HR0011-16-S-0001_MTO_Office-Wide_Final_For_Posting_14Sep2016.pdf

HR0011-16-S-0001

Microsystems Technology Office Office-wide

Broad Agency Announcement

September 14, 2016

Table of Contents

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description A. MTO Mission and Thrust Areas B. Topic Areas of Interest

II. Award Information A. General Award Information B. Fundamental Research

III. Eligibility Information A. Eligible Applicants

1. Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and Government Entities

2. Non-U.S. Organizations and/or Individuals B. Organizational Conflicts of Interest C. Cost Sharing/Matching D. Other Eligibility Criteria

1. Collaborative Efforts IV. Application and Submission Information

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

1. Abstract Format

2. Full Proposal Format

3. Proprietary Information

4. Security Information

a. Unclassified Submissions

b. Classified Submissions

c. Both Classified and Unclassified Submissions

5. Human Subjects Research/Animal Use

6. Approved Cost Accounting System Documentation

7. Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. § 749d)/FAR 39.2

8. Grant Abstract

9. Small Business Subcontracting Plan

10. Intellectual Property

a. For Procurement Contracts

b. For All Non-Procurement Contracts

11. Patents

12. Unique Entity Identifier and System for Award Management (SAM)

13. Funding Restrictions

C. Submission Information

1. Submission Dates and Times

a. Abstract Due Date

b. Full Proposal Date

c. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)

2. Abstract Submission Information

3. Proposal Submission Information

a. For Proposers Requesting Grants or Cooperative Agreements:

b. For Proposers Requesting Contracts or Other Transaction Agreements

c. Classified Submission Information

4. Other Submission Requirements

V. Application Review Information A. Evaluation Criteria

1. Overall Scientific and Technical Merit

2. Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission

3. Cost Realism

B. Review and Selection Process

1. Review Process

2. Handling of Source Selection Information

3. Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information (FAPIIS)

VI. Award Administration Information A. Selection Notices

1. Abstracts

2. Proposals

B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements

1. Meeting and Travel Requirements

2. Representations and Certifications

3. Terms and Conditions

C. Reporting D. Electronic Systems

1. Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF)

2. i-Edison

VII. Agency Contacts

ATTACHMENT 1: Cost Volume Proposer Checklist ATTACHMENT 2: Proposal Summary Slide Template

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

Federal Agency Name – Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Microsystems Technology Office (MTO)

Funding Opportunity Title – Office-wide Announcement Type – Initial Announcement Funding Opportunity Number – HR0011-16-S-0001 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) – 12.910 Research and

Technology Development Dates (All times listed herein are Eastern Time) o Posting Date: September 14, 2016 o Abstract Due Date: Abstracts may be submitted on a rolling basis until 4:00PM

(Eastern Time) on August 10, 2018.

o Proposal Due Date: Proposals may be submitted on a rolling basis until 4:00PM

(Eastern Time) on September 13, 2018.

o Closing Date: September 13, 2018 o Estimated period of performance start: Approximately 120 calendar days after proposal submission Concise description of the funding opportunity - This announcement seeks revolutionary research ideas for topics not being addressed by ongoing MTO programs or other published solicitations.

Anticipated individual awards – Multiple awards are anticipated.

Anticipated funding type - 6.1, 6.2, and/or 6.3 Types of instruments that may be awarded – Procurement contract, grant, cooperative agreement or other transaction Agency contact o Dr. William Chappell Director, Microsystems Technology Office

BAA Coordinator: HR0011-16-S-0001@darpa.mil

DARPA/MTO

ATTN: HR0011-16-S-0001

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114

THOSE INTENDING TO SUBMIT A PROPOSAL FOR AN ASSISTANCE INSTRUMENT

(GRANT OR COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT) ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO READ

THE INSTRUCTIONS PROVIDED AT SECTION IV.C.3.a REGARDING THE TIME

REQUIRED TO RECEIVE VALIDATION OF SUBMISSIONS MADE THROUGH

GRANTS.GOV. PROPOSALS THAT ARE VALIDATED AFTER THE PROPOSAL DUE

DATE/TIME WILL BE CONSIDERED LATE AND, AS SUCH, WILL NOT BE REVIEWED.

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 the procedures under Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016, and 2 C.F.R. § 200, as applicable. Any negotiations and/or awards will use procedures under FAR 15.4, Contract Pricing, and 2 C.F.R § 200, as applicable.

Proposals received as a result of this BAA shall be evaluated in accordance with evaluation criteria specified herein through a scientific review process.

DARPA BAAs are posted on the Federal Business Opportunities (FedBizOpps) website, https://www.fbo.gov/, and, as applicable, the Grants.gov website at http://www.grants.gov/. The following information is for those wishing to respond to the BAA.

The Microsystems Technology Office (MTO) at DARPA regularly publishes BAAs requesting responses to specific program topics. This announcement seeks revolutionary research ideas for topics not addressed by ongoing MTO programs or other published BAA solicitations.

To avoid proposals that that duplicate existing activities or are responsive to other published MTO solicitations, potential bidders are highly encouraged to review current MTO programs and solicitations, respectively listed at http://www.darpa.mil/about-us/offices/mto and http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities. Contacting MTO program managers to discuss research their interests is also encouraged. A current list of program managers is available at http://www.darpa.mil/about-us/people.

A. MTO Mission and Thrust Areas

MTO seeks to develop high-risk, high-reward technologies that create and prevent strategic surprise, help secure the Department of Defense’s (DoD) technological superiority and address the complex threats facing U.S. national security. Proposed research should investigate innovative approaches that enable revolutionary advances in science, devices, or systems.

Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

Since its inception in 1991, MTO has helped create and prevent strategic surprise through investments in compact microelectronic components, such as microprocessors, microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), and photonic devices. MTO’s revolutionary work applying advanced capabilities in areas such as wide-band gap materials, phased array radars, high-energy lasers and infrared imaging, have helped the United States establish and maintain technological superiority for more than two decades.

As MTO evolves to address future microsystems-related challenges, the office has identified three target thrust areas: (1) data collection and exploitation in resource-constrained environments, (2) effective DoD operations in the electromagnetic spectrum, and (3) embracing and thriving in the internationalized technology base. Each of these overlapping spaces present significant opportunity for exploring new and creative technologies.

Tactical Information Extraction (Processing, Learning, Application) - Extensive, heterogeneous sensor arrays and networked operations will underpin U.S. success in future conflicts. Managing and interpreting the flood of information, however, will pose a major challenge to power-constrained systems and require adaptive, embedded computing hardware for real-time data fusion and exploitation. MTO is therefore developing technologies that will enable future warfighters to extract actionable intelligence from the numerous sensor feeds around them, even in areas where robust network connections and cloud-based analytics are intermittent or unavailable.

Research areas include advanced machine learning techniques that far surpass the state-of-the-art – to understand context, learn continuously, achieve high accuracy on new tasks, and recognize both objects and activities – and enable enhanced autonomy and man-unmanned teaming. Further research includes low-power hardware architectures to provide learning and complex computation in embedded military applications.

Spectrum and Physics Interfaces (RF, Optics, Sensors) - The effectiveness of land, sea, air, space, and cyber-based combat operations depends on controlling and exploiting the electromagnetic (EM) spectrum, which is emerging as a sixth domain of modern warfare. DoD depends on the spectrum to collect information about the physical world, to process it digitally, and to disseminate it to the warfighter.

However, as info-centric military and commercial systems demand greater spectrum access, this limited resource will become increasingly contested and congested. To be effective, U.S. systems will need to sense and adapt to surprise events in the spectrum (e.g. unfamiliar jamming and spoofing techniques) and in the physical world. DoD will need tactical sensors with novel sensing modalities, higher performance, lower cost, and "selective attention," meaning that they conserve power by only collecting and transmitting relevant signals. Where spectrum access for capabilities like GPS is limited, DoD will also need positioning, navigation, and timing (PNT) technologies that allow its systems to sense their location and to coordinate with each other.

DARPA/MTO is developing components to enable these capabilities and to ensure effective U.S. operations in a dynamic, contentious spectrum environment. Research areas include radiofrequency (RF), optical, and other low-footprint sensor hardware that provides assured connectivity at high-bandwidths, emphasizes maximal flexibility, and facilitates fast development cycles for fielding complex EM systems.

Globalization (Speed, Leveraging, Security) - The DoD relies on advanced microelectronics for a range of capabilities including command, control communications, computers, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance (C4ISR).

Even as DARPA continues to push the leading edge in microelectronics, the semiconductor industry has globalized and grown more innovative, commercially-focused, and international. DARPA/MTO is developing the technology-based solutions required to leverage this global microelectronics supply chain while ensuring the security of U.S. microelectronics. MTO is also addressing the military's ongoing need for custom microelectronics. To keep the United States ahead of potential adversaries, research areas include application specific integrated circuits with “built-in trust” protections, technologies that accelerate DoD circuit development timelines, and techniques that promise surprising performance for military systems.

B. Topic Areas of Interest

Research areas of current interest to MTO include, but are not limited to, the following topics:

Advanced Imaging Architectures and Systems Chip Scale Sensors Computational Architectures and Algorithms for Next Generation Artificial Intelligence

(AI)

Electro-Optical Infrared (EO/IR) Technologies Emerging MEMS Technologies Enabling component technology for cold-atom microsystems Energy-Efficient Computing Hardware Assurance, Reliability & Validation Hardware for Advanced Signal Processing Heterogeneous Integration Low Power Electronics Low Volume Microsystems Manufacturing Microsystem Design & CAD Microsystems for Directed Energy Microsystems for Precision Navigation & Timing Microsystems for RF/Optical Transceivers Non-Silicon Electronics Novel Photonic Devices Photonic & Electronic Interconnects Processing Techniques for Imaging and Spectral Recognition Quantum Devices Signal Processing to Reduce Hardware Requirements Thermal Management Other Microsystems Technology Topic Areas

II. Award Information

A. General Award Information

This BAA is primarily, but not solely, intended for early stage research (studies) that may lead to larger, focused, MTO programs in the future. Studies are defined as single phase efforts of short duration (< 12 months) costing less than $1,000,000. Whereas proposers are strongly encouraged to submit studies to this BAA, multi-phase efforts will also be considered. Multi-phase efforts are defined as efforts with more than one phase that may span longer than 12 months and that may cost more than $1,000,000. Multi-phase efforts must also cover clearly identifiable research topic areas with quantitative technical metrics. Proposals for studies that are 12 months or less in duration, cost $500,000 or less, and for which the performer is seeking an assistance instrument (grant or cooperative agreement) are provided a streamlined proposal preparation process (see Section IV.B.2, “Full Proposal Format”).

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. If warranted, portions of resulting awards may be segregated into pre-priced options. 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, as applicable.

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. 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 (see Section VI.B.2., “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. 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, whether or not the research is classified as Fundamental Research, and other factors.

Proposers looking for innovative, commercial-like contractual arrangements are encouraged to consider requesting Other Transactions. To understand the flexibility and options associated with Other Transactions, consult http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions.

In all cases, the Government contracting officer shall have sole discretion to select award instrument type and to negotiate all instrument terms and conditions with selectees. Proposers are advised that regardless of the instrument type proposed, DARPA personnel, in consultation with the Government contracting officer, may select other award instruments, as they deem appropriate. DARPA will apply publication or other restrictions, as necessary, if it determines that the research resulting from the proposed effort will present a high likelihood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies that are unique and critical to defense. Any award resulting from such a determination will include a requirement for DARPA permission before publishing any information or results on the program. For more information on publication restrictions, see the section below on Fundamental Research.

B. Fundamental Research

It is DoD policy that the publication of products of fundamental research will remain unrestricted to the maximum extent possible. National Security Decision Directive (NSDD) 189 defines fundamental research as follows:

‘Fundamental research’ means 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.

As of the date of publication of this BAA, the Government cannot identify whether the work under this BAA may be considered fundamental research and may award both fundamental and non-fundamental research.

Proposers should indicate in their proposal whether they believe the scope of the research included in their proposal is fundamental or not. While proposers should clearly explain the intended results of their research, the Government shall have sole discretion to select award instrument type and to negotiate all instrument terms and conditions with selectees. Appropriate clauses will be included in resultant awards for non-fundamental research to prescribe publication requirements and other restrictions, as appropriate. This clause can be found at (www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa).

For certain research projects, it may be possible that although the research being performed by the awardee is restricted research, a subawardee may be conducting fundamental research. In those cases, it is the awardee’s responsibility to explain in their proposal why its subawardee’s effort is fundamental research.

III. Eligibility Information

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

A. Eligible Applicants

1. Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and Government Entities

a) FFRDCs

FFRDCs are subject to applicable direct competition limitations and cannot propose to this BAA in any capacity unless they meet the following conditions: (1) FFRDCs must clearly demonstrate that the proposed work is not otherwise available from the private sector. (2) FFRDCs must provide a letter on official letterhead from their sponsoring organization citing the specific authority establishing their eligibility to propose to Government solicitations and compete with industry, and their compliance with the associated FFRDC sponsor agreement’s terms and conditions. This information is required for FFRDCs proposing to be awardees or subawardees.

b) Government Entities

Government Entities (e.g., Government/National laboratories, military educational institutions, etc.) are subject to applicable direct competition limitations. 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 and contractual authority, if relevant, establishing their ability to propose to Government solicitations.

c) Authority and Eligibility

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 FFRDC and Government entity eligibility submissions on a case-by-case basis; however, the burden to prove eligibility for all team members rests solely with the proposer.

2. Non-U.S. Organizations and/or Individuals

Non-U.S. organizations and/or individuals may participate to the extent that such participants comply with any necessary nondisclosure agreements, security regulations, export control laws, and other governing statutes applicable under the circumstances.

B. Organizational Conflicts of Interest

Without prior approval or a waiver from the DARPA Director, in accordance with FAR 9.503, a contractor cannot simultaneously provide scientific, engineering, technical assistance (SETA), advisory and assistance services (A&AS), or similar support and also be a technical performer.

As part of the proposal submission, all members of the proposed team (including any potential subawardees or consultants) must affirm whether they (their organizations and individual team members) are providing SETA or similar support to any DARPA office(s) through an active award or subaward. All facts relevant to the existence or potential existence of organizational conflicts of interest (FAR 9.5) must be disclosed. The disclosure must include a description of the action the proposer has taken or proposes to take to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate such conflict. Prior to the start of proposal evaluations, the Government will assess potential conflicts of interest based on the proposals submitted. DARPA will promptly notify the proposer if any appear to exist. The Government assessment does NOT affect, offset, or mitigate the proposer’s responsibility to give full notice and planned mitigation for all potential organizational conflicts.

If, in the sole opinion of the Government after full consideration of the circumstances, a proposal fails to fully disclose potential conflicts of interest and/or any identified conflict situation cannot be effectively mitigated, the proposal will be rejected without technical evaluation and withdrawn from further consideration for award.

If a prospective proposer believes a conflict of interest exists or may exist (whether organizational or otherwise) or has questions on what constitutes a conflict of interest, the proposer should send his/her contact information and a summary of the potential conflict via email to the BAA email address before time and effort are expended in preparing a proposal and mitigation plan.

C. Cost Sharing/Matching

Cost sharing is not required; however, it will be carefully considered where there is an applicable statutory condition relating to the selected funding instrument. Cost sharing is encouraged where there is a reasonable probability of a potential commercial application related to the proposed research and development effort.

For more information on potential cost sharing requirements for Other Transactions for Prototype, see http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions.

D. Other Eligibility Criteria

1. Collaborative Efforts

Collaborative efforts/teaming are encouraged.

IV. Application and Submission Information

A. Address to Request Application Package

This announcement, any attachments, and any references to external websites herein constitute the total solicitation. If proposers cannot access the referenced material posted in the announcement found at http://www.darpa.mil/, contact the administrative contact listed herein.

PROPOSERS ARE CAUTIONED THAT EVALUATION RATINGS MAY BE LOWERED

AND/OR PROPOSALS REJECTED IF PROPOSAL PREPARATION (PROPOSAL FORMAT,

CONTENT, ETC.) AND/OR SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS ARE NOT FOLLOWED.

B. Content and Form of Application Submission

1. Abstract Format

Abstracts should follow the format described below in this section. The cover sheet should be clearly marked “ABSTRACT” and the total length of Section II should not exceed 6 pages, which includes all figures, tables, and charts. 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. No formal transmittal letter is required. All abstracts must be written in English.

Section I. Administrative

A. Cover sheet to include:

(1) BAA number;

(2) MTO Topic(s) of Interest (see Section I.B.);

(3) Lead Organization submitting proposal abstract;

(4) Type of organization, selected among the following categories:

Large Organization, Small Disadvantaged Organization, Other Small Organization, HBCU, MI, Other Educational, Other Nonprofit;

(5) Proposer’s internal reference number (if any);

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

(7) Abstract title;

(8) Technical point of contact to include:

Salutation, last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code (+4), telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail;

(9) Administrative point of contact to include:

Salutation, last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code (+4), telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail;

(10) Total funds requested from DARPA, and the amount of cost share (if any); AND

(11) Date abstract was submitted.

(Note: An official transmittal letter is not required when submitting a Proposal Abstract.)

Section II. Abstract Details

A. Innovative Claims

Summary of innovative claims for the proposed research. This section is the centerpiece of the abstract and should succinctly describe the uniqueness and benefits of the proposed approach relative to the current state-of-art alternate approaches.

B. Technical Approach Technical rationale, technical approach, and constructive plan for accomplishment of technical goals in support of innovative claims and deliverable production.

C. Deliverables 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 no proprietary claims, this should be stated. For forms to be completed regarding intellectual property, see Section IV.B.10. There will be no page limit for the listed forms.

D. Other Research General discussion of other research in this area.

E. Cost and Schedule Provide a cost estimate for resources (e.g. labor, materials) and any subcontractors over the proposed timeline of the project, broken down by Government fiscal year.

F. Capabilities/Management Plan 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.

2. Full Proposal Format

All full proposals must be in the format given below. Proposals shall consist of two volumes:

Volume I – Technical and Management Proposal (3 sections), and Volume II – Cost Proposal (4 sections). The submission of other supporting materials along with the proposals is strongly discouraged and will not be considered for review. 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.

Section II of Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal, shall not exceed: 1) 15 pages for studies proposals that are less than 12 months in duration, cost less than $500,000, and are seeking an assistance instrument (grant or cooperative agreement); and 2) 26 pages for all other proposals. The page limitation for full proposals includes all figures, tables, and charts. All proposals must be written in English. There is no page limit for Volume II - Cost Proposal. All full proposals must be written in English.

A summary slide of the proposed effort, in PowerPoint format, should be submitted with the proposal. A template slide is provided as Attachment 2 to the BAA. Submit this PowerPoint file in addition to Volumes I and II of your full proposal. This summary slide does not count towards the total page count.

a. Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal

Section I. Administrative

A. Cover sheet to include:

(1) BAA number;

(2) MTO Topic(s) of Interest (see Section I.B.);

(3) Lead Organization submitting proposal;

(4) Type of organization, selected among the following categories:

Large Organization, Small Disadvantaged Organization, Other Small Organization, HBCU, MI, Other Educational, Other Nonprofit;

(5) Proposer’s internal reference number (if any);

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

(7) Proposal title;

(8) Technical point of contact to include:

Salutation, last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code (+4), telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail;

(9) Administrative point of contact to include: salutation, last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code (+4), telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail;

(10) Total funds requested from DARPA, and the amount of cost share (if any); AND

(11) Date proposal was submitted.

B. Official transmittal letter.

Section II. Detailed Proposal Information

A. Technical Approach and Innovative Claims

This section is the centerpiece of the proposal and should succinctly summarize the innovative claims for the proposed research and clearly describe the proposed approach without using any jargon. Thoroughly and quantitatively describe the uniqueness and benefits of the proposed approach relative to the current state-of-art and alternate approaches. This section should demonstrate that the proposer has a clear understanding of the state-of-the-art and should provide sufficient justification for the feasibility of the proposed approach(es).

B. Program Plan, Metrics, and Milestones Describe a detailed plan for accomplishing the proposed research effort using the innovative approach(es). The program plan should:

1. Provide a detailed description of performance metrics and assessment parameters.

2. Discuss how performance of each metric will be accurately demonstrated and measured. All program metrics must be associated with demonstrable, quantitative measures of performance and should be summarized in a single table (values for the metrics should be given that are anticipated at the program’s conclusion and at intermediate milestones).

3. Include a comprehensive timeline/schedule.

4. Identify all milestones and a plan for achieving the milestones.

5. Provide appropriate measurable milestones (quantitative if possible) at intermediate stages of the project to demonstrate progress.

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.

C. Risk Assessment Discuss mitigation of technical risk. Outline and address technical challenges inherent in the approach and possible solutions for overcoming potential problems. Demonstrate a deep understanding of the technical challenges and present a credible (even if risky) plan to achieve the project’s goal. Include a thoughtful and thorough risk-assessment, in which the major risks associated with the proposed work are articulated. All risk assessments should:

(1) identify all major technical risks specific to the proposed approaches, (2) estimate the relative magnitude of the risks, (3) identify which milestones are subject to each risk, and (4) describe specific plans to mitigate each risk.

D. 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:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Note: Each Phase of the program must be separately defined in the SOW.

E. Deliverables and Technology Transfer

Describe the deliverables, the results, products, transferable technology, and plans and capability to accomplish the expected technology transfer associated with the proposed research.

The section should address 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 and mitigation of life-cycle and sustainment risks associated with transitioning intellectual property for U.S. military applications, if applicable. See also Section IV.B.10, “Intellectual Property.” If there are no proprietary claims, this should be stated.

F. Teaming and Management Plan Describe the formal teaming arrangements which will be used to execute this effort. Describe the programmatic relationship between investigators and the rationale for choosing this teaming strategy. Present a coherent organization chart and integrated management strategy for the program team. For each person, indicate: (1) name, (2) affiliation, (3) abbreviated listing of all technical area tasks they will work on with roles, responsibilities, and percent time indicated, (4) discussion of the proposers’ previous accomplishments, relevant expertise and/or unique capabilities.

G. Facilities and Equipment Identify the facilities and equipment required to achieve the proposed goals. Clearly identify which tools and facilities are presently available to the team. For each, if it is presently available to the team, identify its location, which investigator or facility is providing it, and describe its specifications and/or qualifications. If the tool or facility is not available to the team, justify why this is the case and provide the expected cost of acquisition.

Section III. Additional Information

Information in this section may include 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 may be included in the submission.

b. Volume II, Cost Proposal (Proposals seeking assistance instruments under a total proposed amount of $500,000 with a period of performance of 12 months or less)

All proposers, including FFRDCs, must submit the following:

Cover sheet to include:

(1) BAA number;

(2) MTO Topic(s) of Interest (see Section I.B.);

(3) Lead Organization submitting proposal;

(4) Type of organization, selected among the following categories:

Large Organization, Small Disadvantaged Organization, Other Small Organization, HBCU, MI, Other Educational, Other Nonprofit;

(5) Proposer’s internal reference number (if any);

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

(7) Proposal title;

(8) Technical point of contact to include:

Salutation, last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code (+4), 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 (+4), telephone, fax (if available), and electronic mail (if available);

(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, by calendar year and by government fiscal year;

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

(14) Name, address, and telephone number of the proposer’s cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) audit office (if known);

(15) Date proposal was prepared;

(16) DUNS number;

(17) TIN number;

(18) CAGE Code;

(19) Subcontractor Information;

(20) Proposal validity period; AND

(21) Any Forward Pricing Rate Agreement, other such approved rate information, or such documentation that may assist in expediting negotiations (if available).

Attachment 1, the Cost Volume Proposer Checklist, must be included with the coversheet of the Cost Proposal.

Section II. Detailed Cost Information (Prime and Subcontractors)

The proposer shall provide a summary cost breakdown by fiscal year and a detailed cost breakdown by phase (if multiple phases are proposed), technical task/sub-task, and month for each technical area proposed to. In doing so, the proposer shall provide budget information in sufficient detail to substantiate the program price proposed (e.g. reasonableness).

The breakdown/s shall include, at a minimum, the following major cost items along with associated backup documentation for both the prime and subcontractor(s):

A. Direct Labor

Including Fringe Benefits, Facilities and Administrative (F&A), General and Administrative, as applicable (proposer must provide a copy of the current rate agreement, if applicable, and clearly describe the application of all proposed indirect cost rates);

B. Indirect Costs Including Fringe Benefits, Facilities and Administrative (F&A), General and Administrative, as applicable (proposer must provide a copy of the current rate agreement, if applicable, and clearly describe the application of all proposed indirect cost rates);

C. Travel Provide the purpose of the trip (justifying its relevancy to the proposed project), number of trips, number of days per trip, departure and arrival destinations, number of people, etc.

D. Other Direct Costs Itemized with costs (proposer must provide supporting rationale justifying the relevancy of the items to the proposed project and explaining how the proposed costs/budget was developed).

E. Material Itemized with costs (proposer must provide supporting rationale justifying the relevancy of the items to the proposed project and explaining how the proposed costs/budget was developed).

F. Equipment Itemized with costs (proposer must provide supporting rationale justifying the relevancy of the items to the proposed project and provide documentation (i.e., vendor quote, past/recent purchase order, catalog price lists, etc.) supporting the proposed price for each item.

G. Consultants If consultants are to be used, proposer must provide a copy of the consultant’s proposed SOW as well as a signed consultant agreement or other document which verifies the proposed loaded daily / hourly rate and any other proposed consultant costs (e.g. travel);

H. Subcontracts Itemization of all subcontracts. Additionally, the prime contractor is responsible for compiling and providing, as part of its proposal submission to the Government, subcontractor proposals prepared at the same level of detail as that required by the prime. Subcontractor proposals include Interdivisional Work Transfer Agreements (ITWA) or similar arrangements. If seeking a procurement contract, the prime contractor shall provide a cost reasonableness analysis of all proposed subcontractor costs/prices. Such analysis shall indicate the extent to which the prime contractor has negotiated subcontract costs/prices and whether any such subcontracts are to be placed on a sole-source basis.

All proprietary subcontractor proposal documentation, prepared at the same level of detail as that required of the prime, which cannot be uploaded to the DARPA BAA website (https://www.baa.darpa.mil, BAAT) or Grants.gov as part of the proposer’s submission, shall be made immediately available to the Government, upon request, under separate cover (i.e., mail, electronic/email, etc.), either by the proposer or by the subcontractor organization. This does not relieve the proposer from the requirement to include, as part of their submission (via BAAT or Grants.gov, as applicable), subcontract proposals that do not include proprietary pricing information (rates, factors, etc.).

A Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM), or similar budgetary estimate, is not considered a fully qualified subcontract cost proposal submission. Inclusion of a ROM, or similar budgetary estimate, or failure to submit a fully qualified subcontract cost proposal, will result in the full proposal being deemed non-compliant.

I. Government Furnished Equipment/Property/Information The cost proposal should include identification of pricing assumptions of which may require incorporation into the resulting award instrument (i.e., use of Government Furnished Property/Facilities/Information, access to Government Subject Matter Experts, etc.).

J. Cost-Sharing The source, nature, and amount of any industry cost-sharing;

K. Contracted Fundamental Research Written justification required per Section II.B, “Fundamental Research,” pertaining to prime and/or subcontracted effort being considered Contracted Fundamental Research; AND

L. Small Business Subcontracting Plan If applicable. See Section IV.B.9, “Small Business Subcontracting Plan” below.

Proposers are strongly encouraged to provide the aforementioned cost breakdown as an editable MS Excel spreadsheet, inclusive of calculations formulae, with tabs (material, travel, ODC’s) provided as necessary. Providing information in this manner will assist the Government in understanding what is being proposed both technically and in terms of cost reasonableness.

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.

c. Volume II, Cost Proposal (All proposals not meeting the above subsection b criteria)

All proposers, including FFRDCs, must submit the following:

Cover sheet to include:

(1) BAA number;

(2) MTO Topic(s) of Interest (see Section I.B.);

(3) Lead Organization submitting proposal;

(4) Type of organization, selected among the following categories:

Large Organization, Small Disadvantaged Organization, Other Small Organization, HBCU, MI, Other Educational, Other Nonprofit;

(5) Proposer’s internal reference number (if any);

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

(7) Proposal title;

(8) Technical point of contact to include:

Salutation, last name, first name, street address, city, state, zip code (+4), 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 (+4), telephone, fax (if available), and electronic mail (if available);

(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, by calendar year and by government fiscal year;

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

(14) Name, address, and telephone number of the proposer’s cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) audit office (if known);

(15) Date proposal was prepared;

(16) DUNS number;

(17) TIN number;

(18) CAGE Code;

(19) Subcontractor Information;

(20) Proposal validity period; AND

(21) Any Forward Pricing Rate Agreement, other such approved rate information, or such documentation that may assist in expediting negotiations (if available).

Attachment 1, the Cost Volume Proposer Checklist, must be included with the coversheet of the Cost Proposal.

Section II. Detailed Cost Information (Prime and Subcontractors)

The proposer shall provide a summary cost breakdown by fiscal year and a detailed cost breakdown by phase (if multiple phases are proposed), technical task/sub-task, and month for each technical area proposed to. The proposer’s (to include eligible FFRDCs) cost volume shall provide cost and pricing information (See Note 1), or other than cost or pricing information if the total price is under the referenced threshold, in sufficient detail to substantiate the program price proposed (e.g., realism and reasonableness). The proposer should include supporting cost and pricing information in sufficient detail to substantiate the summary cost estimates and should include a description of the method used to estimate costs and supporting documentation.

