HR001122S0040.pdf

HR001122S0040

Broad Agency Announcement

Redefining Possible

Tactical Technology Office

June 21, 2022

Contents

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

A. Program Overview B. TTO Focus Areas

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. Application Assistance B. Content and Form of Application Submission C. Submission Information D. Funding Restrictions E. Other Submission Requirements

V. Application Review Information A. Evaluation Criteria B. Review of Submissions

VI. Award Administration Information A. Selection Notices and Notifications B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements C. Reporting D. Electronic Systems E. DARPA Embedded Entrepreneurship Initiative (EEI)

VII. Agency Contacts VIII. Other Information

PART I: OVERVIEW INFORMATION

Federal Agency Name – Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Tactical Technology Office (TTO)

Funding Opportunity Title – Redefining Possible Announcement Type – Initial Announcement Funding Opportunity Number – HR001122S0040 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) – 12.910 Research and

Technology Development Dates o Posting Date: June 21, 2022 o Closing Date and Time: 4 PM Eastern Time on June 21, 2023

Concise description of the funding opportunity – The Tactical Technology Office (TTO) of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is soliciting executive summaries, proposal abstracts, and proposals for applied research, advanced technology development, platform demonstrations, or systems studies that aim to redefine the future of warfighting across four domains: Air, Ground, Maritime, and Space.

Anticipated individual awards – Multiple awards are anticipated.

Types of instruments that may be awarded – Procurement (FAR-based) contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or other transaction.

Agency contact: The BAA Coordinator for this effort can be reached via: HR001122S0040@darpa.mil o DARPA/Tactical Technology Office

ATTN: HR001122S0040

675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114

PHONE: (571) 218-4893

mailto:HR001121S0029@darpa.mil

PART II: FULL TEXT OF ANNOUNCEMENT

I. Funding Opportunity Description

The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) often selects its research efforts through the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) process. This publication constitutes a 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. The following information is for those wishing to respond to the BAA.

A. Program Overview

The Tactical Technology Office (TTO) of the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) is soliciting executive summaries, proposal abstracts, and proposals for applied research, advanced technology development, platform demonstrations, or systems studies that aim to redefine the future of warfighting across four domains: Air, Ground, Maritime, and Space.

The mission of the Tactical Technology Office (TTO) is to redefine access and delivery of effects to every domain in the battlespace: Air, Ground, Maritime and Space in support of national security policy. This includes both platforms as well as the enabling support elements for delivering effects, such as unit-level autonomy or human-machine collaboration. TTO accomplishes this mission by placing bold bets on developing new and novel system technologies and conducting platform demonstrations at a credible scale in realistic, operationally relevant conditions to support technology transition.

Our adversaries have developed means to counter our current military architecture built around exquisite, monolithic systems. TTO is focusing on revolutionary system architectures that are disaggregated, dispersed, diversified, disruptive, and instill doubt in our adversaries to deter and pre-empt aggression, with the ultimate goal of maintaining U.S.

military superiority in the future.

DARPA is built on a foundation of pivotal investments in high-risk technologies for national security; the Office-wide BAA represents a critical portal for innovation and initial investment towards developing the DARPA portfolio. TTO views the Office-wide BAA as an opportunity to gain knowledge or understanding necessary to determine the means by which a specific need may be met. Submissions should describe how an investment would provide the unique insight into the problem TTO is trying to solve and quantifiably substantiate those assertions. These insights may include proof-of-concept prototypes, system analyses, or any other work product that identifies the path to a new demonstration concept.

TTO encourages approaches that prove (or disprove) this unique insight as fast as possible.

TTO is interested in quickly identifying promising technologies and moving them to the next phase of research and development.

TTO recommends submitting an executive summary prior to a proposal abstract or a full proposal submission to have your concept reviewed by TTO personnel to gauge interest.

Submission instructions can be found in Section IV – concepts may not be submitted by fax or e-mail. Evaluation criteria for this solicitation can be found in Section V.A.

B. TTO Focus Areas

TTO is a systems office that researches, develops and demonstrates platform level technologies to enable revolutionary advances in military system resilience, responsiveness, range, lethality, access, endurance, and affordability to enable new Joint Force warfighting concepts. TTO is focusing on revolutionary system architectures that are disaggregated, dispersed, diversified, disruptive, and instill doubt in our adversaries to deter and pre-empt aggression, with the ultimate goal of maintaining U.S. military superiority in the future.

TTO’s strategy for achieving these objectives is to conduct platform level demonstrations of high-risk, high-payoff technologies in realistic, operationally relevant conditions to support technology transition.

