HR001122S0004.pdf

Broad Agency Announcement

Strategic Technology Office (STO)

Office-wide

HR001122S0004

November 1, 2021

STO Office-wide 2

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITY DESCRIPTION

A. STO MISSION AND THRUST AREAS

1. Mosaic Warfare (MW)

2. Shaping the Battlespace (StB)

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

a) FFRDCs

b) Government Entities

c) Authority and Eligibility

2. Other Applicants

B. ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST

C. COST SHARING/MATCHING

IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION INFORMATION

A. ADDRESS TO REQUEST APPLICATION PACKAGE

B. CONTENT AND FORM OF APPLICATION SUBMISSION

1. Executive Summary Information and Formatting

2. Proposal Abstract Information and Formatting

3. Full Proposal Information and Formatting

a) Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal

b) Volume II, Cost Proposal {No Page Limit}

4. Additional Proposal Information

a) Proprietary Markings

b) Security Information

c) Disclosure of Information and Compliance with Safeguarding Covered Defense Information Controls

d) Representations and Certifications

e) Human Subjects Research (HSR)/Animal Use

f) Approved Cost Accounting System Documentation

g) Small Business Subcontracting Plan

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

i) Grant Abstract

j) Intellectual Property

k) System for Award Management (SAM) and Universal Identifier Requirements

5. Submission Information

a) Executive Summary Submission

b) Abstract Submission

c) Proposal Submission

6. Funding Restrictions

7. Other Submission Requirements

V. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION

STO Office-wide 3

A. EVALUATION CRITERIA

1. Overall Scientific and Technical Merit

2. Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA Mission

3. Cost Realism

B. REVIEW OF PROPOSALS

1. Review Process

2. Handling of Source Selection Information

3. Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information (FAPIIS)

4. Countering Foreign Influence Program (CFIP)

VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION

A. SELECTION NOTICES AND NOTIFICATIONS

1. Executive Summaries

2. Abstracts

3. Proposals

B. ADMINISTRATIVE AND NATIONAL POLICY REQUIREMENTS

1. Meeting and Travel Requirements

2. Solicitation Provisions and Award Clauses, Terms and Conditions

3. Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) and Controlled Technical Information (CTI) on Non-DoD Information Systems

4. Terms and Conditions

C. REPORTING

D. ELECTRONIC SYSTEMS

1. Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF)

2. iEdison

E. DARPA EMBEDDED ENTREPRENEURSHIP INITIATIVE (EEI)

VII. AGENCY CONTACTS

VIII. OTHER INFORMATION

IX. APPENDIX 1: PROPOSAL SLIDE SUMMARY

X. APPENDIX 2: VOLUME 1 COVER SHEET TEMPLATE

STO Office-wide 4

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

Federal Agency Name—Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Strategic Technology Office (STO)

Funding Opportunity Title—Strategic Technology Office (STO) Office-wide Announcement Type—Initial announcement Funding Opportunity Number—HR001122S0004 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA)—12.910 Research and

Technology Development Dates (All times listed herein are Eastern Time.)

o Posting Date: November 1, 2021 o Proposal Due Date: Proposals may be submitted any time throughout the year until 4:00 PM on the closing date.

o Closing Date: October 31, 2022

Concise description of the funding opportunity—This solicitation seeks revolutionary research ideas for topics not being addressed by ongoing STO programs or other published solicitations.

Anticipated individual awards—Multiple awards are anticipated.

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

Agency contact o BAA Email: HR001122S0004@darpa.mil o BAA Mailing Address:

DARPA/STO

ATTN: HR001122S0004

675 North Randolph Street Arlington VA 22203-2114 o DARPA/STO Opportunities Website:

https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities mailto:HR001122S0004@darpa.mil https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities

STO Office-wide 5

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

This publication constitutes a Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) as contemplated in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016 and 2 CFR § 200.203. Any resultant award negotiations will follow all pertinent law and regulation, and any negotiations and/or awards for procurement contracts will use procedures under FAR 15.4, Contract Pricing, as specified in the BAA.

Proposed research should investigate innovative approaches that enable revolutionary advances in science, devices, or systems. The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) anticipates funding a limited number of proposals under this solicitation. Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

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

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

A. STO Mission and Thrust Areas

DARPA’s Strategic Technology Office (STO) is seeking innovative ideas and disruptive technologies that provide the U.S. military with increased lethality against peer nation threats and enable a diverse and robust range of options in all phases of competition. STO seeks to carry out DARPA’s mission of creating high-risk, high-reward “breakthrough” technologies with a focus on ambitious, difficult, and revolutionary projects that achieve significant changes or fundamental shifts in technical capabilities and give our warfighters new ways to fight.

STO is a “systems office,” seeking to create new “proof-of-concept” mission systems. Its goals are to develop and demonstrate new capabilities that expand what is technically possible. STO is primarily interested in technical solutions associated with mission systems technology – e.g.

autonomy and command & control (C2) algorithms, communications and networking, sensing, and non-kinetic effects.

For decades, the United States has enjoyed uncontested or dominant superiority in every operating domain. Today, every domain - air, land, sea, space and cyberspace - is contested and challenged by peer competitors, who have had decades to study our strengths, and are hard at work developing counters to degrade the advantages we currently possess. The United States faces an ever more lethal and disruptive battlefield, combined across domains, and conducted at http://www.darpa.mil/about-us/offices/sto http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities http://www.darpa.mil/about-us/people

STO Office-wide 6 increasing speed and reach—from close combat, throughout overseas theaters, and reaching to our homeland.

STO is developing a mission-focused technology portfolio aimed at peer competition across all phases and levels of intensity. When one looks at the full spectrum of peer competition, there are two fundamental drivers:

The pace of peer modernization and growth of conventional military capabilities; and The effectiveness of peer adversary incremental expansion of influence and coercion by management of escalation and competitive actions below the threshold of conventional conflict

STO is helping to address these challenges with two major thrust areas: (1) Mosaic Warfare (MW) and (2) Shaping the Battlespace (StB).

1. Mosaic Warfare (MW)

Technology to maintain a combat-credible conventional deterrent through disaggregation of capabilities and re-composition of adaptable effects chains at mission speed. At the core of STO’s MW thrust is a sub-thrust called Mosaic Infrastructure, which is developing the tools and infrastructure to provide warfighters more combat options to adapt to opportunities, surprise, and disruptions with the speed and agility of mission planning. Additionally, STO’s MW thrust is developing Mosaic Targeting technologies to take advantage of mosaic architectures. Assuming that Mosaic Infrastructure will enable distributed, disaggregated effects chains, Mosaic Targeting is re-imaging how sensors and electromagnetic warfare (EW) technologies may be designed for use in these novel architectures to provide new long-range kill chains for friendly warfighters and counters to adversary targeting.

2. Shaping the Battlespace (StB)

Technology to provide military leaders options across the spectrum of peer competition. These concepts will enable military means to deter and impose cost to contain expansionism and ensure U.S. and coalition partners freedom of operations and tactical advantage while driving de-escalation.

B. Topic Areas of Interest

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

Acoustic communication and sensing Adaptability Advanced computing Architecture and advanced systems engineering Artificial intelligence Autonomy and control algorithms “Big data” analytics

STO Office-wide 7

Combat identification Communications and networking, virtual and adaptive Complexity management Critical infrastructure defense Decision Aids and C2 technology DevOps and novel software development and integration Digital twins Directed energy (DE) Distributed autonomy and teaming (machine-machine, human-machine) Effects chain functions (disaggregated Find, Fix, Finish, Target, Engage, Assess) Electro-Optic/Infrared sensors Electromagnetic Warfare (EW) High frequency (HF) communications and sensing High voltage electric power systems and architecture Human behavior modeling Human-machine symbiosis Logistics and supply chain analytics and C2 Integration and reliability technologies Interoperability Modeling and simulation Microwave and millimeter wave communications and sensing Novel kinetic effects Non-kinetic effects (EW, DE, cyber) Photonics Radio technologies (especially software-defined and novel waveforms and processing) Radar and adaptive arrays Robotics Seekers and other expendable sensors and processing Sensors and analytics Signal processing Space sensors, communications, autonomy, and architectures (especially supporting proliferated low earth orbit constellations) Strategy analysis technology System of systems Undersea and seabed technology Tactics development technology Testing and data collection Very Low Frequency (VLF) technology

General Advice for Submitting New Ideas to STO

STO Office-wide 8

Proposers1 are welcome to submit proposals of any scope and duration. However, submissions proposing short-duration exploratory projects, such as analytical studies or proof of concept experiments, to inform new program ideas will be given priority. An ideal study helps a program manager answer some of the Heilmeier Questions (see https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/heilmeier-catechism) such as: “Why do you think your approach will be successful?”; “What are the risks?”; and “What difference will it make?” In STO, we are a mission-centric office and try to align our answers to these questions with how a new capability will change the nature of warfare and the manner in which the U.S. defends itself.

II. Award Information

A. General Award Information

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

The Government reserves the right to select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of the proposals received in response to this solicitation and to make awards without discussions with proposers. The Government also reserves the right to conduct discussions if it is later determined to be necessary. 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, as applicable.

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/or cost/price within a reasonable time, and 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 accordance with 10 U.S.C. § 2371b(f), the Government may award a follow-on production contract or Other Transaction (OT) for any OT awarded under this solicitation if: (1) that

1 As used throughout this solicitation, “proposer” refers to the lead organization on a submission to this solicitation.

The proposer is responsible for ensuring that all information required by a solicitation—from all team members—is submitted in accordance with the solicitation.

https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/heilmeier-catechism https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/heilmeier-catechism http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/contract-management#OtherTransactions

STO Office-wide 9 participant in the OT, or a recognized successor in interest to the OT, successfully completed the entire prototype project provided for in the OT, as modified; and (2) the OT provides for the award of a follow-on production contract or OT to the participant, or a recognized successor in interest to the OT.

In all cases, the Government contracting officer shall have sole discretion to select award instrument type, regardless of instrument type proposed, and to negotiate all instrument terms and conditions with selectees. 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 solicitation, the Government cannot identify whether the work under this solicitation may be considered fundamental research and may award both fundamental and non-fundamental research.

University or non-profit research institution performance under this solicitation may include effort categorized as fundamental research. In addition to Government support for free and open scientific exchanges and dissemination of research results in a broad and unrestricted manner, the academic or non-profit research performer or recipient, regardless of tier, acknowledges that such research may have implications that are important to U.S. national interests and must be protected against foreign influence and exploitation. As such, the academic or non-profit research performer or recipient agrees to comply with the following requirements:

(a) The University or non-profit research institution performer or recipient must establish and maintain an internal process or procedure to address foreign talent programs, conflicts of commitment, conflicts of interest, and research integrity.

The academic or non-profit research performer or recipient must also utilize due diligence to identify Foreign Components or participation by Senior/Key Personnel in Foreign Government Talent Recruitment Programs and

STO Office-wide 10 agree to share such information with the Government upon request.

i. The above described information will be provided to the Government as part of the proposal response to the solicitation and will be reviewed and assessed prior to award. Generally, this information will be included in the Research and Related Senior/Key Personnel Profile (Expanded) form (SF-424) required as part the proposer’s submission through Grants.gov.

1. Instructions regarding how to fill out the SF- 424 and its biographical sketch can be found through Grants.gov.

ii. In accordance with USD(R&E) direction to mitigate undue foreign influence in DoD-funded science and technology, DARPA will assess all Senior/Key Personnel proposed to support DARPA grants and cooperative agreements for potential undue foreign influence risk factors. This will be done by evaluating information provided via the SF-424, and any accompanying or referenced documents, in order to identify and assess any associations or affiliations the Senior/Key Personnel may have with foreign strategic competitors or countries that have a history of intellectual property theft, research misconduct, or history of targeting U.S. technology for unauthorized transfer. DARPA’s evaluation takes into consideration the entirety of the Senior/Key Personnel’s SF-424, current and pending support, and biographical sketch, placing the most weight on the Senior/Key Person’s activities over the last 4 years. The majority of foreign entities lists used to make these determinations are publicly available. The DARPA Countering Foreign Influence Program (CFIP) “Senior/Key Personnel Foreign Influence Risk Rubric” details the various risk ratings and factors.

The rubric can be seen at the following link:

https://www.darpa.mil/attachments/092021DARPA CFIPRubric.pdf

iii. Examples of lists that DARPA leverages to assess potential undue foreign influence factors include, but are not limited to:

https://www.darpa.mil/attachments/092021DARPACFIPRubric.pdf https://www.darpa.mil/attachments/092021DARPACFIPRubric.pdf

STO Office-wide 11

1. Executive Order 13959 “Addressing the Threat From Securities Investments That Finance Communist Chinese Military Companies”:

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR- 2020-11-17/pdf/2020-25459.pdf

2. The U.S. Department of Education’s College Foreign Gift and Contract Report:

College Foreign Gift Reporting (ed.gov)

3. The U.S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of Industry and Security, List of Parties of Concern:

https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/policy-guidance/lists-of-parties-of-concern

4. Georgetown University’s Center for Security and Emerging Technology (CSET) Chinese Talent Program Tracker:

https://chinatalenttracker.cset.tech

5. Director of National Intelligence (DNI) “World Wide Threat Assessment of the US Intelligence Community”: 2021 Annual Threat Assessment of the U.S. Intelligence Community (dni.gov)

6. Various Defense Counterintelligence and Security Agency (DCSA) products regarding targeting of US technologies, adversary targeting of academia, and the exploitation of academic experts:

https://www.dcsa.mil/

DARPA’s analysis and assessment of Senior/Key Personnel is compliant with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Information regarding race, color, or national origin is not collected and does not have bearing in DARPA’s assessment.

University or non-profit research institutions with proposals selected for negotiation that have been assessed as having high or very high undue foreign influence risk, will be given an opportunity during the negotiation process to mitigate the risk. DARPA reserves the right to request any follow-up information needed to assess risk or mitigation strategies.

https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-11-17/pdf/2020-25459.pdf https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2020-11-17/pdf/2020-25459.pdf https://sites.ed.gov/foreigngifts/ https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/policy-guidance/lists-of-parties-of-concern https://www.bis.doc.gov/index.php/policy-guidance/lists-of-parties-of-concern https://chinatalenttracker.cset.tech/ https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reports-publications/reports-publications-2021/item/2204-2021-annual-threat-assessment-of-the-u-s-intelligence-community https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reports-publications/reports-publications-2021/item/2204-2021-annual-threat-assessment-of-the-u-s-intelligence-community https://www.dni.gov/index.php/newsroom/reports-publications/reports-publications-2021/item/2204-2021-annual-threat-assessment-of-the-u-s-intelligence-community https://www.dcsa.mil/

STO Office-wide 12

iv. Upon conclusion of the negotiations, if DARPA determines, despite any proposed mitigation terms (e.g. mitigation plan, alternative research personnel), the participation of any Senior/Key Research Personnel still represents high risk to the program, or proposed mitigation affects the Government’s confidence in proposer’s capability to successfully complete the research (e.g., less qualified Senior/Key Research Personnel) the Government may determine not to award the proposed effort. Any decision not to award will be predicated upon reasonable disclosure of the pertinent facts and reasonable discussion of any possible alternatives while balancing program award timeline requirements.

(b) Failure of the academic or non-profit research performer or recipient to reasonably exercise due diligence to discover or ensure that neither it nor any of its Senior/Key Research Personnel involved in the subject award are participating in a Foreign Government Talent Program or have a Foreign Component with an a strategic competitor or country with a history of targeting U.S. technology for unauthorized transfer may result in the Government exercising remedies in accordance with federal law and regulation.

i. If, at any time, during performance of this research award, the academic or non-profit research performer or recipient should learn that it, its Senior/Key Research Personnel, or applicable team members or subtier performers on this award are or are believed to be participants in a Foreign Government Talent Program or have Foreign Components with a strategic competitor or country with a history of targeting U.S. technology for unauthorized transfer , the performer or recipient will notify the Government Contracting Officer or Agreements Officer within 5 business days.

1. This disclosure must include specific information as to the personnel involved and the nature of the situation and relationship.

The Government will have 30 business days to review this information and conduct any necessary fact-finding or discussion with the performer or recipient.

2. The Government’s timely determination and response to this disclosure may range

STO Office-wide 13 anywhere from acceptance, to mitigation, to termination of this award at the Government’s discretion.

3. If the University receives no response from the Government to its disclosure within 30 business days, it may presume that the Government has determined the disclosure does not represent a threat.

ii. The performer or recipient must flow down this provision to any subtier contracts or agreements involving direct participation in the performance of the research.

(c) Definitions

i. Senior/Key Research Personnel

1. This definition would include the Principal Investigator or Program/Project Director and other individuals who contribute to the scientific development or execution of a project in a substantive, measurable way, whether or not they receive salaries or compensation under the award. These include individuals whose absence from the project would be expected to impact the approved scope of the project.

2. Most often, these individuals will have a doctorate or other professional degrees, although other individuals may be included within this definition on occasion.

ii. Foreign Associations/Affiliations

1. Association is defined as collaboration, coordination or interrelation, professionally or personally, with a foreign government-connected entity where no direct monetary or non-monetary reward is involved.

2. Affiliation is defined as collaboration, coordination, or interrelation, professionally or personally, with a foreign government-connected entity where direct monetary or non-monetary reward is involved.

iii. Foreign Government Talent Recruitment Programs

1. In general, these programs will include any foreign-state-sponsored attempt to acquire

STO Office-wide 14

U.S. scientific-funded research or technology through foreign government-run or funded recruitment programs that target scientists, engineers, academics, researchers, and entrepreneurs of all nationalities working and educated in the U.S.

2. Distinguishing features of a Foreign Government Talent Recruitment Program may include:

a. Compensation, either monetary or in-kind, provided by the foreign state to the targeted individual in exchange for the individual transferring their knowledge and expertise to the foreign country.

b. In-kind compensation may include honorific titles, career advancement opportunities, promised future compensation or other types of remuneration or compensation.

c. Recruitment, in this context, refers to the foreign-state-sponsor’s active engagement in attracting the targeted individual to join the foreign-sponsored program and transfer their knowledge and expertise to the foreign state. The targeted individual may be employed and located in the U.S. or in the foreign state.

d. Contracts for participation in some programs that create conflicts of commitment and/or conflicts of interest for researchers. These contracts include, but are not limited to, requirements to attribute awards, patents, and projects to the foreign institution, even if conducted under U.S. funding, to recruit or train other talent recruitment plan members, circumventing merit-based processes, and to replicate or transfer U.S.-funded work in another country.

STO Office-wide 15

e. Many, but not all, of these programs aim to incentivize the targeted individual to physically relocate to the foreign state. Of particular concern are those programs that allow for continued employment at U.S. research facilities or receipt of U.S. Government research funding while concurrently receiving compensation from the foreign state.

3. Foreign Government Talent Recruitment Programs DO NOT include:

a. Research agreements between the University and a foreign entity, unless that agreement include provisions that create situations of concern addressed elsewhere in this section,

b. Agreements for the provision of goods or services by commercial vendors, or

c. Invitations to attend or present at conferences.

iv. Conflict of Interest

1. A situation in which an individual, or the individual’s spouse or dependent children, has a financial interest or financial relationship that could directly and significantly affect the design, conduct, reporting, or funding of research.

v. Conflict of Commitment

1. A situation in which an individual accepts or incurs conflicting obligations between or among multiple employers or other entities.

2. Common conflicts of commitment involve conflicting commitments of time and effort, including obligations to dedicate time in excess of institutional or funding agency policies or commitments. Other types of conflicting obligations, including obligations to improperly share information with, or withhold information from, an employer or

STO Office-wide 16 funding agency, can also threaten research security and integrity and are an element of a broader concept of conflicts of commitment.

vi. Foreign Component

1. Performance of any significant scientific element or segment of a program or project outside of the U.S., either by the University or by a researcher employed by a foreign organization, whether or not U.S.

government funds are expended.

2. Activities that would meet this definition include, but are not limited to:

a. Involvement of human subjects or animals;

b. Extensive foreign travel by University research program or project staff for the purpose of data collection, surveying, sampling, and similar activities;

c. Collaborations with investigators at a foreign site anticipated to result in co-authorship;

d. Use of facilities or instrumentation at a foreign site;

e. Receipt of financial support or resources from a foreign entity; or

f. Any activity of the University that may have an impact on U.S. foreign policy through involvement in the affairs or environment of a foreign country.

3. Foreign travel is not considered a Foreign Component.

vii. Strategic Competitor

1. A nation, or nation-state, that engages in diplomatic, economic or technological rivalry with the United States where the fundamental strategic interests of the U.S are under threat.

STO Office-wide 17

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 determine whether the proposed research shall be considered fundamental and to select the award instrument type. Appropriate language will be included in resultant awards for non-fundamental research to prescribe publication requirements and other restrictions, as appropriate. This language can be found at http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa.

For certain research projects, it may be possible that although the research to be performed by a potential awardee is non-fundamental research, its proposed subawardee’s effort may be fundamental research. It is also possible that the research performed by a potential awardee is fundamental research while its proposed subawardee’s effort may be non-fundamental research.

In all cases, it is the potential awardee’s responsibility to explain in its proposal which proposed efforts are fundamental research and why the proposed efforts should be considered fundamental research.

III. Eligibility Information

A. Eligible Applicants

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

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 solicitation 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, that (a) cites the specific authority establishing their eligibility to propose to Government solicitations and compete with industry, and (b) certifies the FFRDC’s compliance with the associated FFRDC sponsor agreement’s terms and conditions. These conditions are a requirement 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 and compete with industry. This information is required for Government Entities proposing to be awardees or subawardees.

http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/additional-baa

STO Office-wide 18

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. Other Applicants

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

FAR 9.5 Requirements

In accordance with FAR 9.5, proposers are required to identify and disclose all facts relevant to potential OCIs involving the proposer’s organization and any proposed team member (subawardee, consultant). Under this Section, the proposer is responsible for providing this disclosure with each proposal submitted to the solicitation. The disclosure must include the proposer’s, and as applicable, proposed team member’s OCI mitigation plan. The OCI mitigation plan must include a description of the actions the proposer has taken, or intends to take, to prevent the existence of conflicting roles that might bias the proposer’s judgment and to prevent the proposer from having unfair competitive advantage. The OCI mitigation plan will specifically discuss the disclosed OCI in the context of each of the OCI limitations outlined in FAR 9.505-1 through FAR 9.505-4.

Agency Supplemental OCI Policy

In addition, DARPA has a supplemental OCI policy that prohibits contractors/performers from concurrently providing Scientific Engineering Technical Assistance (SETA), Advisory and Assistance Services (A&AS) or similar support services and being a technical performer.

Therefore, as part of the FAR 9.5 disclosure requirement above, a proposer must affirm whether the proposer or any proposed team member (subawardee, consultant) is providing SETA, A&AS, or similar support to any DARPA office(s) under: (a) a current award or subaward; or (b) a past award or subaward that ended within one calendar year prior to the proposal’s submission date.

If SETA, A&AS, or similar support is being or was provided to any DARPA office(s), the proposal must include:

The name of the DARPA office receiving the support;

The prime contract number;

STO Office-wide 19

Identification of proposed team member (subawardee, consultant) providing the support; and

An OCI mitigation plan in accordance with FAR 9.5.

Government Procedures

In accordance with FAR 9.503, 9.504 and 9.506, the Government will evaluate OCI mitigation plans to avoid, neutralize or mitigate potential OCI issues before award and to determine whether it is in the Government’s interest to grant a waiver. The Government will only evaluate OCI mitigation plans for proposals that are determined selectable under the solicitation evaluation criteria and funding availability.

The Government may require proposers to provide additional information to assist the Government in evaluating the proposer’s OCI mitigation plan.

If the Government determines that a proposer failed to fully disclose an OCI; or failed to provide the affirmation of DARPA support as described above; or failed to reasonably provide additional information requested by the Government to assist in evaluating the proposer’s OCI mitigation plan, the Government may reject the proposal and withdraw it from consideration for award.

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.

IV. Application and Submission Information

Prior to submitting a full proposal, proposers are strongly encouraged to first submit an executive summary and/or abstract as described below. This process allows a proposer to ascertain whether the proposed concept is (1) applicable to the STO Office-wide BAA and (2) currently of interest. For the purposes of this BAA, applicability is defined as follows:

The proposed concept is applicable to the technical areas described herein.

The proposed concept is important to STO’s current investment portfolio.

The proposed concept investigates an innovative approach that enables revolutionary advances, i.e., will not primarily result in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

The proposed work has not already been completed (i.e., the research element is complete but manufacturing/fabrication funds are required).

The proposer has not already received funding or a positive funding decision for the proposed concept (whether from DARPA or another Government agency).

STO Office-wide 20

Executive summaries, abstracts and full proposals that are not found to be applicable to the STO Office-wide BAA as defined above may be deemed non-conforming2 and removed from consideration. All executive summaries, abstracts, and full proposals must provide sufficient information to assess the validity/feasibility of their claims as well as comply with the requirements outlined herein for submission formatting, content and transmission to DARPA.

Executive summaries, abstracts, and full proposals that fail to do so may be deemed nonconforming and removed from consideration. Proposers will be notified of non-conforming determinations via letter.

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 www.darpa.mil, contact the agency contact listed in Part I: Overview Information.

B. Content and Form of Application Submission

For all responses to this solicitation, the responder must clearly identify the technical topic area(s) the proposed effort seeks to address.

In order to reduce the administrative burden on proposers and the Government and in an attempt to mitigate unnecessary costs associated with the generation of proposals that are not of interest to DARPA/STO, described herein is the Government’s process for submission of information for evaluation. Any responsible proposer is encouraged to respond.

Proposers are strongly encouraged to submit an executive summary prior to proposal abstracts or full proposals. The recommended order of submissions is executive summary, abstract, proposal.

Please note it is not mandatory to submit an executive summary and/or abstract before submitting a full proposal. This procedure is intended to minimize unnecessary effort in proposal preparation and review. The time and date for submissions is specified in Part I: Overview Information above. DARPA will acknowledge receipt of the submission and assign a control number that should be used in all further correspondence regarding the submission.

Unclassified executive summaries, abstracts, and proposals sent in response to HR001122S0004 may be submitted via DARPA's BAA Website (https://baa.darpa.mil). Proposals may not be submitted by fax or email; any so sent will be disregarded. Note: If an account has already been created for the DARPA BAA Website, this account may be reused. If no account currently exists for the DARPA BAA Website, visit the website to complete the two-step registration process.

Submitters will need to register for an Extranet account (via the form at the URL listed above) and wait for two separate e-mails containing a username and temporary password. After accessing the Extranet, submitters may then create an account for the DARPA BAA website (via the "Register your Organization" link along the left side of the homepage), view submission instructions, and upload/finalize the proposal. Proposers using the DARPA BAA Website may

2 “Conforming” is defined as having been submitted in accordance with the requirements outlined herein.

http://www.darpa.mil/ https://baa.darpa.mil/

STO Office-wide 21 encounter heavy traffic on the submission deadline date; it is highly advised that submission process be started as early as possible.

All unclassified concepts submitted electronically through DARPA’s BAA Website must be uploaded as zip files (.zip or .zipx extension). The final zip file should be no greater than 50 MB in size. Only one zip file will be accepted per submission, and submissions not uploaded as zip files will be rejected by DARPA.

Technical support for DARPA's BAA Website may be reached at BAAT_Support@darpa.mil, and is typically available during regular business hours, (9:00 AM- 5:00 PM EST Monday - Friday).

All submissions, including executive summaries, abstracts, and proposals must be written in English with type not smaller than 12-point font. Smaller font may be used for figures, tables, and charts. Copies of all documents submitted must be clearly labeled with the DARPA BAA number, proposer organization, and proposal title/proposal short title.

1. Executive Summary Information and Formatting

The executive summary provides a synopsis of the proposed project by concisely answering the following questions (Note: these questions are a subset of the Heilmeier Catechism. Please view http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/heilmeier-catechism for more information.):

What is the proposed work attempting to accomplish or do?

How is the work performed today (what is the state of the art or practice), and what are the limitations?

Who will care, and what will the impact be if the work is successful?

What is new in your approach, and why do you think it will be successful?

All submissions must be in the following format – nonconforming submissions may be rejected without further review. The executive summary should be clearly marked "EXECUTIVE SUMMARY" and the total length shall not exceed one (1) page. A page is defined as being no larger than 8.5” by 11.0”. (Accordion-style foldouts will be counted as multiple pages equivalent to the expanded size.) The page limitation for executive summaries includes all point of contact information, figures, tables, and charts. Do not submit additional copies of the same executive summary for different technical topic areas. If an executive summary applies to more than one area, simply indicate that fact.

DARPA will respond to executive summaries with a brief statement either encouraging or discouraging submission of a follow-on abstract or full proposal. In keeping with the intent of the executive summary, these responses will generally be limited to a statement of interest (or lack thereof), rather than providing detailed feedback. DARPA will attempt to reply to executive summaries via e-mail within thirty calendar days of receipt. Regardless of DARPA’s response to an executive summary, proposers may submit an abstract or full proposal.

mailto:BAAT_Support@darpa.mil http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/heilmeier-catechism

STO Office-wide 22

2. Proposal Abstract Information and Formatting

As stated above, proposers are strongly encouraged to submit an abstract in advance of a full proposal to minimize effort and reduce the potential expense of preparing an out of scope proposal. Proposal abstracts should follow the format provided below. The cover sheet should be clearly marked “PROPOSAL ABSTRACT,” and the total length should not exceed 6 pages, excluding cover page and official transmittal letter. All pages shall be printed on 8.5” by 11.0” paper. The page limitation for proposal abstracts includes all figures, tables, and charts. No formal transmittal letter is required.

Cover sheet to include:

1. BAA number;

2. STO Topic Areas of Interest (see Sec I.B.);

3. Lead organization submitting proposal abstract;

4. Type of organization, selected among the following categories: "LARGE

BUSINESS," "SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS," "OTHER SMALL

BUSINESS," "HBCU,"3 "MI,"4 "OTHER EDUCATIONAL,” or "OTHER

NONPROFIT";

5. Proposer’s 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, telephone, fax (if available), email;

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

10. Estimated funds requested from DARPA for each phase proposed and the total estimated proposed cost; and the amount of cost share (if any)

11. Date abstract was submitted.

Abstracts may be structured as you wish. Here is one example of an abstract structure. The proposer may choose any combination of suggested portions listed below; however, the total length must not exceed 6 pages.

Executive Summary:

Includes a title and an abstract that provides a concise summary of work to be performed and basic approaches to be used.

Summary of Innovative Claims for the Proposed Research:

Succinctly describe the uniqueness and benefits of the proposed approach relative to the current state-of-art and alternative approaches.

Summary of Technical Approach:

3 Historically Black College or University 4 Minority Institution

STO Office-wide 23

The technical rationale, technical approach, and constructive plan for accomplishments of technical goals in support of innovative claims and deliverable production should be summarized.

Organization and Teaming Chart:

A clearly defined organization chart for the program team that includes, as applicable:

1. Programmatic relationship of team members;

2. Unique capabilities of team members;

3. Task responsibilities of team members;

4. Teaming strategy among the team members;

5. Key personnel along with the amount of effort to be expended by each person during each year.

Summary of Deliverables and Approach to Intellectual Property:

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 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.

This section should list all technical data, computer software, or computer software documentation to be provided with other than unlimited rights in accordance with DFARS Clause 252.227-7017 IDENTIFICATION AND ASSERTION OF USE, RELEASE, OR

DISCLOSURE RESTRICTIONS (JUNE 1995).

Summary of Estimated Cost, Schedule, and Milestones:

Summarize, in table form, estimated cost, schedule, and milestones for the proposed research.

Discussion of Other Research:

Compare the proposed effort with other ongoing research in this area. Describe the advantages and disadvantages of the proposed effort in comparison with other relevant research.

3. Full Proposal Information and Formatting

All proposals must be in the format given below. The typical proposal should express a consolidated effort in support of one or more related technical concepts or ideas. Disjointed efforts should not be included into a single proposal. Proposals shall consist of two volumes: 1) Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal (composed of 3 parts), and 2) Volume II, Cost Proposal. Maximum page lengths for each section are shown in brackets { } below.

NOTE: Non-conforming submissions that do not follow the instructions herein may be rejected without further review.

a) Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal

(1) Section I: Administrative {No more than 2 pages}

(a) Cover Sheet to Include:

STO Office-wide 24

(1) BAA number (HR001122S0004)

(2) STO Topic Areas of Interest;

(3) Lead Organization submitting proposal;

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

BUSINESS”, “SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS”, “OTHER

SMALL BUSINESS”, “HBCU”, “MI”, “OTHER EDUCATIONAL”, OR

“OTHER NONPROFIT”;

(5) Proposer’s 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, telephone, fax (if available), electronic mail (if available);

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

(10) Total funds requested…