The breakdown/s shall include, at a minimum, the following major cost items along with associated backup documentation for both the prime and subcontractor(s):

A. Direct Labor

A breakout clearly identifying the individual labor categories with associated labor hours and direct labor rates, as well as a detailed Basis-of-Estimate (BOE) narrative description of the methods used to estimate labor costs;

B. Indirect Costs Including Fringe Benefits, Overhead, General and Administrative Expense, Cost of Money, Fee, etc. (must show base amount and rate);

C. Travel Provide the purpose of the trip, number of trips, number of days per trip, departure and arrival destinations, number of people, etc.;

D. Other Direct Costs Itemized with costs; back-up documentation is to be submitted to support proposed costs;

E. Material/Equipment

(i) For IT and equipment purchases, include a letter stating why the proposer cannot provide the requested resources from its own funding.

(ii) A priced Bill-of-Material (BOM) clearly identifying, for each item proposed, the quantity, unit price, the source of the unit price (i.e., vendor quote, engineering estimate, etc.), the type of property (i.e., material, equipment, special test equipment, information technology, etc.), and a cross-reference to the Statement of Work (SOW) task/s that require the item/s. At time of proposal submission, any item that exceeds $1,000 must be supported with basis-of-estimate (BOE) documentation such as a copy of catalog price lists, vendor quotes or a written engineering estimate (additional documentation may be required during negotiations, if selected).

(iii) If seeking a procurement contract and items of Contractor Acquired Property are proposed, exclusive of material, the proposer shall clearly demonstrate that the inclusion of such items as Government Property is in keeping with the requirements of FAR Part 45.102.

In accordance with FAR 35.014, “Government property and title,” it is the Government’s intent that title to all equipment purchased with funds available for research under any resulting contract will vest in the acquiring nonprofit institution (e.g., Nonprofit Institutions of Higher Education and Nonprofit Organizations whose primary purpose is the conduct of scientific research) upon acquisition without further obligation to the Government. Any such equipment shall be used for the conduct of basic and applied scientific research. The above transfer of title to all equipment purchased with funds available for research under any resulting contract is not allowable when the acquiring entity is a for-profit organization;

however, such organizations can, in accordance with FAR 52.245-1(j), be given priority to acquire such property at its full acquisition cost.

F. Consultants If consultants are to be used, proposer must provide a copy of the consultant’s proposed SOW as well as a signed consultant agreement or other document which verifies the proposed loaded daily / hourly rate and any other proposed consultant costs (e.g. travel);

G. Subcontracts Itemization of all subcontracts. Additionally, the prime contractor is responsible for compiling and providing, as part of its proposal submission to the Government, subcontractor proposals prepared at the same level of detail as that required by the prime. Subcontractor proposals include Interdivisional Work Transfer Agreements (ITWA) or similar arrangements. If seeking a procurement contract, the prime contractor shall provide a cost reasonableness analysis of all proposed subcontractor costs/prices. Such analysis shall indicate the extent to which the prime contractor has negotiated subcontract costs/prices and whether any such subcontracts are to be placed on a sole-source basis.

All proprietary subcontractor proposal documentation, prepared at the same level of detail as that required of the prime, which cannot be uploaded to the DARPA BAA website (https://www.baa.darpa.mil, BAAT) or Grants.gov as part of the proposer’s submission, shall be made immediately available to the Government, upon request, under separate cover (i.e., mail, electronic/email, etc.), either by the proposer or by the subcontractor organization. This does not relieve the proposer from the requirement to include, as part of their submission (via BAAT or Grants.gov, as applicable), subcontract proposals that do not include proprietary pricing information (rates, factors, etc.).

A Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM), or similar budgetary estimate, is not considered a fully qualified subcontract cost proposal submission. Inclusion of a ROM, or similar budgetary estimate, or failure to submit a fully qualified subcontract cost proposal, will result in the full proposal being deemed non-compliant.

H. Cost-Sharing The source, nature, and amount of any industry cost-sharing;

I. Fundamental Research Written justification required per Section II.B, “Fundamental Research,” pertaining to prime and/or subcontracted effort being considered Fundamental Research; AND

J. Small Business…