TTO projects usually define a reference operational system upfront, decompose critical technical risks, and define a demonstration concept around them. Use of off-the-shelf technology for lower risk subsystems reduces program cost and schedule, but allows critical technologies to be matured and demonstrated.

1. Air Systems

Historically low observability has been a feature of the DoD’s combat aircraft since the stealth demonstrator HAVE BLUE over 40 years ago. The F-117, F-22, B-2, and F-35 have incorporated the disruptive technologies that comprise stealth, improving performance and reliability, over this time. Our adversaries, however, have noted the value of low observability and have responded with multiple generations of countermeasures. The ability to make platforms survivable is approaching physical limits, making continuance of the traditional path impractical.

It has been about half that time since the demonstration of Unmanned Combat Air Vehicles (UCAVs), which have seen widespread use in stabilization operations. Adversary response to counter this capability has rapidly degraded the effectiveness of current Unmanned Air Vehicle (UAV) and UCAV systems.

To ensure access to and operations across all battlespace domains, TTO is interested in systems to counter the proliferation of advanced Integrated Air Defense Systems (IADS), to include extremely capable surface-to-air and air-to-air missiles, that directly threaten our ability to engage and prevail in combat, and to develop and harness revolutionary aviation technologies to achieve lasting advantage across the spectrum of conflict.

TTO’s interest in Air Systems includes but is not limited to:

Technologies to enable next generation unmanned air systems providing survivability and lethality improvements over existing UAVs.

Distributed, disaggregated systems to reduce reliance on small numbers of exquisite platforms, increase survivability, improve flexibility, and counter adversary numerical advantage.

Technologies to enable timely delivery of targeting data and tactical target prosecution at campaign scale to support Assault Breaker II (ABII).

Technologies to enable development of aircraft capabilities that have not previously been fully exploited, including flight demonstration of vehicles that are traceable to operationally relevant missions.

Technologies to enable greater levels of autonomy (both at the individual aircraft and collaborative levels) that can minimize the risk to human warfighters and make individual platforms more “attritable,” all while increasing overall effectiveness and lethality and allow piloted and autonomous systems to operate in concert.

Emerging technologies in design and systems engineering that offer the possibility of developing and fielding systems more rapidly than previously. These may include the use of Model-Based Systems Engineering (MBSE), Multi-Dimensional Optimization (MDO), and Additive Manufacturing.

2. Ground Systems

The distinguishing feature of land combat is its relative symmetry and profound complexity. Naval, air, and space assets can rely on long-standoff weapons to engage an enemy and are often able to retreat to relative sanctuary. However, soldiers and Marines are exposed to direct fire from the adversary, often at very close range, confronting an adversary that often possesses better knowledge of the terrain, shorter supply lines, and increasing access to sophisticated technology that enables precision strike capabilities. The future ground battlefield will be one of chaos and unpredictability where stationary forces will be subject to lethal attacks.

TTO’s interest in Ground Systems includes but is not limited to:

Systems and technologies that deliver teams of platforms that are capable of coordinating and planning in the presence of adversaries with limited a priori knowledge of the environment, are resilient in the face of unplanned events and possess the plasticity to adapt to new contexts in order to enhance operational performance.

Systems that protect soldiers, optimize the kill chain and extend warfighters’ range.

Systems that offer the capability to amplify effects, and to reconfigure to account for attrition.

Autonomous systems operating at speeds surpassing human warfighters’ speed, adaptability, and flexibility.

Systems that leverage advances in intelligent autonomy for effective integrated manned-unmanned ground force operations.

Technologies to provide small units or individual warfighters improved mobility and lethality.

Technologies that expand the combined arms maneuver trade space to include the vertical dimension, interiors of buildings, and exploiting natural and man-made subterranean environments.

3. Maritime Systems

The maritime domain is characterized by the persistent presence of a manned fleet to show the flag and exercise freedom of navigation throughout the world. The carrier strike group, has repeatedly demonstrated its efficacy in the decades following World War II. But investment in a monolithic, high-value asset (the carrier) brings with it specific deficiencies, namely, the need for a layered defense of the high-value asset against adversary countermeasures. Air-launched cruise missiles, advanced ballistic missiles, and hypersonic weapons represent serious threats to maintain presence with manned platforms inside adversary weapons engagement. Emphasis will be placed in the undersea environment and transition between undersea, surface and air. The maritime domain will also include expanding access and presence to new areas, such as the Arctic, and in new ways, such as enabling distributed architectures, to ensure freedom of navigation and prevent potential adversaries from achieving dominance across the globe.

TTO’s interest in Maritime Systems includes but is not limited to:

New maritime technologies to enable a dispersed system-of-systems architecture that complicates an adversary’s plans by reducing warfighting reliance on monolithic, high-value surface and sub-surface assets.

