ENGAGE DARPA-BAA-11-36.pdf

ENGAGE: Learning to Solve Problems, Solving Problems to Learn

DARPA-BAA-11-36

February 23, 2011

Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Information Innovation Office 3701 North Fairfax Drive Arlington, VA 22203-1714

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT

Table of Contents Part I: Overview

Part II: Full Text of Announcement

I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

II. AWARD

III. ELIGIBILITY

A. Applicants

1. Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Small Businesses, Small Disadvantaged Businesses and Minority Institutions

2. Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and Government entities

3. Foreign Participation

B. Procurement Integrity

C. Cost Sharing/Matching

IV. APPLICATION

A. Announcement

B. Proposals

C. Proprietary and Classified Information

D. Submission Instructions

1. Due Dates

2. Unclassified Submission

3. Classified Submission

E. Intergovernmental Review – N/A

F. Funding Restrictions

G. Other Submission Requirements

V. EVALUATION

A. Evaluation Criteria

B. Review and Selection Process

VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION

A. Selection Notices

B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

1. Meeting and Travel Requirements

2. Intellectual Property

3. Human Use

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT

4. Animal Use

5. Publication Approval

6. Export Control

7. Electronic and Information Technology

8. Employment Eligibility Verification

9. Reporting Executive Compensation and First-Tier Subcontract Awards ... 35

10. Updates of Information Regarding Responsibility Matters

C. Reporting

D. Electronic Systems

VII. AGENCY CONTACTS

VIII. OTHER INFORMATION

A. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

B. Collaborative Efforts/Teaming

C. Industry Day

D. Cost Proposal Checklist

E. Submission Checklist

F. References

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 1

Part I: Overview

Federal Agency Name – Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Information Innovation Office (I2O)

Funding Opportunity Title – ENGAGE: Learning to Solve Problems, Solving Problems to Learn

Announcement Type – Initial Announcement

Funding Opportunity Number – DARPA-BAA-11-36

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) – 12.910 Research and Technology Development

Dates o Posting Date – see announcement at www.fbo.gov o Proposal Due Date

Initial Closing – 12:00 noon (ET), 13 April 2011 Final Closing – 12:00 noon (ET), 27 May 2011 o Industry Day – March 15, 2011

Anticipated Individual Awards – Multiple awards are anticipated.

Total Funding Available for Award – The ENGAGE research effort under this solicitation is estimated at $8M of 6.1 funding over a period of approximately three years.

Types of Instruments that may be Awarded – Procurement contract, cooperative agreement, or other transaction agreement.

Technical POC: CAPT Russell Shilling, PhD, Program Manager, DARPA/I2O

BAA Mailbox: DARPA-BAA-11-36@darpa.mil

BAA FAX: (703) 807-9913

BAA Mailing Address:

o ATTN: DARPA-BAA-11-36

I2O Solicitation Website: http://www.darpa.mil/i2o/solicit/solicit_open.asp mailto:DARPA-BAA-11-36@darpa.mil http://www.darpa.mil/i2o/solicit/solicit_open.asp

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 2

Part II: Full Text of Announcement

I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) often selects its research efforts through the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) process. This BAA is being issued, and any resultant selection will be made, using procedures under FAR Part

35.016 (DoDGARS Part 22 for Grants and Cooperative Agreements). Any negotiations and/or awards will use procedures under FAR 15.4, Contract Pricing, as specified in the BAA (including DoDGARS Part 22 for Grants and Cooperative Agreements). Proposals received as a result of this BAA shall be evaluated in accordance with evaluation criteria specified herein through a scientific review process. The BAA will appear first on the Federal Business Opportunities 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 proposals for innovative research in educational systems that will ENGAGE young students (Pre-K – Grade 3) in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) studies while conducting research into the best methods and practices for teaching these topics. Specifically, an educational game-based approach is being sought that will analyze game-play across thousands of players to determine the best approaches for teaching specific STEM topics while taking into account individual learning styles, demographics and other factors identified by the game to impact learning. These educational games must meet the highest industry standards for quality and engagement while incorporating the best pedagogical practices and clearly focusing on the ability to measure and identify metrics critical to teaching STEM topics, as well as to see if the lessons learned within the game generalize to the classroom.

As a secondary goal, DARPA hopes to learn if these same problem-solving strategies can be generalized to Social Emotional Learning to help children succeed in stressful environments and cope with social issues such as bullying.

Background

DARPA’s mission is to maintain the technological superiority of the U.S. military and prevent technological surprise from harming our national security by sponsoring revolutionary, high-payoff research bridging the gap between fundamental discoveries and their military use. In order for this mission to be successful, the United States educational system must effectively produce citizens who are proficient in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) to be the nation’s future innovators.

Furthermore, a 21st century technology-based military requires recruits who are comfortable with science and advanced technologies and can adapt quickly in an ever changing technological environment.

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

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 3

The need is critical and a National priority. A recent analysis of High School Student scores on the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) found that one in five high school students currently fail to meet the minimum requirements for entering the Army. ASVAB scores also correlate with future success within technical military fields (The Educational Trust, 2010). In order to produce students who are proficient in STEM topics, their interest in STEM must be encouraged and spurred to motivate them in the pursuit of their studies. The need is most acute in minority and underserved populations. One of the conclusions from a recent report from the President’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology (PCAST) was that ―We must prepare all students, including girls and minorities who are underrepresented in these fields, to be proficient in STEM subjects. And we must inspire all students to learn STEM and, in the process, motivate many of them to pursue STEM careers,‖ (PCAST, 2010).

It is not enough to simply develop software tools that educate; children must be inspired and also given the emotional/psychological tools they need to succeed in stressful environments. In the 1995 novel, ―The Diamond Age: Or, A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer‖, Neal Stephenson describes an interactive primer that adapts to the user. The primer was not aimed solely at academics, but was designed to enhance creativity and social intelligence. The question this raises for the current program is whether this can be done with current technologies and game-based approaches. Although the primary goal of the current program is STEM education, the secondary goal of the program is to gauge whether the approach can impact overall academic success by generalizing principles learned in the game environment to social learning.

Overview

The DARPA ENGAGE program is aimed at providing a crucial step in advancing the educational process by developing interactive game-based technologies, coupled with innovative pedagogical techniques to enhance the learning process, encourage interest among students in STEM-related careers, and to provide the tools needed for underserved populations to achieve success. Games offer an unparalleled opportunity in STEM since they allow for experimentation by the player with new techniques and strategies, and provide a social platform in modern society where children interact and teach each other. Furthermore, development on PC’s and mobile platforms enable the opportunity to provide education anywhere and anytime.

Specifically, ENGAGE aims to develop compelling, professional quality, PC-Based and/or mobile software that adapts teaching strategies based on the analysis of crowd-sourced data derived from gameplay across thousands of users. This technique was shown to be highly successful in the DARPA FOLD-IT program (http://fold.it/portal/) to solve complex scientific problems. The current question is, ―Can these techniques or variations of these techniques be used to educate and also improve the educational process?‖ Since different children require different pedagogical strategies, it is assumed that the software will identify a number of optimal techniques across the population, especially as the problem solving tasks become more complex. Hence, software will improve over time and tailor pedagogical strategies to optimum approaches. So, not only does the software adapt to the individual user, the software approach improves over time on the basis of crowd-sourced information. As a result, ENGAGE will produce and transition useful game-based teaching tools while the http://fold.it/portal/

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 4 educational community gains valuable insights into optimum teaching techniques, which can be applied to future products and directly into the classroom.

The Problem

The challenges are immense. The curriculum approach employed in most schools has remained largely unchanged over the past 100 years and is not conducive to instilling a sense of wonder about science and technology that will encourage students, especially minorities and women, to pursue their studies in STEM areas. Socio-economic pressures and stresses, such as bullying, conspire to inhibit the success of many young students. Access to educational resources, technology, experts, and best practices are often unavailable to students and teachers in the greatest need. Many questions still remain about the optimum manner in which to teach specific subjects in a STEM curriculum. How can you capture the ―lightning-in-a-bottle‖ of the best teaching practices and provide them to students wherever they may be? Can you also give them the tools they need to succeed academically in stressful social circumstances? The ENGAGE program seeks to provide answers to these questions.

Although, STEM education is the primary goal, a secondary goal is to see if problem-solving skills related to STEM can be generalized to problem solving in day-to-day life and peer relations. Social Emotional Learning (SEL) has been shown to have a significant and enduring impact on academic success, attitudes towards school, and has been shown to elevate academic performance by 11 to 17 percent (CASEL, 2008).

Sustained academic success for children depends on developing logical reasoning skills related to both STEM and SEL. These skills are not mutually exclusive and both are equally important to overall academic success. It is believed that games can be developed that combine these skills under one umbrella. Using game-based scenarios, children can be shown that the same logical problem solving activities related to science can also be applied to day-to-day life.

Content Development

For this solicitation, DARPA is interested in applications aimed at Pre-K – Grade 3. The reason for this selection is based on the importance of developing basic skills at an early age and laying the foundation for lifelong interest in STEM. This age range is not only critical in the civilian population, but it is also of critical importance to military personnel and their families. The Department of Defense Educational Activity (DoDEA), which is responsible for the education of many of the military’s dependents, reports that 44 percent of their school enrollment is Pre-K – Grade 3, making this a prime age-group on which to start to directly support military dependents.

Topics can cover the entire gamut of STEM areas, but DARPA is particularly interested in the development of logical problem solving skills related to basic physics, chemistry, or other basic sciences. For instance, games might teach a variety of cause and effect relationships that require students to make predictions on outcomes or solve increasingly complex problems. Topics which increase in complexity to reach a wide age range will ensure that students continue to learn the desired concepts and remain predisposed toward STEM areas. Next, these same principles could be applied to social/emotional learning within the context of gameplay.

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 5

Design Principles

It is recommended that design principles for applications broadly consider the following guidelines set forth by Chiong & Shuler, 2010. Specifically, applications should focus narrowly within a developmental age range, try to relate content to other materials children are already learning, consider children’s evolving motor skills, engage children by making them laugh when appropriate, and balance engagement and learning. In other words, design the system to make the student want to continue to engage in the task, while focusing on age-appropriate learning.

Concepts for these games should be compelling and aimed at making children want to play them. A good example of this philosophy can be seen in the recent ―Game Changers‖ competition in 2009, which used mods of Sony’s ―Little Big Planet‖ to develop STEM education tools. As such, the educational games should evoke both a sense of fun and also stir up interest in the topic(s) upon which they focus. Production values should be in line with the best videogames. Yet, educational goals and metrics should be clear and rigorous enough to allow software to substitute for regular classroom work or homework. Learning goals and expectations must be age appropriate and reflect the wide range of abilities for young learners. Metrics of success should be clearly outlined and testing methodologies developed. Thus, teams should reflect strong and balanced expertise in game production, educational research, and early education.

The goal of this program is to develop both educational software tools and advance pedagogical research. It should be noted that although the DoD has a long history of applying advanced technology to training, the current solicitation is aimed at a broader concept of learning where the goal isn’t to learn a specific task, but to learn concepts generalizable across a broader academic context of STEM education and encourage students to learn additional materials. The idea is to demonstrate if the educational goals elicited by the game can transfer to other domains both academically and socially.

Thus, metrics must be developed to measure the impact of these educational strategies on overall classroom performance.

Proposals should clearly outline both the game design and the experimental method underlying the analysis of gameplay data to derive relevant pedagogical principles.

DARPA does not have a specific solution in mind. DARPA seeks innovative approaches to develop learning tools that adapt to the user and which allow researchers and developers to analyze pedagogical outcomes across thousands of players to improve both current and future computer-based learning approaches, as well as lend insights into optimal approaches to be used in the classroom. Ideally, the software would automate the analysis of gameplay data to assist researchers in identifying trends and to minimize the impact of human judgment on the approach.

The goal is to explore the possibilities of new technological approaches to learning. As a result, game-based approaches should also examine cross-platform development to

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 6 leverage both PC’s and the explosive growth of mobile platforms. Because of their relatively low cost, mobile technologies offer the increased promise of reaching underserved populations in rural and low Socio Economic Status communities. Thus, preference will be given to proposals which are able to develop software across multiple platforms and which can demonstrate that the approach can be disseminated widely and made available to underserved populations.

Program Goals

1. Develop modular, extensible videogame content to teach students about STEM and social resilience.

2. Identify the desired educational outcomes and associated metrics required to develop an adaptive game-based approach to the educational goals described above.

3. Identify and develop rigorous methodology for anonymously collecting outcome data from gameplay over numerous users, analyzing it, and improving the software and educational approach. Data collection and analysis should be automated to the greatest extent practicable.

4. Develop and test professional quality, psychologically engaging videogame software and demonstrate effectiveness of the software to adapt to the individual user and across many users, taking into account crowd-sourced data, demographics and other factors to be determined.

5. Identify pedagogical techniques and strategies unique to the topic(s) pursued to improve teaching across demographic and cultural boundaries.

6. Demonstrate that the learning objectives in the game are generalized beyond the game to improve academic performance, test scores, and Social Emotional Learning (resilience).

7. Assess attitudinal changes about STEM as a result of the game play experience

8. Develop clear guidelines and principles for replicating this work for other STEM topics and make recommendations on other promising areas of exploration.

Determine if this concept is amenable to an open-source, common-architecture solution to simplify future development.

9. Leverage and enhance open-source, common architectures to reduce costs in development and dissemination. Common software development architectures across the ENGAGE performers will be encouraged.

10. Determine if these techniques can be applied across both standard PC and mobile platforms.

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 7

Program Structure

The ENGAGE program is anticipated to proceed in two phases (each informed by results from the last). The current program as outlined in this BAA is scheduled to run over a 32 month period. Formal Evaluations will be performed by the DARPA PM with input from an independent advisory panel of educational experts at the end of each year. After each evaluation, metrics for success and milestones for the following year will be jointly reviewed by the ENGAGE community and revised as necessary.

Technical Areas

There will be two main technical areas, Educational Videogame Development (TA-1) and Educational Specialists (TA-2). TA-1 will be responsible for creating and delivering ENGAGE code, content, and documentation that runs without error, meets the program objectives for educational content and research goals and is easy to maintain and modify. TA-2 will be responsible for ensuring that the educational experiences provided by the ENGAGE programs are optimized with regard to educational effectiveness, and will create and deliver techniques for testing and validating the ENGAGE programs for educational effectiveness and ability to derive pedagogical principles. TA-1 and TA-2 performer teams will collaborate under the guidance of the DARPA PM. Success of the ENGAGE program requires that the TA-1 and TA-2 performers actively collaborate throughout the entire program. Based on the availability of funding, multiple performers may be selected in each technical area. Interested organizations may propose to either or both technical areas. Although it is possible to receive awards in both technical areas, a separate proposal will be required for each technical area. Although, there can be coordination between proposers in each technical area prior to submission, the proposals will be evaluated independently, on their own merit, and should be structured accordingly. Each proposal must clearly state which technical area is being proposed.

Technical Area 1 (TA-1): Educational Videogame Development

Develop a professional quality educational videogame focused at the Pre-K to Grade 3 level

Demonstrate content extensibility and modularity to allow the rapid creation of new content and maintain student interest.

The software architecture should include a layered design which includes separation between the videogame rendering engine, the STEM learning content, an analytical framework, and automated tools which select and adapt to the student’s game play.

Actively coordinate and integrate work being conducted in TA-2.

Focus is on the development of logical problem solving skills related to basic physics, chemistry, or other basic sciences.

Demonstrate ability to develop professional quality games and game concepts comparable with the best commercial games

Balance entertainment with advanced educational concepts

Identify development tools and detailed design approach

Explain the execution risks in the program elements

Identify how much effort is required in each element

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 8

Describe the integration approach of elements and how is it going to be managed

Develop business model to provide widest dissemination of software to those most in need (software must be affordable). Open-source - open-architecture, or common architecture solutions are preferred. If not following this approach, give justification and impact on future development.

Technical Area 2 (TA-2): Educational Specialists

Design, develop, and conduct advanced pedagogical research that can analyze outcomes across thousands of players to be used by the TA-1 Team(s).

Work with TA-1 performers to guide them in developing game-based software that addresses the educational goals, is engaging and is appropriate to the target audience

Work with TA-1 performers to develop software that will allow for the systematic collection of data and subsequent adaptation of the software.

Identify relevant metrics and validation strategies for software approaches

Identify strategies for coupling STEM education with Social Emotional Learning (resilience)

Assess which approaches best encourage children to play the learning games

Identify relevant pedagogical research strategies amenable to the game approach and compare against today’s educational approaches

Identify best ways to integrate software approach into classroom curricula.

Proposals should not propose specific videogames except as illustrative examples

Program Phases and Metrics

DARPA will be implementing a two-phased approach over approximately 32 months encompassing the aforementioned technical areas.

Phase 1 (8 months): Performers will develop an integrated education/ software/videogame/research approach, identify metrics, and design a prototype game.

A rigorous validation and testing plan should precede the initial software development phase to assure that the software provides a platform to rigorously assess identified metrics. Thus, the validation plan and metrics should drive software development.

Performers should anticipate regular interactions with the DARPA PM and follow a structured development approach and will be expected to start supplying story-board concepts for content within the first 30 days.

Specific Phase 1 tasks/goals include:

1. Identify desired educational outcomes and metrics (TA-1 & TA-2)

2. Structured development approach with storyboarding based on outcomes and metrics (TA-1 & TA-2)

3. Develop and deliver detailed validation and testing strategy (TA-2)

4. Initiate Institutional Review Board Process for Phase 2 (TA-2)

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 9

5. Deliver prototype game and recommendations for Phase 2 development (TA-1)

Phase 2 (24 months): In this Phase, the educational software will be completed and software deployed for research. TA-1 performers will be expected to modify software as needed during this timeframe based on software performance and also to modify software based on user performance and guidance from TA-2. TA-2 will be responsible for conducting the actual research study and analyzing the resulting data.

Specific Phase 2 tasks/goals include:

1. Completion of test-ready prototype (TA-1)

2. Implementation of testing plan (TA-2)

3. Demonstrate ability to identify learning strategies employed across a numerous and diverse user population (TA-1 & TA-2)

4. Demonstrate ability to develop games that simultaneously meet STEM goals and academic outcomes while enhancing psychological resilience (TA-1 & TA-2).

5. Demonstrate ability of software to adapt to individual user (TA-1)

6. Demonstrate ability of software to adapt across users (TA-1)

7. Assess whether learning achieved in the game generalized to classroom performance

8. Develop comprehensive plan for transitioning software into the classroom curriculum

9. Develop Final Report on both software development (TA-1) and research (TA-2).

10. Assess attitudinal changes concerning STEM

Schedule

The schedule listed herein contains notional estimates. Offerors should submit a detailed schedule that is consistent with the maturity of their approaches and the risk reduction required for their concepts. These schedules will be synchronized across performers, as required, and monitored/revised as necessary throughout the ENGAGE research effort’s period of performance. For budgeting purposes, the estimated start date is June 15, 2011.

At the beginning/end of each year, an ENGAGE community meeting will be held to define metrics and set performance milestones for the coming year / perform evaluations for the work of the past year. A community meeting will be held each year at mid-year to share results, make necessary course corrections and discuss progress and issues.

The locations for the meetings will be specified by the Government. In general, for budgeting travel, meetings with individual performers will be held either in Washington, D.C., or at the performer’s location. It is anticipated that ENGAGE community meetings will be held alternately at East and West Coast locations. In addition to site visits, regular teleconferences are encouraged to enhance communications with the Government team. Should important issues arise between program reviews, the Government team will be available to support informal interim technical interchange meetings.

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 10

Deliverables

Performers shall be required to provide the following deliverables:

Storyboard concepts within 30 days of program initiation and regular updates based on TA-2 feedback (TA-1)

Research results consistent with the goals of this solicitation that can be immediately applied within the educational system to improve outcomes (TA-2)

Professional quality educational software that can support classroom activities

(TA-1)

Approaches that can be applied as open-source, common architecture solutions

(TA-1)

Technical papers and reports outlining research and detailing both software and research approach allowing for replication and future expansion of the program

(TA-1 & TA-2).

Slide Presentations. Annotated slide presentations shall be submitted within 1 month after the program kickoff meeting and after each annual review (TA-1 &

TA-2).

Implementation Documentation. Documentation shall be provided within 1 month after the end of each year documenting all algorithms, source code, hardware descriptions, language specifications, system diagrams, part numbers, and other data necessary to replicate and test the designs (TA-1).

Monthly Progress Reports (TA-1 & TA-2). A monthly progress report describing progress made, resources expended, and any issues requiring the attention of the Government team shall be provided within 10 days after the end of each month. Progress reports may be in the form of annotated slides to help facilitate the transfer of information.

Monthly Teleconferences (TA-1 & TA-2). Short monthly teleconferences are required to update the Government regarding progress, milestones, and any issues. Performers are expected to review the monthly progress report and the Government will synchronize TA-1 and TA-2 as needed.

Final Report. The final report shall concisely summarize the effort conducted.

Intellectual Property

It is desired that all noncommercial software (including source code), software documentation, hardware designs and documentation, and technical data generated under the ENGAGE program be provided as a deliverable to the Government, with a minimum of Government Purpose Rights. Therefore, to the greatest extent feasible, offerors should not include background proprietary software and technical data as the basis of their proposed approach. If offerors desire to use proprietary software or technical data or both as the basis of their proposed approach, in whole or in part, they should: 1) clearly identify such software/data and its proposed particular use(s); 2) explain how the Government will be able to reach its program goals (including transition) within the proprietary model offered; and 3) provide possible nonproprietary alternatives in any area that might present transition difficulties or increased risk or cost to the Government under the proposed proprietary solution. See Section VI.B.2 for

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 11 further information on disclosing proprietary intellectual property and attendant restrictions.

Offerors expecting to use, but not to deliver, commercial open source tools or other materials in implementing their approach may be required to indemnify the Government against legal liability arising from such use.

All references to "Unlimited Rights" or "Government Purpose Rights" are intended to refer to the definitions of those terms as set forth in the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement (DFARS) Part 227. (See also Section VI.B.2. below, ―Intellectual Property,‖ including subsections c. and d.).

II. AWARD

Multiple awards are anticipated. The level of funding for individual awards made under this BAA has not been predetermined and will depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds. Awards will be made to offerors whose proposals are determined to be the most advantageous and provide the best value to the Government, all factors considered, including the potential contributions of the proposed work, overall funding strategy, and availability of funding for the effort. See Section V.B.

for further information.

Proposals selected for award negotiation may result in a procurement contract, 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 contracting officer shall have sole discretion to negotiate instrument provisions with selectees.

The projects funded under this BAA are expected to be fundamental research, basic and applied research in science and engineering, the results of which are ordinarily 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 are ordinarily restricted for proprietary or national security reasons. Notwithstanding this expectation, DARPA will also consider research proposals that, while perhaps not qualifying as fundamental research under the foregoing definition, meet the BAA criteria for submissions. See Section VI.B.5 below for further information on fundamental research. In all cases, the contracting officer shall have sole discretion to select award instrument type and to negotiate all instrument provisions with selectees.

In addition, the Government reserves its rights to the following:

to select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of the proposals received in response to this solicitation, to make awards without discussions with offerors, to conduct discussions if it is later determined to be necessary, to segregate portions of resulting awards into pre-priced options, DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 12 to accept proposals in their entirety or to select only portions of proposals for award, to fund proposals in phases with options for continued work at the end of one or more of the phases, 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; and, to remove offerors from award consideration should the parties fail to reach agreement on award terms, conditions and cost/price within a reasonable time or the offeror fails to timely provide requested additional information.

III. ELIGIBILITY

A. Applicants

All responsible sources capable of satisfying the Government's needs may submit a proposal that shall be considered by DARPA.

1. Historically Black Colleges and Universities, Small Businesses, Small

Disadvantaged Businesses and Minority Institutions

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.

2. Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and

Government entities

FFRDCs and Government entities (e.g., military educational institutions, etc.) are subject to applicable direct competition limitations and cannot propose to this BAA in any capacity (as prime or sub) unless they address the following conditions.

FFRDCs must clearly demonstrate that the 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, in compliance with the associated FFRDC sponsor agreement 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 ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 13

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 offeror.

3. Foreign Participation

Foreign participants and/or individuals may participate to the extent that such participants comply with any necessary Non-Disclosure Agreements, Security Regulations, Export Control Laws, and other governing statutes applicable under the circumstances.

B. Procurement Integrity

Current Federal employees are prohibited from participating in particular matters involving conflicting financial, employment, and representational interests (18 U.S. Code 203, 205, and 208). Prior to the start of proposal evaluation, the Government will assess potential conflicts of interest and promptly notify the offeror if any appear to exist. The Government assessment does not affect, offset, or mitigate the offeror’s duty to give full notice and planned mitigation for all potential organizational conflicts, as discussed below.

In accordance with Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) 9.503 and without prior approval or a waiver from the DARPA Director, a contractor cannot simultaneously be a SETA contractor and a performer. FAR citations are at https://www.acquisition.gov/FAR/.

As part of the proposal submission, offerors and proposed subcontractors must affirm whether they (individuals and organizations) are providing scientific, engineering, and technical assistance (SETA) or similar support to any DARPA technical office(s) through an active contract or subcontract. Affirmations must state which office(s) the offeror and/or proposed subcontractor supports and must provide prime contract numbers. 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 offeror has taken or proposes to take to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate such conflict. Proposals that fail to fully disclose potential conflicts of interest and/or do not have plans to mitigate this conflict may be rejected without technical evaluation and withdrawn from further consideration for award.

If a prospective offeror believes a conflict of interest exists or may exist (whether organizational or otherwise) or has a question on what constitutes a conflict, the offeror should promptly raise the issue with DARPA by sending the offeror's contact information and a summary of the potential conflict to the BAA mailbox before 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.

https://www.acquisition.gov/FAR/

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 14

C. Cost Sharing/Matching

Cost sharing is not required for this particular program; however, cost sharing will be carefully considered if proposed.

IV. APPLICATION

A. Announcement

This announcement contains all information required to respond to this solicitation and constitutes the total BAA. No additional forms, kits, or other materials are needed. No request for proposal (RFP) or additional solicitation regarding this opportunity will be issued nor is additional information available except as provided at the FedBizOpps website (http://www.fbo.gov) or referenced in this document.

B. Proposals

Proposals consist of two volumes: the technical and management proposal (including Appendix A) and the cost proposal.

All pages shall be formatted for printing on 8-1/2- by 11-inch paper with a font size not smaller than 12 point. Smaller font sizes may be used for figures, tables and charts.

Document files must be in Portable Document Format (.pdf, ISO 32000-1), OpenDocument (.odx, ISO/IEC 26300:2006 ), .doc, .docx, .xls, or .xlsx formats.

Submissions must be written in English. Proposals not meeting the format prescribed herein may not be reviewed.

1. Volume I: Technical and Management Proposal

The 35-page limit for Volume I includes all figures, tables, and charts, but does not include the cover sheet, table of contents or Appendix A.

Note: Appendix A is required and will be reviewed as part of the proposal. A submission letter is optional, and is not included in the page count. Section k - Additional Information does not count against the overall page limit, is provided for reviewer convenience, and is not reviewed as part of the proposal. Additional information not explicitly called for in the Additional Information section must not be submitted with the proposal, but may be included as links in the bibliography. Such materials will be considered for the reviewers’ convenience only and not considered as part of the proposal during the evaluation process.

Volume I must include the following components:

http://www.fbo.gov/

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 15

a. Cover Sheet:

BAA number

Technical area

Lead organization (prime contractor)

Type of business, selected from among the following categories: ―LARGE

BUSINESS‖, ―SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS‖, ―OTHER SMALL

BUSINESS‖, ―HBCU‖, ―MI‖, ―OTHER EDUCATIONAL‖, OR ―OTHER

NONPROFIT‖

Contractor’s reference number (if any)

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

Proposal title

Technical point of contact to include: name, mailing address, telephone, email, and fax

Administrative point of contact to include: name, mailing address, telephone, email, and fax

Award instrument requested: cost-plus-fixed-free (CPFF), cost-contract—no fee, cost sharing contract – no fee, or other type of procurement contract (specify), cooperative agreement or other transaction agreement (Information on award instruments is available at http://www.darpa.mil/cmo/proposerinfo.html#Contract%20Award%20Types):

Place(s) and period(s) of performance

Subcontractor Information

Proposal validity period (minimum 120 days)

DUNS number (https://eupdate.dnb.com/requestoptions.asp?cm_re=HomepageB*TopNav*DUN SNumberTab)

Taxpayer ID number (http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=96696,00.html)

CAGE code (http://www.dlis.dla.mil/CAGESearch/cage_faq.asp)

Label: ―PROPOSAL: VOLUME I‖ http://www.darpa.mil/cmo/proposerinfo.html#Contract%20Award%20Types https://eupdate.dnb.com/requestoptions.asp?cm_re=HomepageB*TopNav*DUNSNumberTab https://eupdate.dnb.com/requestoptions.asp?cm_re=HomepageB*TopNav*DUNSNumberTab http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=96696,00.html http://www.dlis.dla.mil/CAGESearch/cage_faq.asp

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 16

b. Table of Contents

c. Executive Summary: Provide a synopsis of the proposed project, including answers to the following questions:

What are you trying to do?

How is it done today, and what are the limitations?

Who will care and what will the impact be if you are successful?

How much will it cost and how long will it take?

The summary should include a description of the key technical challenges, a concise review of the technologies proposed to overcome these challenges and achieve the program goal, and a clear statement of the novelty and uniqueness of the proposed idea.

d. Goals and Impact: Clearly describe what the team is trying to achieve and the difference it will make (qualitatively and quantitatively) if successful. Describe the deliverables associated with the proposed project and any plans to commercialize the technology, transition it to a customer, or further the work. Include in this section any and 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 no proprietary claims, this should be stated.

Assuming the technology transition plan is successful, this section should discuss the mitigation of any issues related to sustainment of the technology over its entire lifecycle.

e. Technical Plan: Describe in as much detail as possible the proposed approach, paying particular attention to its innovative features, to meeting the technical challenges specified in the relevant (TA-1 or TA-2) Technical Areas subsection of this BAA. Outline and address technical difficulties inherent in the approach and possible solutions for overcoming potential problems. This section should provide appropriate measurable technical milestones (quantitative if possible) at intermediate stages of the program to demonstrate progress, and a plan for achieving the milestones. The technical plan should demonstrate a deep understanding of the technical challenges and present a credible (even if risky) plan to achieve the program goal. Mitigation of technical risk should be discussed.

The technical plan of both TA-1 and TA-2 performers should include suggestions for possible metrics to be used for the program even though final decisions on metrics will be made by the ENGAGE community once the program is started.

f. Management Plan: A principal investigator for the project must be identified. A clear description of the team’s organization including an organization chart should

DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 17 be provided that includes, as applicable: the programmatic relationship of team members; the unique capabilities of team members; the task responsibilities of team members, the teaming strategy among the team members. Include a detailed plan for coordination including explicit guidelines for interaction among collaborators/subcontractors of the proposed effort. Risk management approaches should be included. Details of any formal teaming agreements that are required to execute this program should be discussed.

g. Capabilities: Briefly describe organizational experience in this area, existing intellectual property, specialized facilities, and any Government-furnished materials or data. Provide a discussion of and work in closely related research areas and previous accomplishments.

h. Statement of Work (SOW): The SOW should provide a detailed task breakdown, citing specific tasks and their connection to the interim milestones and program metrics. Each phase of the program should be separately defined.

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, and/or team member by name, etc.)

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

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

Clearly identify any tasks/subtasks (prime or subcontracted) that will be accomplished on-campus at a university.

The SOW must not include proprietary information.

i. Schedule and Milestones: Provide a detailed schedule showing tasks (task name, duration, WBS element as applicable, performing organization), milestones which identify major decision points and major accomplishments, and the interrelationships among tasks. The task structure must be consistent with that in the SOW. Measurable milestones should be clearly articulated and defined in time relative to start of effort.

j. Cost Summary: Provide a top level cost summary with cost totals for labor, materials, other direct charges (ODCs), indirect charges (e.g. overhead, fringe, DARPA ENGAGE: LEARNING TO SOLVE PROBLEMS, SOLVING PROBLEMS TO LEARN – BROAD AGENCY ANNOUNCEMENT 18 general and administrative (G&A), etc.), and the proposed fee (if any) for the entire effort broken down by phase. Include 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. Any requests for Government-furnished equipment or Government-furnished information should be included on the summary page with cost estimates (if applicable) and due dates.

k. Additional Information:

Personnel, Qualifications, and Commitments - List key personnel, showing a concise summary of their qualifications, and how those qualifications directly address technical and managerial tasks to be executed within the program.

Provide a description of any previous accomplishments or similar efforts completed/ongoing in this or closely related research area, including identification of other Government sponsors, if any.

Indicate the level of effort in terms of hours to be expended by each person during each contract year and other (current and proposed) major sources of support for them and/or commitments of their efforts. DARPA expects all key personnel associated with a proposal to make substantial time commitment to the proposed activity and the proposal will be evaluated accordingly. It is DARPA’s intention to put key personnel clauses into the contracts, so offerors should not bid personnel whom they do not intend to execute the contract.

Include a table of key individual time commitments as follows:

Key Individual Project Pending/Current 2011 2012 2013

Jane Doe ENGAGE Proposed ZZZ hours

UUU

hours

WWW

hours

Project 1 Current n/a n/a n/a

Project 2 Pending 100 hours n/a n/a

John Deer ENGAGE Proposed

Bibliography - A bibliography must be included. Resumes of additional performers may be included, as well as links to relevant papers, reports, or videos. Do not include technical papers as part of the submission.

Appendix A {No page limit}

a. Intellectual Property: If no restrictions are intended, then the offeror must state

―NONE‖.

Otherwise,…