HR001122S0012-Amendment-01.pdf

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 1

Broad Agency Announcement Cornucopia

Defense Sciences Office

HR001122S0012

December 16, 2021

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 2

Table of Contents I. Funding Opportunity Description

A. Introduction B. Background C. Program Description/Scope D. Program Structure E. Schedule F. Deliverables G. Government-furnished Property/Equipment/Information H. Other Program Objectives and Considerations

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

III. Eligibility Information A. Eligible 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 C. Submission Dates and Times D. Funding Restrictions E. Other Submission Requirements

V. Application Review Information A. Evaluation Criteria B. Review and Selection Process C. Countering Foreign Influence Program (CFIP) D. Federal Awardee Performance and Integrity Information (FAPIIS)

VI. Award Administration Information A. Selection Notices B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements C. Reporting

VII. Agency Contacts VIII. Other Information

A. Proposers Day B. Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) C. Collaborative Efforts/Teaming

IX. Appendix 1

BAA Attachments:

Attachment A: ABSTRACT SUMMARY SLIDE TEMPLATE Attachment B: ABSTRACT TEMPLATE Attachment C: PROPOSAL SUMMARY SLIDE TEMPLATE Attachment D: PROPOSAL TEMPLATE VOLUME 1: TECHNICAL & MANAGEMENT Attachment E: PROPOSAL TEMPLATE VOLUME 2: COST Attachment F: MS ExcelTM DARPA COST PROPOSAL SPREADSHEET Attachment G: PROPOSAL TEMPLATE VOLUME 3: ADMINISTRATIVE & NATIONAL POLICY REQUIREMENTS

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 3

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

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

Funding Opportunity Title: Cornucopia

Announcement Type: Amendment

Funding Opportunity Number: HR001122S0012

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance (CFDA) Number(s): 12.910 Research and Technology Development

Dates (All times listed herein are Eastern Time.)

o Posting Date: December 16, 2021 o Proposers Day: December 15, 2021. See Section VIII.A.

o Abstract Due Date: January 6, 2022, 4:00 p.m.

o FAQ Submission Deadline: February 8, 2022, 4:00 p.m. See Section VIII.B.

o Full Proposal Due Date: February 22, 2022, 4:00 p.m.

Types of Instruments that May be Awarded: Procurement contracts, cooperative agreements, or Other Transactions. Award instruments will be limited to procurement contracts and Other Transactions for Proposers whose proposed solution includes Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI).

Agency contacts o Technical POC: Molly Jahn, Program Manager, DARPA/DSO o BAA Email: Cornucopia@darpa.mil o BAA Mailing Address:

DARPA/DSO

ATTN: HR001122S0012

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114 o DARPA/DSO Opportunities Website: http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities

Teaming Information: See Section VIII.C for information on teaming opportunities.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ): FAQs for this solicitation may be viewed on the DARPA/DSO Opportunities Website. See Section VIII.B for further information.

Security: Cornucopia is an UNCLASSIFIED program. If proposers would like to work with Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) or classified information, please specify so in the abstract and proposal and refer to section IV.B.4.

mailto:Cornucopia@darpa.mil http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities http://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 4

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

This Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) constitutes a public notice of a competitive funding opportunity as described in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 6.102(d)(2) and 35.016 as well as 2 C.F.R. § 200.203. Any resultant negotiations and/or awards will follow all laws and regulations applicable to the specific award instrument(s) available under this BAA, e.g., FAR

15.4 for procurement contracts.

A. Introduction

The Defense Sciences Office (DSO) at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is soliciting innovative research proposals to develop capabilities for field-deployable, on demand production of a range of nutritious, palatable foodstuffs from engineered microbes, air, water, and electricity. Proposed research will investigate innovative approaches and drive revolutionary advances in science, devices, and/or systems to enable production of nutrition on demand, at the point of consumption within parameters associated with two DARPA-defined use cases. Specifically excluded is research that primarily results in evolutionary improvements to the existing state of practice.

B. Background

Today’s Class I (food) supply chains are lengthy, resource intensive, and known targets of adversaries. In addition, the primary source of nutrition in many military operations abroad, Meals Ready to Eat (MREs), are not recommended as a sole source of nutrition for long duration missions (>21 days), not approved for civilian use, and not tailored for age/sex differences that are needed in Humanitarian Assistance/Disaster Relief (HADR) missions supporting distressed civilian populations.