Technologies for surface combatants to organically defeat raids of sea-skimming high-speed missiles.

Technologies to counter advanced subsurface systems and defeat advanced torpedo threats.

Architectures, advanced technologies, and concepts of operations to mature a capability to protect U.S. waterways and port facilities, thus enabling unencumbered naval operations.

Technologies to provide a persistent presence in harsh environments such as the arctic, to include long duration, minimum maintenance, and safe navigation.

Technologies to disperse and disaggregate maritime assets using small, inexpensive, networked vessels that leverage commercial private sector development in artificial intelligence and autonomy.

Cross-domain technologies to leverage the undersea domain to impose doubt on our adversaries by projecting power into all other domains.

4. Space Systems

The national security space enterprise remains dominated by a culture of risk aversion and the deliberately paced development of small numbers of exquisite, expensive spacecraft used primarily for strategic applications, such as early warning of ballistic missile launches, intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance, and nuclear command and control. Upgrades occur on timescales measured in years to decades. Tactical applications currently comprise only a small portion of U.S. space capabilities, and they are insufficient to support envisioned operations in denied or contested areas. Potential adversaries have recognized the U.S.’s dependency on space products – for defense, civil, and commercial applications – and have invested accordingly. Threats to our space assets and their attendant control systems have multiplied. TTO seeks innovative concepts for space systems that will preserve the U.S.’s capability to support warfighters in, and across, all domains of the battlespace.

TTO's interest in Space Systems includes but is not limited to:

New space architectures that complicate an adversary's counter-space capabilities by reducing warfighting reliance on monolithic, long lead-time, high-value space assets and instruments.

Innovative approaches to counter emerging threats assuming a contested space environment. Concepts and technologies to enhance access and freedom of operations in all orbital regimes.

Concepts and technologies that reduce reliance on large, expensive, and increasingly vulnerable geostationary equatorial orbit (GEO) assets. Delivering capability by proliferating and disaggregating space assets at low earth orbit (LEO) with smaller, simpler satellites derived from commercial designs, and leveraging the emerging commercial private sector development of network and user segments.

Concepts and technologies that exploit artificial intelligence and deep learning technologies to support access-denied scenarios, by enabling autonomous evaluation of data collected by multiple proliferated-LEO constellations, and enabling dynamic creation of kill chains.

Advances in material science, manufacturing and computational techniques to reduce the size/weight, cost, and timeliness required to field game-changing capabilities.

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. Initial awards are anticipated to be for less than $1 million and less than 18 months duration, although options that follow a base effort may also be proposed.

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.

Awards under this BAA will be made to proposers on the basis of the evaluation criteria listed below (see Section V, “Application Review Information,”) to provide overall value to the Government. The Government reserves the right to request any additional, necessary documentation once it makes the award instrument determination. Such additional information may include but is not limited to Representations and Certifications (see Section IV.B.4(d), “Representations and Certifications”). The Government reserves the right to remove proposals from award consideration, should the parties fail to reach agreement on award terms, conditions, and/or cost/price 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, 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. Any requests for or assumptions regarding Government Furnished Equipment (GFE) or Government Furnished Information (GFI) should be clearly stated in the proposal.

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. § 4022(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.

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.

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

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 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:

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

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 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.

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/

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.

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. 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.

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 includes 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 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.

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.

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, to include:

Industrial/commercial concerns including small businesses Accredited degree granting colleges and universities Non-profit and not-for-profit organizations

Additionally:

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.

All proposers are expected to address transition; transition is part of the evaluation criteria in Section V.A. However, given their special status, FFRDCs should describe how and when a proposed technology/system will transition to which Non-FFRDC organization(s).

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.

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.§ 4892 may be the appropriate statutory starting point for some entities, specific supporting regulatory guidance, together with evidence of agency approval, will still be required to fully establish eligibility. DARPA will consider FFRDC and Government Entity eligibility submissions on a case-by-case basis; however, the burden to prove eligibility for all team members rests solely with the proposer.

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

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

3. Classified Proposals

If a submission contains Classified National Security Information or the suspicion of such, as defined by Executive Order 13526, applicants will ensure all industrial, personnel, and information systems processing security requirements are in place and at the appropriate level (e.g., Facility Clearance Level (FCL), Automated Information Security (AIS), Certification and Accreditation (C&A), and any Foreign Ownership Control and Influence (FOCI) issues are mitigated prior to submission. Additional information on these subjects can be found at http://www.dcsa.mil.

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, http://www.dcsa.mil/ 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;

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

A. Application Assistance

All administrative correspondence and questions on this solicitation, including requests for information on how to submit an executive summary, proposal abstract, or full proposal to this BAA, should be directed to HR001122S0040@darpa.mil.

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 administrative contact listed above. No additional information is available, except as provided at SAM.gov or Grants.gov, nor will a formal Request for Proposal (RFP) or additional solicitation regarding this announcement be issued. Requests for the same will be disregarded.

Technical support for DARPA's BAA Website may be reached at BAAT_Support@darpa.mil. It is recommended that you Courtesy Copy (CC) the administrative contact at HR001122S0040@darpa.mil on this correspondence, for situational awareness.

B. Content and Form of Application Submission

Proposers are strongly encouraged to submit an executive summary and, if encouraged, a proposal abstract in advance of a full proposal. This procedure is intended to minimize unnecessary effort and cost in proposal preparation and review.

All submissions must be written in English with type not smaller than 12-point font. A page is defined as being no larger than an electronically formatted page of 8.5” by 11.0” with type not smaller than 12 point. 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.

For a proposal that includes both classified and unclassified information, the proposal may be separated into an unclassified portion and a classified portion. The proposal should use the unclassified portion to the maximum extent reasonable. Submissions should be made according to the instructions outlined in Section IV.C.4. All monetary references in the proposal shall be in U.S. Dollars.

NOTE: Non-conforming submissions that do not follow the instructions herein may be rejected without further review. Submissions including profane, racially charged, or other similarly inappropriate language will not be reviewed.

1. Executive Summary (ES) Format

Executive summaries are encouraged in advance of submitting proposal abstracts and full proposals in order to provide potential proposers with a rapid response to minimize unnecessary effort. Proposers should specifically and clearly address the innovation of their proposed system or subsystem component development, the scientific or technical basis for innovative claims, and the impact of the proposed development on military mission capabilities, efficiency, or effectiveness. DARPA policy is to treat all submissions as source selection information (see FAR

2.101 and 3.104), and to disclose their contents only for the purpose of evaluation. The executive summary should be clearly marked “EXECUTIVE SUMMARY,” and the total length shall not exceed two [2] pages. All executive summary submissions must be written in narrative form. No formal transmittal letter is required, but submissions must include the organization name, submission title, and technical POC information (e-mail and mailing address).

2. Proposal Abstract (PA) Format

Proposers are strongly encouraged to submit a proposal abstract, or white paper, in advance of a proposal. Abstracts should follow the same general format as described for proposals (see IV.B.3) but include ONLY sections I and II of Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal. The abstract must include a statement of the anticipated Rough Order of Magnitude (ROM) cost and the anticipated duration of the proposed effort. It is recommended that proposers provide sufficient information to assess the technical performance claims – DARPA policy is to treat all submissions as source selection information (see FAR 2.101 and 3.104), and to disclose their contents only for the purpose of evaluation. The cover sheet should be clearly marked “ABSTRACT,” and the total length should not exceed six [6] pages. The maximum page count excludes the cover page in Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal, section I, and official transmittal letter, but does include any figures, tables, or the requested tri chart. An official transmittal letter is not required.

3. Full Proposal (FP) Format

All proposals must be in the format given below. Non-conforming proposals may be rejected without review. The typical proposal should express a consolidated effort in support of one or more related technical concepts or ideas. Separate or disjointed efforts should not be combined into a single proposal. Proposals shall consist of two volumes: 1) Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal (composed of three parts), and 2) Volume II, Cost Proposal. The maximum page limit for Volume I is 30 pages (40 pages if the proposal dollar value is > $1 million). Bracketed numbers by each section denote page limits. The page limitation for full proposals includes all figures, tables, and charts.

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

DARPA.

Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal, described below, may include an attached bibliography of relevant technical papers or research notes (published and unpublished), which document the technical ideas and approach upon which the proposal is based. Copies of not more than three (3) relevant papers may be included with the submission. The bibliography and attached papers are not included in the page limits. The submission of other supporting materials along with the proposals is strongly discouraged and will not be considered for review.

a) Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal

Section I: Administrative

A. Cover Sheet to include {no page limit}:

(1) BAA number (HR001122S0040);

(2) Technical area;

(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 from DARPA, including total base cost, estimates of base cost in each year of the effort, estimates of itemized options in each year of the effort, and the amount of cost share (if any);

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

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

(13) Affirmation of Human Subject Research. If none, state “none”;

(14) Affirmation of Animal Research. If none, state “none”;

(15) Summary of the costs of the proposed research, including total base cost, estimates of base cost in each year of the effort, estimates of itemized options in each year of the effort, and cost sharing if relevant;

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

(17) Name, address, and telephone number of the proposer’s cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency…