not submit paper proposals in addition to the Grants.gov APPLY electronic submission.

Proposers must complete the following steps before submitting proposals on Grants.gov (these steps are also detailed at www.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp):

• Proposers must obtain a DUNS number

• Proposers must register their organization in the Central Contractor Registration

(CCR) (https://www.bpn.gov/CCRSearch/Search.aspx)

• Proposers must obtain a user name and password with an E-Authentication provider

• Proposers must register the Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) in

Grants.gov

• Proposers must have the organization’s E-BIZ point of contact authorize the AOR to submit applications

Proposers electing to submit grant or cooperative agreement proposals as hard copies must complete the SF 424 R&R form (Application for Federal Assistance, Research and Related) available on the Grants.gov website http://www.grants.gov/agencies/aapproved_standard_forms.jsp#2. Attach the abstract/proposal (if submitting a full proposal please upload two separate documents, Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal and Volume II, the Cost Proposal) as attachments to the application package. No other Grants.gov forms are required. Please note that Grants.gov does not accept zipped or encrypted proposals. More detailed instructions for using Grants.gov can be found on the Grants.gov website.

Grant or cooperative agreement proposals may only be submitted to DARPA through Grants.gov or in hard-copy. Grant or cooperative agreement proposals may not be submitted through any other means (including T-FIMS and other comparable systems).

If proposers intend to use Grants.gov as their means of submission, then they must submit https://www.bpn.gov/CCRSearch/Search.aspx http://www.grants.gov/agencies/aapproved_standard_forms.jsp#2 their entire proposal through Grants.gov; applications can not be submitted in part to Grants.gov and in part as a hard-copy.

Please note that due to the new DARPA security policies, submitters to grants.gov will still need to visit https://dsobaa.sainc.com/ to register their organization concurrently and are also required to send in a password form via e-mail to ensure the DSO BAA office can verify the security of their submission.

For Proposers Submitting proposals through DSO’s BAA Submission Portal:

Proposal abstracts and full proposals sent in response to DARPA-BAA-10-93 may be submitted via DSO’s BAA Website (https://dsobaa.sainc.com). Visit the website to register for an account (via the “Create Login” link along the left side of the homepage), view submission instructions, and upload/finalize abstracts/proposals. All submissions must be compressed and encrypted as described below. Proposers using the DSO BAA Website may encounter heavy traffic on the submission deadline date, it is highly advised that submission process be started as early as possible.

All abstracts/proposals submitted electronically by means of an Electronic Business Application Tool or proposal submission website (not including Grants.gov) must be encrypted using Winzip or PKZip with 256-bit AES encryption. Please submit full proposals as two separate documents, Volume I (Technical and Management Proposal) and Volume II (Cost Proposal), uploaded as one single encrypted .zip file.

Abstracts/proposals not zipped/encrypted will be rejected by DARPA. An encryption password form must be completed and e-mailed to DARPA-BAA-10-93@darpa.mil at the time of submission. See https://dsobaa.sainc.com for the encryption password form.

Note the word “PASSWORD” must appear in the subject line of the above e-mail and there are minimum security requirements for establishing the encryption password.

Failure to provide the encryption password may result in the abstract/proposal not being evaluated. For further information and instructions on how to zip and encrypt abstract/proposal files, see https://dsobaa.sainc.com.

For All:

All administrative correspondence and questions on this solicitation, including requests for information on how to submit a proposal abstract or full proposal to this BAA, should be directed to one of the administrative addresses below; e-mail is preferred.

DARPA/DSO

ATTN: DARPA-BAA-10-93

https://dsobaa.sainc.com/ https://dsobaa.sainc.com/ mailto:DARPA-BAA-XX-XX@darpa.mil http://www.sainc.com/dsobaa https://dsobaa.sainc.com/ mailto:DARPA-BAA-XX-XX@darpa.mil

DARPA intends to use electronic mail for correspondence regarding DARPA-BAA-10-

93. Proposals and proposal abstracts may not be submitted by fax or e-mail; any so sent will be disregarded. DARPA encourages use of the Internet for retrieving the BAA and any other related information that may subsequently be provided.

4. Proposal Abstract Format

Proposal abstracts are encouraged in advance of full proposals in order to provide potential proposers with a rapid response to minimize unnecessary effort. The cover sheet should be clearly marked “PROPOSAL ABSTRACT” and the total length should not exceed 8 pages, excluding cover page. All pages shall be printed on 8-1/2 by 11 inch paper with type not smaller than 12 point. Smaller font may be used for figures, tables and charts. The page limitation for proposal abstracts includes all figures, tables, and charts. No formal transmittal letter is required. All proposal abstracts must be written in English.

A. Proposed research claims. This section is the centerpiece of the proposal and should succinctly describe the uniqueness and benefits of the proposed approach relative to the current state-of-art alternate approaches.

B. Deliverables associated with the proposed research and the plans and capability to accomplish technology transition and commercialization. Include in this section all proprietary claims to the results, prototypes, intellectual property, or systems supporting and/or necessary for the use of the research, results, and/or prototype.

If there are not proprietary claims, this should be stated. For forms to be completed regarding intellectual property, see Section VIII. Other Information.

There will be no page limit for the listed forms.

C. Cost, schedule, and measurable milestones for the proposed research, including estimates of cost, by phase, for each task in each year of the effort delineated by the prime and major subcontractors, total cost, and company cost share, if applicable. (Note: Measurable milestones should capture key development points in tasks and should be clearly articulated and defined in time relative to start of effort.)

D. Technical rationale, technical approach, and constructive plan for accomplishment of technical goals in support of technologicalclaims and deliverables .

E. General discussion of other research in this area.

F. A clearly defined organization chart for the program team which includes, as applicable: (1) the programmatic relationship of each team member; (2) the unique capabilities of team members; (3) the task or responsibilities of team members; (4) the teaming strategy among the team members; and (5) the key personnel along with the amount of effort to be expended by each person during each year.

5. Full Proposal Format

All full proposals must be in the format given below. Nonconforming proposals may be rejected without review. Proposals shall consist of two volumes. All pages shall be printed on 8-1/2 by 11 inch paper with type not smaller than 12 point. Smaller font may be used for figures, tables and charts. The page limitation for full proposals includes all figures, tables, and charts. Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal, may include an attached bibliography of relevant technical papers or research notes (published and unpublished) which document the technical ideas and approach upon which the proposal is based. Copies of not more than three (3) relevant papers can be included with the submission. The bibliography and attached papers are not included in the page counts given below. The submission of other supporting materials along with the proposals is strongly discouraged and will not be considered for review. Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal, shall not exceed 52 pages. Maximum page lengths for each section are shown in braces { } below. All full proposals must be written in English.

6. Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal

Section I. Administrative

A. Cover sheet to include:

(1) BAA number;

(2) Technical area;

(3) Lead Organization Submitting proposal;

(4) Type of business, selected among the following categories: “LARGE

BUSINESS”, “SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS”, “OTHER SMALL

BUSINESS”, “HBCU”, “MI”, “EDUCATIONAL”, “NON PROFIT” OR “NOT-

FOR-PROFIT”;

(5) Contractor’s reference number (if any);

(6) Other team members (if applicable) and type of business for each;

(7) Proposal title;

(8) Technical point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code, telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail (if available);

(9) Administrative point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code, telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail (if available);

(10) total funds requested from DARPA, separated by Base Award and Options (if any), and the amount of cost share (if any); AND

(11) Date proposal was submitted.

B. Official transmittal letter.

Section II. Summary of Proposal

A. {2} Innovative claims for the proposed research. This section is the centerpiece of the proposal and should succinctly describe the uniqueness and benefits of the proposed approach relative to the current state-of-art alternate approaches.

B. {2} Deliverables associated with the proposed research and the plans and capability to accomplish technology transition and commercialization. Include in this section all proprietary claims to the results, prototypes, intellectual property, or systems supporting and/or necessary for the use of the research, results, and/or prototype. If there are not proprietary claims, this should be stated. For forms to be completed regarding intellectual property, see Section VIII. Other Information.

There will be no page limit for the listed forms.

C. {3} Cost, schedule and measurable milestones for the proposed research, including estimates of cost for each task in each year of the effort delineated by the prime and major subcontractors, total cost and company cost share, if applicable. (Note: Measurable milestones should capture key development points in tasks and should be clearly articulated and defined in time relative to start of effort.)

D. {5} Technical rationale, technical approach, and constructive plan for accomplishment of technical goals in support of innovative claims and deliverable production.

E. {1} General discussion of other research in this area.

F. {2} A clearly defined organization chart for the program team which includes, as applicable: (1) the programmatic relationship of team member; (2) the unique capabilities of team members; (3) the task of responsibilities of team members;

(4) the teaming strategy among the team members; and (5) the key personnel along with the amount of effort to be expended by each person during each year.

Section III. Detailed Proposal Information

This section provides the detailed discussion of the proposed work necessary to enable an in-depth review of the specific technical and managerial issues. Specific attention must be given to addressing both risk and payoff of the proposed work that make it desirable to

DARPA.

A. {2} Statement of Work (SOW) - In plain English, clearly define the technical tasks/subtasks to be performed, their durations, and dependencies among them.

The page length for the SOW will be dependent on the amount of the effort. The SOW must not include proprietary information. For each task/subtask, provide:

• A general description of the objective (for each defined task/activity);

• A detailed description of the approach to be taken to accomplish each defined task/activity);

• Identification of the primary organization responsible for task execution (prime, sub, team member, by name, etc.);

• The completion criteria for each task/activity - a product, event or milestone that defines its completion.

• Define all deliverables (reporting, data, reports, software, etc.) to be provided to the Government in support of the proposed research tasks/activities.

Note: It is recommended that the SOW should be developed so that each Phase of the program is separately defined. Do not include any proprietary information in the SOW.

B. {2} Description of the results, products, transferable technology, and expected technology transfer path enhancing that of Section II. B. This should also address mitigation of life-cycle and sustainment risks associated with transitioning intellectual property for U.S. military applications, if applicable. See also Section VIII. Other Information.

C. {25} Detailed technical approach enhancing and completing that of Section II.

D. {2} Comparison with other ongoing research indicating advantages and disadvantages of the proposed effort.

E. {1} Discussion of proposer’s previous accomplishments and work in closely related research areas.

F. {1} Description of the facilities that would be used for the proposed effort.

G. {1} Detail support enhancing that of Section II, including formal teaming agreements which are required to execute this program.

H. {3} Cost, schedules and measurable milestones for the proposed research, including estimates of cost for each task in each year of the effort delineated by the primes and major subcontractors, total cost, and any company cost share.

(Note: Measurable milestones should capture key development points in tasks and should be clearly articulated and defined in time relative to start of effort.) Where the effort consists of multiple portions which could reasonably be partitioned for purposes of funding, these should be identified as options with separate cost estimates for each. Additionally, proposals should clearly explain the technical approach(es) that will be employed to meet or exceed each program metrics and deliverables as described in Section I. Funding Opportunity Description. Also, provide ample justification as to why the approach(es) is/are feasible. The milestones must not include proprietary information.

Section IV. Additional Information

A brief bibliography of relevant technical papers and research notes (published and unpublished) which document the technical ideas upon which the proposal is based.

Copies of not more than three (3) relevant papers can be included in the submission.

7. Volume II, Cost Proposal – {No Page Limit}

COVER SHEET TO INCLUDE:

A. (1) BAA number;

(2) Technical area;

(3) Lead Organization Submitting proposal;

(4) Type of business, selected among the following categories: “LARGE

BUSINESS,” “SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS,” “OTHER SMALL

BUSINESS,” “HBCU,” “MI,” “EDUCATIONAL,” “NONPROFIT” OR NOT-

FOR -PROFIT;

(5) Contractor’s reference number (if applicable);

(6) Other team members (if applicable) and type of business for each;

(7) Proposal title;

(8) Technical point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code, telephone, fax, e-mail;

(9) Administrative point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code, telephone, fax, e-mail;

(10) Award instrument requested: cost-plus-fixed-fee (CPFF), cost-contract-no fee, cost sharing contract-no fee, or other type of procurement contract (specify), grant, cooperative agreement, or other transaction;

(11) Place(s) and period(s) of performance;

(12) Total proposed cost separated by basic award and option(s) (if any);

(13) Name, address, and telephone number of the proposer’s cognizant Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) administration office…