Capacity to produce palatable food from microbial biomass starting from minimal inputs, including air, water, and electricity at the point of consumption could have significant benefits to nutrition of U.S. and allied forces, especially under stress, exertion, or injury, as well as to civilian populations in contexts such as HADR missions. Such a capability could also improve supply chain security and resilience, relieving the need for lengthy transport, protection, preparation, service, and waste management, allowing more flexibility in allocation of military resources, including labor and fuel. Companies at the forefront of microbial-origin food are achieving success with food products that are primarily protein, but face an array of hard technical problems to break through to products that more fully meet human nutritional requirements, and report no market drivers for mobile production, nutritionally complete foodstuffs, or tailorable outputs.

Cornucopia will develop capabilities for field-deployable, on demand production of a range of nutritious, palatable foodstuffs from engineered microbes, air, water, and electricity. To adequately address the critical vulnerabilities faced in food supply chains across a variety of operational and humanitarian scenarios, Cornucopia will demonstrate capacity to produce all four human dietary macronutrients (protein, carbohydrate, fat, dietary fiber) in multiple food formats (e.g., shake, bar, gel, jerky) that meet military nutritional standards and palatability requirements in a system minimizing inputs, handling, and footprint. Cornucopia will exploit

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 5

advances in chemistry, microbial engineering, and synthetic biology to enable production of highly nutritious, palatable, microbial-origin foodstuffs within thresholds associated with DARPA-defined use cases that frame military and humanitarian missions.

To demonstrate success across the mission sets of interest, DARPA has developed two use cases that will drive technology development and demonstration. Cornucopia goals are bounded by Military Dietary Reference Intake (MDRI) requirements for Nutritional Standards for Operational Rations (NSOR) and Nutritional Standards for Restricted Rations (NSRR).1 The program and its efforts will demonstrate the ability to (1) meet daily NSOR specifications for a small forward-operating unit comprised of 14 males, due to higher caloric intake requirements, deployed in austere conditions for 45 days; and (2) meet daily NSRR specifications for 100 civilians in the context of a HADR mission for 21 days.

C. Program Description/Scope

Cornucopia will enable the capability to produce nutritionally complete, microbial-origin foodstuffs at the point of consumption, consistent with military nutritional standards, starting with air (CO2, N2), water, electricity, and microbes. The term “microbe” refers to bacteria, archaea, fungi, protozoa, or microalgae. Out of scope is any approach that cultivates animal- or higher plant-derived cells or organisms. Cornucopia aims to design and test systems that are capable of producing highly nutritious, palatable microbial-origin food to enhance force readiness and operational resilience, prolong mission endurance, defend against supply chain disruptions, support disaster relief and influence operations, and mitigate cascading vulnerabilities in the face of an attack or disaster.

Cornucopia seeks to leverage breakthroughs from academia and industry to produce desirable flavors from processed microbial biomass containing human dietary macronutrients (protein, carbohydrate, fat, dietary fiber) in multiple food formats (e.g., shake, gel, bar, jerky). Cornucopia will enable future microbial food production systems that meet food quality, safety, and palatability needs, while critically ensuring the absence of food- and water-borne pathogens and minimizing overall production footprint as indicated by the two program use cases.

Proposals should present integrated, multi-disciplinary teams to pursue concepts that meet all program metrics derived from the two program use cases. Teams are required to address both use cases, emphasizing solutions that generalize where possible but focusing where necessary to achieve specific use case targets. The system must be robust enough to be operated and maintained for the duration of each test period by a trained warfighter. The end-to-end system for the small unit system, to include bioreactors, or other large equipment, should meet the size, weight, and power (SWaP) constraints of a High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle (a.k.a., Humvee) payload at no more than 4400 lb. total weight excluding a generator up to 10 kW, fuel and water. For the HADR use case, the end-to-end system including all equipment (i.e., including generator) but excluding water and fuel must be deployable in no more than four Quadcon containers.

Cornucopia is a 48-month program, comprising three concurrent research focus areas (FAs) that integrated teams will pursue through three phases. Each phase is associated with a set of program metrics detailed in Table 1 that guide the rate of technology development. Proposals must

1 Army Regulation 40-25 OPNAVINST 10110.1/MCO 10110.49 AFI 44-141

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 6

address both use cases in all three FAs through all three phases. This structure will guide performer effort toward achieving interim and final program goals that assure levels of performance necessary to meet military use cases. Proposals must include consideration of risks in their technical approaches and strategies for risk mitigation.

FA1: Domestication of Microbes for Human Consumption FA1 primary technical objectives include the following:

Produce all four human dietary macronutrients from microbes, air, water, and electricity with minimal to no supplementation.

Develop control of both macronutrient and micronutrient composition in system output in shake format (10-15% solids) to meet use case specifications.

Proposals must present a strategy to simultaneously produce protein, carbohydrates, fats, and dietary fiber suitable for human sustenance from microbes, air, water, and electricity with minimal to no supplementation in both use case contexts. This may require domestication of microbes in order to meet recommended dietary allowances for military operational and restricted rations. Electrochemical synthesis of molecules such as formate or acetate may expand the range of microbes that can be considered. Proposers must describe strategies to address rate-limiting steps, exclude known food-borne pathogens and microbial-origin anti-nutritional compounds including toxins, and select for rapid growth rates within the envelopes prescribed by the two program use cases. Excluded are additional ingredients other than those that may be synthesized from air, water, and electricity or processes that are incompatible with the needs and constraints of the use cases.

FA2: Tailorability of Microbial-Origin Food FA2 primary technical objectives include the following:

Impart three desirable flavors via expression of molecules known to confer flavor in microbial-origin nutritionally complete shake or pudding/gel format.

Impart a total of four flavors by demonstrating through chemical analysis the presence of molecules associated with a given flavor in two additional food formats selected from this set of formats, shake, pudding/gel, bar or jerky, that need not be nutritionally complete.

Demonstrate test readiness to meet or exceed the rating of “like slightly” on a 9 point hedonic scale administered by the Natick Soldier Systems Center Combat Feeding Division for three flavors of shake or pudding, and four additional distinct food format/flavor combinations in minimum of two additional food formats drawn from the list above for a total of seven distinct food format/flavor combinations in at least three distinct food formats, three of which are nutritionally complete.

Proposals must present strategies to demonstrate the presence in system output of sufficient levels of molecules known to impart desirable flavor (see Table 1). For the nutritionally complete shake format, three distinct desirable flavors in a nutritionally complete shake must be demonstrated. In addition, four more distinct flavors must be demonstrated in the system by chemical analysis to confirm the presence of molecules known to impart that flavor in at least two more food formats designed to provide supplemental nutrition (less than complete nutrition, HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 7 e.g., protein bars). Proposals should employ chemical analyses to confirm presence of molecules known to impart flavor obviating the need for Human Subjects Research (HSR). HSR panels for sensory evaluation are out of scope. Further, performers will be required to demonstrate the ability to support a shift in production from one flavor/format to another within the context of both specified use cases.

FA3: Integrated System Demonstrations for Military Use Cases FA3 primary technical objectives include the following:

Demonstrate, on a lab benchtop, the integrated capability to produce foodstuffs from microbes, air, water, and electricity with minimal to no supplementation with proof that the processes could scale to meet production goals within the SWaP envelopes for each use case and a plan to demonstrate exclusion of disallowed food-borne pathogens .

Demonstrate this integrated capability while meeting designated food safety requirements and use case driven SWaP specifications.

Demonstrate system output at specified caloric density (kcal per kg processed system output) at rates of production (kg processed output/day) that meet both use case goals for daily per capita production and overall production per day (per capita production × number of people) for the performance period in question (45 or 21 days, respectively).

Proposals must include a detailed description of the planned technical approach to meet all program metrics, including incremental steps, and a final demonstration of an integrated, lab benchtop system that meets all Phase 3 objectives for each use case. While some commonality of approach is expected for the use cases, proposers may present distinct approaches for each use case as necessary. Proposers must describe their approaches to devise bioreactor designs, protocols, and operating conditions that meet the demands of both use cases, including mobile military environments. Proposers are encouraged to consider, as appropriate, low energy CO2 capture, “green” NH3 synthesis, and in-reactor hydrolysis to support microbial growth rates within mission-informed thresholds for SWaP, toxicity, food quality, and food safety.

DARPA anticipates that selected Cornucopia efforts will be in line with existing regulatory requirements. Proposals should include a discussion and justification for how the proposed approach will ultimately be in line with all such standards.

Proposals that do not address all three FAs will be considered to be non-compliant and may not be reviewed. Proposer teams should submit a single, integrated proposal led by a single Principal Investigator, Program Integrator/Manager, under a single prime contractor that addresses all program phases, as applicable.

D. Program Structure

Cornucopia is a 48-month program executed through three phases: Phase 1 Base period of 18 months; Phase 2 Option of 12 months; and Phase 3 Option of 18 months. Proposed performer teams are expected to be multi-disciplinary, as proposals must address all three FAs for both of the specified program use cases. In order to provide an appropriate scope for the program, DARPA has selected two program use cases to bracket a wide range of potential military applications and that represent contrasting stresses on the technologies in question. While some commonalities are expected in approaches to the two use cases, performers may propose divergent approaches where necessary to meet program metrics for each use case. Program

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 8

metrics, described below and outlined in Table 1, drive toward two distinct nutritional standards specified by the MDRI for operational rations specified in the NSOR, and restricted rations, likewise specified in the NSRR, provided in Appendix 1.

Proposals should be structured to show how the proposed research will achieve program metrics.

Integration of the focus areas is critical, therefore performers should describe how their work in each focus area will be linked to progress in all focus areas. Likewise, proposals should describe risks, potential pitfalls and relevant uncertainties, and strategies to obviate technical risks and other concerns. Performers will be required to provide 100 g samples of their system output upon request to the Government Test and Evaluation (T&E) team for analyses.

Phase 1 Base (18 months) Performer teams will demonstrate simultaneous production of all four classes of essential human macronutrients (protein, carbohydrates, fats, and dietary fiber) from edible microbial biomass, including integration of flavor and assembly of component processes.

FA1: Demonstrate simultaneous production of all four classes of human macronutrients in any ratio and accurate measurement of micronutrients listed in the MDRI. Additional ingredients or processes that are incompatible with the two program use cases are excluded. Performers must provide 100 g of system output to the Government T&E team 15 months after the contract is initiated for an interim chemical analysis required for DARPA reporting.

FA2: Demonstrate ability to synthesize molecules that confer one desirable flavor in a shake format. The flavor must be selected from those rated as “like slightly” or better on a 9-point hedonic scale as determined by the Natick Soldier Systems Center (NSSC) Combat Feeding Division (CFD). The CFD will provide a “table of preferences” based on past HSR surveys of specific flavors molecules that will define the list of flavors for performers to consider. Additional flavors that are not on the list may be presented for review by CFD prior to initiating work. Exploration of flavor chemistry is encouraged.

Palatability in this program will be inferred from chemical analyses. No HSR will occur in this program. Performers will evaluate and select highest priority flavor candidates, those that are easily expressed in microbes, stable through processing, and easy to produce, for further development.

FA3: Provide a benchtop demonstration of all processes envisioned for the overall system that will be necessary to meet the program metrics for both use cases in all focus areas, and provide proof that these processes could be scaled to meet use case objectives.

The Government T&E and Independent Validation and Verification (IV&V) teams will conduct analyses of nutrient content in a 100g sample of system output collected over an unrestricted time interval for each use case according to current accredited military protocols2 at 15 months after contract to evaluate progress against Phase 1 metrics.

2 USAPHC Circular 40-1, Appendix O. All analytical testing is completed according to AOAC methods.

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 9

At the conclusion of Phase 1, the Government may fund the option for the Phase 2 effort on one, some, all, or none of the awards, based on funding availability and performance across the Phase 1 metrics.

Phase 2 Option (12 months) Performer teams will demonstrate the ability to produce required macronutrient and micronutrient composition in shake or pudding format to meet restricted ration standards (MDRI NSRR) in processed microbial biomass within tolerances prescribed around the target metrics, and one additional food format of unrestricted macronutrient composition and one additional flavor.

FA1: Produce a shake or pudding format in two distinct flavors determined by chemical analysis of molecules known to impart flavor with macronutrient composition (protein, carbohydrates, fats, and dietary fiber) and micronutrient content required by MDRI NSRR specifications within tolerances specified in Table 1. For as many micronutrients as possible, it should be demonstrated that the system output in the context of both use cases delivers at least 50% of the minimum daily NSRR requirement for that specific nutrient.

FA2: Produce two flavors, as determined by chemical analyses, in a shake or pudding format that fully meets NSRR targets and one additional format that may not meet NSRR standards. Expand the flavor repertoire of the system by identifying and justifying additional candidate pathways/molecules.

FA3: Develop and demonstrate an integrated system capability that can produce one day’s worth of processed biomass output sufficient to support 14 male warfighters or 50 civilians at NSRR specifications for one day produced over 14 days elapsed time with any necessary human intervention. While there may be commonalities, two distinct systems are permitted to address each use case, but each must comply with program metrics for SWaP and production. During this test, interventions are allowed to maximize productivity. Performers must submit a plan to exclude food- and water-borne pathogenic organisms disallowed by the military AOAC microbiological standard2

At the conclusion of Phase 2, the Government may fund the option for the Phase 3 effort on one, some, all, or none of the awards, based on funding availability and performance across the Phase 2 metrics.

Phase 3 Option (18 months) Performer teams will focus on development of a third food format that does not have to be nutritionally complete and additional flavors as well as demonstration of more precise control over macronutrient composition, more complete micronutrient content, and higher caloric density in the nutritionally complete food. In Phase 3, the systems will be expected to provide nutrition that meets the specified nutritional standards as indicated in Table 1 within SWaP envelope for each use case. Performers will demonstrate an integrated system for each use case with a specific written plan that shows the capability to scale up to meet program metrics.

FA1: System output must meet NSOR specifications within specified tolerances for both use cases.

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 10

FA2: Produce three flavors in a nutritionally complete shake or pudding format and two additional distinct flavors in two alternative formats for a total of seven flavor/format combinations, three of which are nutritionally complete. Demonstrate test readiness to meet the standard of “like slightly” or better on a 9 point hedonic scale administered by the Government T&E team on 100 g samples of system output for each use case produced in 1 day elapsed time.

FA3: Demonstrate an integrated lab benchtop system or systems to meet the objectives of each use case within tolerances with proof of capability to scale production to meet the specifications of both program use cases. The system or systems must produce enough output for the small unit use case with proof the system could scale to support 14 male warfighters at operational rations standards within tolerances with caloric density such that all nutrients and all calories are delivered in 900 grams per person per day of system output. For the HADR use case, the system or systems must produce enough output in one day elapsed time with proof that the system could scale to sustain 100 civilians at restricted ration standards within tolerances. For both use cases, performers must demonstrate that their system can produce the daily objective output at the required caloric and nutrient density within tolerances in one day elapsed time with human intervention.

Table 1: Program Metrics

Phase 1 Base (18 months)

Phase 2 Option (12 months)

Phase 3 Option (18 months)

FA1: Domesticated Microbes for Human Consumption Production of required macronutrients in shake/pudding format

Simultaneous production of all four classes, any ratio

Meet Nutritional Standards for Restricted Rations (NSRR) required macronutrient ratio ≤ ± 30%

Meet Nutritional Standards for Operational Rations (NSOR) macronutrient requirement ≤ ± 10% in 900 g of output in shake or pudding format

Micronutrient content

Demonstrate accurate measurement of micronutrient content

≥ 50% of NSRR requirements, 100% ± 20% of NSOR requirements

FA2: Tailorability

Produce Cornucopia flavors

Demonstrate ability to express molecules known to confer one flavor in system output

Demonstrate ability to express molecules known to confer two distinct flavors in shake/pudding format

Three flavors in shake/pudding nutritionally complete format + two distinct flavors each in two food formats that are not nutritionally complete

Expand Cornucopia flavor catalogue

Propose 10 possible desirable flavors; Select 5 for further development

Identify and demonstrate 10 flavors

Test readiness to meet/exceed standard of ‘like slightly’ for 7 distinct format/flavor combinations

Achieve necessary texture for each format

Shake/pudding, nutritionally complete

Shake/pudding + one additional format (bar, gel, jerky)

Nutritionally complete shake or pudding in three flavors; produce four additional distinct flavors that are test-ready for “slightly like” or better demonstrated by chemical analysis in two additional food formats

FA3: Integrated System Demonstrations for Military Use Cases

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 11

System demonstration, 2 use cases

Benchtop demo of each essential process for both use cases

Integrated system demo, produce 1 day of output for 14 man unit or 50 , civilians on restricted rations in 14 days

Integrated system demos with proof of capability to scale production to meet goals for each use case

Per capita calories per day (Caloric density of output)

1500 kcal in ≤ 1500 g of system output 1500 kcal ≤ 1200g 3600 kcal ≤ 900 g

Size, weight, and power

< 2X SWaP and safety envelope prescribed by two use cases (4400 lb. Humvee payload excluding 10 kW generator/water for small unit use case; for HADR use case, four Quadcons including generator, excluding water)

Integrated system concept ≤ maximum allowable parameters, for each use case

Food safety Demonstrate ability to exclude food-borne pathogens as indicated in DoD food standards and regulations

Demonstrate compliance with DoD food safety standards

Government Test & Evaluation (T&E) Team In addition to selected performer teams, an independent Government T&E team will support all FAs and phases of the program to ensure the resulting technologies meet DoD needs and anticipate acquisition criteria. This team will inform application of program metrics and provide T&E of system performance, food safety and composition, and tailorability. Performers will be expected to work openly and regularly with DARPA and designated Government teams throughout the program. Performers will be required to provide details of their systems, including but not limited to engineering drawings, operating methods and instructions, software, datasets and samples to DARPA and/or any designated Government team member or organization upon request. Proposals should include a task to reflect interaction with government teams and delivery of requested information, data, hardware, software and materials; the details of the work arrangement will be defined as the program proceeds.

E. Schedule

Figure 1 provides the Cornucopia Program schedule.

DARPA will conduct two site visits to all performer sites in Phase 1 (at months 8 and 14) to assess progress against the Phase 1 Metrics as described in Table 1. At the beginning of month 15, the Government will conduct a detailed technical review of progress to date toward the 18-month metrics to inform decisions for which performers will continue into Phase 2. To be compliant with test readiness, performers must prove they have analyzed their prospective foodstuffs for nutritional composition as described in the metrics (caloric density, nutrient composition, relative amounts of each macronutrient, micronutrient content, molecules known to impart flavor) and that their benchtop system demonstrates exclusion of food-borne pathogens.

There will be no Human Subjects Research conducted in Cornucopia. To administer program evaluations, Cornucopia products will be subject to the standard regulated and accredited biological, chemical, and physical analyses and testing applied to military foodstuffs by the

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 12

Government T&E Team. In Phases 2 and 3, on-site and off-site visits and meetings will occur at least once per phase to monitor progress.

Figure 1. Program Schedule F. Deliverables

Minimum deliverables:

Performers are required to provide monthly (or as close as scheduling permits) technical progress reports to establish research progress. These reports should be in the form of a standardized slide presentation and a detailed, written technical report given to DARPA and discussed with the DARPA program management team via teleconference. Length and detail level will be at the discretion of the Program Manager.

Performers will be required to submit monthly financial status updates. The prime performer must include information for itself and all subawardees/subcontractors.

These reports should be in the form of an editable MS Excel file and should provide financial data including, but not limited to:

o Program spend plan by phase and task.

o Incurred program expenditures to date by phase and task.

o Invoiced program expenditures to date by phase and task.

A phase completion report submitted within 30 days of the end of each phase, summarizing the research done

Leadership from each performer team (with additional key personnel at the discretion of the Principal Investigator (PI)) will be required to present research progress in person mid-phase and at the end of each phase. The purpose of these reviews is to ensure adequate engagement with the DARPA team to discuss details that might otherwise fall outside the scope of a routine technical brief and provide opportunities to discuss progress and scientific goals as well as any ongoing technical or

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 13

programmatic challenges that must be overcome to achieve the overarching goals of the program.

When the final funded phase closes out, performer teams will provide a final report that summarizes all research activities, outcomes, and mechanisms discovered during the program; publications; research presentations; patent applications that result from the research pursued; and any additional deliverables required by the award instrument.

Other negotiated deliverables specific to the objectives of the individual efforts.

These may include registered reports; experimental protocols; publications; data management plan; intermediate and final versions of software libraries, code, and APIs, including documentation and user manuals; and/or a comprehensive assemblage of design documents, models, modeling data and results, and model validation data.

Reporting as outlined in Section VI.C.

G.Government-furnished Property/Equipment/Information

Costs for Government Furnished equipment may be included.

H.Other Program Objectives and Considerations

1. Collaboration

DARPA does not anticipate the need for formal collaboration across performers. However, performers will be required to interact with the Government T&E team and to provide the T&E team with data and work products needed to assess performance. All proposals should describe plans for ensuring transparency of their processes to enable interactions with the T&E team.

2. Regulatory

Proposers must present a detailed plan for early and continued engagement with regulators (e.g., Food and Drug Administration, Environmental Protection Agency) throughout the program to discuss developing technologies and challenges in order to inform and facilitate technological advancement and the eventual translation of the technology to field deployment. Ideally, proposers will identify the regulatory framework at the time of proposal submission.

3. Intellectual Property

As with many DARPA programs, there is an emphasis on creating and leveraging open source technologies and architectures, making data sharing and collaboration key aspects of this program. Therefore, intellectual property rights asserted by proposers are strongly encouraged to be aligned with open source regimes, within reason. See Section VI.B.4 for more information related to intellectual property.

4. Other Considerations

If needed, DARPA will revise performer schedules to synchronize across performers, and monitor/revise as necessary throughout the program. Progress reporting as well as problem

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 14

identification and mitigation teleconference meetings will occur regularly, and scheduled with the DARPA PM and the Government team. Proposers should anticipate two site visits in Phase 1 and at least one site visit per subsequent phase by the DARPA Program Manager during which they will have the opportunity to demonstrate progress towards agreed-upon metrics.

Proposers should develop proposals as outlined in Section IV and should assume a target start date of June 2022. The following considerations should be addressed:

Technical and programmatic strategies will conform to the entire program schedule and presents an aggressive plan to fully address all program goals, metrics and deliverables.

Proposed task structures must be consistent across the proposed schedule, Statement of Work, and cost volume.

Proposals must include the following meetings and travel in the proposed schedule and costs:

o Starting at the mid-point of Phase 1 in order to initiate collaboration between teams and disseminate program developments, two-day Principal Investigator (PI) meetings held approximately every six months with options for virtual participation as well as in person attendance as travel restrictions allow, with locations split between the East and West Coasts of the United States. For budgeting purposes, plan for four two-day meetings over the course of the last 18 months of the program: two meetings in the Washington, D.C. area and two meetings in the San Francisco, CA area.

II. Award Information

A. General Award Information

DARPA anticipates multiple awards to integrated performer teams addressing all three Focus Areas (FAs).

The level of funding for individual awards made under this BAA will depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds. Awards will be made to proposers3 whose proposals are determined to be the most advantageous to the Government, all evaluation factors considered. See Section V for further information.

The Government reserves the right to:

select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of the proposals received in response to this solicitation;

make awards without discussions with proposers;

3 As used throughout this BAA, “proposer” refers to the lead organization on a submission to this BAA. The proposer is responsible for ensuring that all information required by a BAA--from all team members--is submitted in accordance with the BAA. “Awardee” refers to anyone who might receive a prime award from the Government, including recipients of procurement contracts, cooperative agreements, or Other Transactions. “Subawardee” refers to anyone who might receive a subaward from a prime awardee (e.g., subawardee, consultant, etc.).

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 15

conduct discussions with proposers if it is later determined to be necessary;

segregate portions of resulting awards into pre-priced options;

accept proposals in their entirety or select only portions of proposals for award;

fund awards in increments with options for continued work at the end of one or more phases;

request additional documentation once the award instrument has been determined (e.g., representations and certifications); and remove proposers from award consideration should the parties fail to reach agreement on award terms within a reasonable time or the proposer fails to provide requested additional information in a timely manner.

Proposals identified for negotiation may result in a procurement contract, cooperative agreement, or Other Transaction (OT), depending upon the nature of the work proposed, the required degree of interaction between parties, 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 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.

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

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 16

As of the date of publication of this solicitation, the Government expects that program goals as described herein may be met by proposed efforts for fundamental research and non-fundamental research. Some proposed research may present a high likelihood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies that are unique and critical to defense. Based on the anticipated type of proposer (e.g., university or industry) and the nature of the solicited work, the Government expects that some awards will include restrictions on the resultant research that will require the awardee to seek DARPA permission before publishing any information or results relative to the program.

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 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 relating to professional and financial activities. 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 professional and financial activities over the last 4 years. The majority of foreign entities lists used to make these determinations are publicly

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 17

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/092021DARPACFIPRubric.pdf

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

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 affiliations and associations 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.

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

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 18

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 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.

HR001122S0012 CORNUCOPIA 19

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 U.S.