RAPIID_TA3_Attachment_E_Task_Description_Document.docx

37 KB Posted

Attached to
Resuscitation and Prevention of Ischemia-Induced Dysfunction (RAPIID) - TA3
Solicitation number
DARPA-PA-26-09
Issued by

About this file

Written by GovTribe AI ·

This is a Task Description Document (TDD) template for DARPA-PA-26-09, the Resuscitation and Prevention of Ischemia-Induced Dysfunction (RAPIID) Task Area 3 (TA-3) program. The TDD is a binding document for Other Transaction (OT) awards that outlines the specific tasks, subtasks, objectives, approaches, milestones, and deliverables that performers will execute. The template requires proposers to structure their research plans hierarchically, providing for each task and subtask: a general description of objectives, detailed approach methodology, identification of human subjects or animal involvement, identification of campus-based work at universities, primary organizations responsible for execution, measurable milestones that mark progress or completion, and specific deliverables to be provided to the Government. The document emphasizes writing in third person, excluding proprietary information, and includes an illustrative example involving peanut butter and jelly sandwich optimization across three subtasks with defined leads, supporting organizations, laboratory locations, experimental protocols, and demonstration requirements.

RAPIID TA-3 focuses on advancing blood analog technologies from proof-of-concept to clinical deployment by addressing manufacturing scalability, clinical regulatory approval, and enabling fielding technologies. Performers are expected to develop complete, deployable, and authorized systems using shelf-stable blood product components that provide oxygen delivery, hemostasis, and volume expansion for military and civilian pre-hospital use in austere settings. The program builds on previous DARPA FSHARP program achievements and requires performers to demonstrate safety and efficacy of blood analog components in combination, achieve manufacturing scalability for individual components, and develop associated fielding technologies to support real-world deployment.

View the file

Other files

File Type Posted
RAPIID_TA3_Attachment_G_RAPIID_CUI_Guide.pdf PDF
RAPIID_TA3_Attachment_D_Sample_OT_R_.docx DOCX document
RAPIID_TA3_Attachment_F_Schedule_of_Milestones_and_Payments.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
DARPA-PA-26-09.pdf PDF
RAPIID_TA3_Attachment_A_Technical_Management_Proposal.docx DOCX document
RAPIID_TA3_Attachment_C_DARPA_Standard_Cost_Proposal_Spreadsheet.xlsx XLSX spreadsheet
RAPIID_TA3_Attachment_B_Cost_Proposal.docx DOCX document

On GovTribe

Work with this file

  • Download the original file
  • Contacts named in this file
  • Similar government files
  • Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Try for free Login

Text version

The file's text, extracted by GovTribe without its formatting.

Attachment E: DARPA-PA-26-09 Task Description Document Competition Sensitive

DARPA-PA-26-09: RAPIID TA-3

TASK DESCRIPTION DOCUMENT (TDD)

[It is recommended to submit the TDD as this separate RAPIID TA-3 Attachment E file]

[For an Other Transaction (OT), the TDD is binding and documents what will be accomplished in the project.

Instructions: Use of this template and the Table 1 below is required. This document should break down the proposed research plan into specific tasks and subtasks and provide concise statements of the objective(s), tasks, metrics, milestones, and deliverables. These tasks/subtasks should lead to the technical milestones outlined in Attachment F – Schedule of Milestones and Payments.

There is no page limit to this template. Instructional (blue) and example (in Table 1) text should be deleted. Please write in the third person (e.g., “[performer name] will…”). Not all tasks require subtasks. Do not include proprietary information.

For each defined task/subtask, provide:

· A general description of the objective.

· A detailed description of the approach to be taken to accomplish each defined task/subtask.

· Identification of any tasks/subtasks that will involve human subjects or animals.

· Identification of any tasks/subtasks that will be performed on campus at a university.

· Identification (by name) of the primary organization (prime contractor, subawardee(s), consultant(s)) responsible for task/subtask execution.

· Measurable milestones (e.g., a metric, deliverable, demonstration, or other event/activity that marks task progress or completion).

· A definition of all deliverables (e.g., data, reports, software) to be provided to the Government in support of the proposed tasks/subtasks.]

The objective of this proposal is: [Insert a general description of the objective.]

[Table 1: Example TDD Task Table] Task 1 Peanut butter and jelly (PBJ) sandwich [Month 1 – Month 4]

Lead:
Pepperidge Farm
Support:
Jif and Smuckers
Location:
Pepperidge Farm laboratory, Jif laboratory, Smuckers laboratory
Description:
Development of a sandwich, consisting of both peanut butter and jelly. Application of both compounds will be optimized on two different substrates, with and without crust, and will then be used to demonstrate an integrated meal at a lunchtime panel. Final metrics will evaluate ease (i.e. time required for completion), uniformity, and reproducibility.

Subtask 1.1 Optimize peanut butter application [Month 1 – Month 4]

Lead:
Jif
Support:
Pepperidge Farm
Location:
Jif laboratory, Pepperidge Farm laboratory
Description:
To evaluate the effect of peanut butter consistency on overall PBJ quality, we will design and execute a suite of experiments to test different peanut butters with a standard piece of whole wheat bread. Initial exploratory experiments will establish the effects of volume of material to be spread, spreading utensil, and spreading technique. Final metrics will evaluate ease and uniformity of application, and reproducibility across at least 3 replicates.
Milestones:
· Finalize protocol based on initial exploratory experiments (Month 1)

· Complete testing of different peanut butter consistencies ranging from smooth to chunky (Month 2)

Deliverables:
· Report with data summarizing the results of peanut butter optimization experiments and optimized protocol (Month 2)

Subtask 1.2 Optimize jelly [Month 1 – Month 2]

Lead:
Smuckers
Support:
Pepperidge Farm
Location:
Smuckers laboratory, Pepperidge Farm laboratory
Description:
To evaluate the effect of jelly consistency on overall PBJ quality, we will design and execute a suite of experiments to test different jellies with a standard piece of whole wheat bread. Initial exploratory experiments will establish the effects of volume of material to be spread, spreading utensil, and spreading technique. Final metrics will evaluate ease and uniformity of application, and reproducibility across at least 3 replicates.
Milestones:
· Finalize protocol based on initial exploratory experiments (Month 1)

· Complete testing of different jelly consistencies ranging from jam to preserves (Month 2)

Deliverables:
· Report with data summarizing the results of jelly optimization experiments and optimized protocol (Month 2)

Subtask 1.3 Integration and demonstration of optimal PBJ [Month 2 – Month 4]

Lead:
Pepperidge Farm
Support:
Jif and Smuckers
Location:
Pepperidge Farm laboratory, Jif laboratory, Smuckers laboratory
Description:
Evaluation of the optimal PBJ will require integration of sub-tasks 1.1 and 1.2. Teams will share materials, methods, and protocols, and establish interoperability between laboratories. An assembly protocol will be developed to facilitate the consistent stacking of each piece of bread (one slice peanut butter, one slice jelly), with the covered surfaces facing each other, and edges of the bread aligned to the maximum extent possible. Versions will be prepared with and without crusts. The task will culminate in a demonstration using a panel of 3 hungry children who will score the PBJs using a rubric developed as part of this task.
Milestones:
· Establish interoperability between peanut butter laboratory and jelly laboratory (Month 2)

· Finalize protocol for PBJ assembly (Month 2.5)

· Finalize scoring rubric for taste-testing (Month 2.5)

Deliverables:
· Host demonstration including panel of taste-testers for evaluating final PBJ, with and without crusts (Month 3)

· Final Report summarizing results of Demonstration, including data from scoring rubric (Month 4)

File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .