• Share
  • Email
  • Embed
  • Like
  • Save
  • Private Content
Nanotech The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) (INFOWARS.COM)

Nanotech The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) (INFOWARS.COM)




The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) often selects its research
efforts through the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) process. The BAA will appear
on the FedBizOpps website (http://www.fedbizopps.gov/) and the Grants.gov website
(http://www.grants.gov/). The following information is for those wishing to respond to
the BAA.



Total Views
Views on SlideShare
Embed Views



0 Embeds 0

No embeds



Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

CC Attribution-NonCommercial LicenseCC Attribution-NonCommercial License

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
Post Comment
Edit your comment

    Nanotech The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) (INFOWARS.COM) Nanotech The Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) (INFOWARS.COM) Document Transcript

    • Broad Agency AnnouncementIn vivo Nanoplatforms for Diagnostics (IVN:Dx) Microsystems Technology Office (MTO) DARPA-BAA-12-33 March 15, 2012 1
    • Table of ContentsPart I.  Overview Information .......................................................................................... 3 Part II.  Full Text of Announcement.............................................................................. 4  Section I.  FUNDING OPPORTUNITY .................................................................... 4  A.  Background....................................................................................................... 6  B.  Technical Areas of Interest ............................................................................... 6  C.  Program Metrics ............................................................................................... 7  Section II.  AWARD INFORMATION ..................................................................... 12  Section III.  ELLIGIBILITY INFORMATION ...................................................... 13  A.  Eligible Applicants ......................................................................................... 13  B.  Procurement Integrity, Standards of Conduct, Ethical Considerations, and Organizational Conflicts of Interest .......................................................................... 13  C.  Cost Sharing/Matching ................................................................................... 14  D.  Other Eligibility Criteria ................................................................................. 14  Section IV.  APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION PACKAGE ............................ 14  A.  Address to Request Application Package ....................................................... 14  B.  Content and Form of Application Submission ............................................... 15  Section V.  APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATION ......................................... 28  A.  Evaluation Criteria.......................................................................................... 28  B.  Review and Selection Process ........................................................................ 30  Section VI.  AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION ............................. 31  A.  Selection Notices ............................................................................................ 31  B.  Administrative and National Policy Requirements ........................................ 31  C.  Reporting ........................................................................................................ 37  D.  Electronic Systems ......................................................................................... 37  Section VII.  AGENCY CONTACTS ...................................................................... 38  Section VIII.  OTHER INFORMATION ................................................................... 38  A.  Intellectual Property Procurement Contract Proposers .................................. 38  B.  Non-Procurement Contract Proposers – Noncommercial and Commercial Items (Technical Data and Computer Software) ...................................................... 40  C.  All Proposers – Patents ................................................................................... 40  D.  Other Transactions .......................................................................................... 40  2
    • Part I. Overview Information  Federal Agency Name – Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), Microsystems Technology Office (MTO)  Funding Announcement Type – Initial Broad Agency Announcement  Funding Opportunity Number – DARPA-BAA-12-33  Opportunity Title – In vivo Nanosensors for Diagnostics (IVN:Dx)  Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) – 12.910 Research and Technology Development  Dates o Posting Date March 15, 2012 o Proposal Abstract Due Date: April 18, 2012 at 3:00 PM Eastern Time o Proposal Due Date: June 28, 2012 at 3:00 PM Eastern Time  Concise description of the funding opportunity: The specific objective of the In vivo Nanoplatforms for Diagnostics (IVN:Dx) thrust of the In vivo Nanoplatforms (IVN) program is to develop biocompatible nanosensors that provide continuous, noninvasive, and highly accurate measurement of a variety of conditions and substances within the living tissue of animals, plants, and insects using non-toxic materials with limited immunogenicity. These sensors will permit qualitative and quantitative assessment over large concentration ranges of both small (e.g., glucose, lactate, and urea) and large molecules (e.g., proteins, oligonucleotides, infectious agents, and chemical/biological threat agents) in the organism and environment through optical, electronic, thermal or magnetic mechanisms.  Anticipated individual awards – Multiple awards are anticipated.  Anticipated available funding types – 6.2 and 6.3  Anticipated commencement of contract negotiations – October 1, 2012  Types of instruments that may be awarded – Procurement contract, grant, cooperative agreement or other transaction.  Any cost sharing requirements – No direct requirement in this BAA  PROPOSERS ARE CAUTIONED THAT EVALUATION RATINGS MAY BE LOWERED AND/OR PROPOSALS REJECTED IF ALL PROPOSAL PREPARATION AND/OR SUBMITTAL INSTRUCTIONS LISTED HEREIN ARE NOT FOLLOWED.  Agency contact Dr. Timothy Broderick, Program Manager DARPA/MTO ATTN: DARPA-BAA-12-33 DARPA-BAA-12-33@darpa.mil 3
    • Part II. Full Text of AnnouncementSection I. FUNDING OPPORTUNITYThe Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA) often selects its researchefforts through the Broad Agency Announcement (BAA) process. The BAA will appearon the FedBizOpps website (http://www.fedbizopps.gov/) and the Grants.gov website(http://www.grants.gov/). The following information is for those wishing to respond tothe BAA.The goal of the In vivo Nanoplatforms (IVN) program is to develop radically new classesof adaptable nanoparticles for persistent, distributed, unobtrusive physiologic andenvironmental sensing as well as the treatment of physiologic abnormalities, illness andinfectious disease. Initially, DARPA is soliciting proposals to develop the nanoscalesystems necessary for in vivo sensing and physiologic monitoring of warfighters ascomponents of the In vivo Nanoplatforms for Diagnostics (IVN:Dx) thrust of the IVNprogram. A subsequent companion solicitation for the In vivo Nanoplatforms forTherapeutics (IVN:Tx) thrust is expected to be released in the first quarter of thegovernment fiscal year 2013 (FY13 begins October 1, 2012). In these solicitations,DARPA seeks proposals that address diagnostic (this BAA) and therapeutic (subsequentBAA) objectives that will enable a versatile, rapidly adaptable system to provide medicaland operational support to the warfighter in any location. The development of standalonediagnostic and therapeutic technologies within each thrust is strongly encouraged tooptimize the technologies, capabilities, and applications developed within the IVNprogram. While not specifically encouraged, proposals that develop integrated“theragnostic” platforms are not excluded. The following information and guidanceincluded in this solicitation addresses only those technical areas of interest relevant to thediagnostic and disease surveillance objectives of the IVN:Dx thrust.The interdisciplinary IVN:Dx program thrust envisioned by DARPA will develop anddemonstrate the following: 1) implantable nanoplatforms using bio-compatible and non-toxic materials, 2) in vivo sensing of small and large molecules of biological interest, 3)multiplexed detection of analytes at clinically relevant concentrations, 4) externalinterrogation of the nanoplatform free from any implanted communications electronics,and 5) complete system demonstration in a large animal.The resulting IVN:Dx sensing platform will need to provide long-term sensingcapabilities for military-relevant analytes. Sensor read-out modality is a necessarycomponent of the platform device and should be carefully considered with respect toparameters such as choice of tissue, analytes, repetitive non-contact signal acquisition,and signal-to-noise ratio. However, the primary objective of this thrust is to develop safe,biocompatible nanoparticles for in vivo multiplexed analyte sensing. Proposers areencouraged to focus on development of the implantable nanoparticles as opposed todevelopment of read out hardware.Literature suggests several technical approaches exist that may prove viable in meetingthe challenging goals of the IVN:Dx thrust. Imperative to any new nanoplatform sensor 4
    • concept is the overriding requirement to avoid harm to the host. The choice of size, shapeand material to limit clearance by the reticuloendothelial system of the nanoparticles is animportant design consideration, as is the selection of appropriate surface coatings that arenon-fouling and biocompatible.Although several such approaches are noted here, these should not be consideredendorsements for the approach; proposers are specifically encouraged to submit the bestsolution to the problem. One potential approach is to use Surface Enhanced RamanSpectroscopy (SERS) nanoparticles within tissue to detect biologically relevantmolecules at very low levels (e.g., femtomolar) whereby their optical response would beuniquely altered by analytes of interest. Related to this concept is the construction of aselective self-assembling monolayer (SAM) that has the ability to partition analytes ofinterest, thereby enhancing sensor specificity. Although a selective SAM has beendemonstrated for glucose, each new analyte of interest will require a unique surface toexploit steric and energetic effects for enhanced selectivity. Mixed SAM coatings thatinclude non-fouling components such as carboxybetaines could also improve sensorsensitivity and lifetime. Another potential optical approach uses “molecular beacons” thatfluoresce upon binding to target analytes. Several researchers have demonstrated the useof background subtraction and ratiometric (or related) techniques to reduce obscurantswhile maintaining detector responsivity. The choice of wavelength is important tooptimize tissue penetration and eye safety while limiting absorption by endogenouschromophores and water. These are a few potential approaches that could increase in vivosensitivity, specificity, and lifetime of the sensor components, all of which are criticalaspects of program success.DARPA desires that performers will demonstrate an in vivo nanoplatform prototype atTechnology Readiness Level (TRL) 5 by program end. The critical platform attributes aredescribed below (see Table 1 under “Program Goals”). Performers shall includemeasurable platform performance metrics, and describe the test methodology, for asmany attributes as possible based on the scope of the proposal and the best judgment ofthe team (see Table 2 “Relevant Attributes and Definitions”). The research anddevelopment program described below is expected to require the integration of multipleapproaches and technologies across many basic and applied scientific disciplines(including but not limited to chemistry, molecular biology, theoretical and experimentalengineering disciplines, biophysics, materials science, as well as clinical and laboratorymedicine specialties). This program may require participation from multiple sectors ofthe scientific and technical community: academia, not-for-profit research institutes, andthe private for-profit sector. The program may also require participation fromorganizations with expertise in system integration and device engineering.This solicitation specifically calls for technologies that can be used in animals andultimately in humans. Human use and testing, however, is specifically excluded from thissolicitation. Clinical trials will not be funded under this program. Additionally, whileDARPA envisions nanoplatforms that could be developed and used within diversebiologic systems, proposals to design sensors for use exclusively in plants or insects arediscouraged. 5
    • A. BackgroundThe leading cause of warfighter downtime is disease rather than battlefield injuries, asone might expect. The military has a compelling need to develop technologies that coulddramatically improve soldier readiness, while also reducing healthcare costs and logisticsburden. Current technologies and products for diagnosing disease are principallyrelegated to in vitro medical devices, which are often expensive, bulky, and fragile.While there are some simple, inexpensive, and portable rapid diagnostic tests (RDTs),these too are in vitro devices and typically suffer from poor sensitivity and specificity;they are almost always limited to the detection of a single analyte (or target). Adiagnostic goal of this program is to develop a generalizable platform for in vivo sensingthat removes the logistical burden of in vitro devices and provides continuous monitoringof warfighter physiology. Such a platform is not limited to single analyte detection,instead providing multiplexed monitoring in real time to the warfighter.The IVN:Dx program thrust makes possible the opportunity for disruptive change to thetraditional model for physiologic monitoring and healthcare delivery to the warfighter.The first high-payoff application of in vivo nanosensor technology is in the early sensingand detection of biologic exposure, long before the warfighter is contagious or symptomsare present. Persistent widespread diagnostics and surveillance could have significantoperational impact, given that disease and illness have historically had a more deleteriousimpact on unit readiness than combat causalities. For military special forces the practicalrealization of implantable nanosensors capable of monitoring multiple indicators ofphysiological state could be a truly disruptive innovation. For example, if an isolatedspecial operator is exposed to an infectious agent or pushed beyond optimumperformance levels, the nanosensors could detect physiological distress and the operatorcould take corrective action. With an appropriate array of therapeutic nanoparticles (to bedeveloped under the subsequent BAA), the warfighter could immediately administereffective therapy.The commercial world would also benefit from continuous physiologic monitoringtechnology. One might reasonably expect IVN:Dx to have the same impact within thecivilian healthcare system given concomitant economies of scale obtained for themilitary. The glucometer market alone is forecasted to reach $6B by 2015 as the totalU.S. population that is diabetic or prediabetic exceeds 100M. A new in vivo nanoplatformcould enable monitoring of metabolic and infectious disease of national significance viameasurement of analytes such as glucose, urea, lactate, and cytokines.B. Technical Areas of InterestDARPA is soliciting proposals for the IVN:Dx thrust of the new IVN program.Collaborative efforts and teaming are encouraged (see Section III.D for additionalinformation). These teams should be self-organized (DARPA will specifically not assistin this regard during the solicitation phase), complementary, and comprehensive toachieve the challenging goals of the program.The focus of this solicitation is the development of biocompatible nanosensors thatprovide continuous, noninvasive, and highly accurate measurement of a variety of 6
    • conditions and substances within the living tissue of animals, plants, and insects usingnon-toxic materials with limited immunogenicity. There are two primary areas of interest,Technical Area 1: Development of safe and biocompatible nanoplatforms; and TechnicalArea 2: Development of implantable in vivo diagnostic nanoplatforms. Proposals thatinclude revolutionary approaches in both technical areas are strongly encouraged; ideallyteams will propose both, but if a team proposes an exceptionally good idea for technicalarea one that could be generalized for a number of approaches to technical area two (andthe other way around) DARPA would like to see the idea. Proposals should address thekey issues in each individual technical area and clearly describe the compatibility of themethods as well as any integration challenges. All proposers are encouraged to considertheir ability to attain eventual clinical diagnostic and operational implementation as wellas Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regulatory compliance when developingproposed efforts. Technical Area 1: Development of safe and biocompatible nanoplatforms Current implantable materials are limited by toxicity and immunogenic response. Implanted nanomaterials may be rapidly cleared by the reticuloendothelial system or foul due to nonspecific binding of biologic material on the surface depending on size, shape and coating. Performers shall focus on new approaches to particle material, sizing, shaping and coating to limit platform toxicity and increase biocompatibility. New approaches to accomplishing this task could include, but are not limited to, polymer coatings; surface modifying additives; and new methods for creating non-toxic nanomaterials of narrow size distribution and tailored shape. End of program goals will require no observable adverse effects from the nanoplatform, as well as inflammation and immunological panels that confirm biocompatibility. Technical Area 2: Development of implantable in vivo diagnostic nanoplatforms Laboratory demonstrations and the few commercially available in vivo sensing platforms are limited to single small analytes at high concentrations. These systems are ineffective for use in monitoring a panel of molecules, or any biologic molecule with mass > 1 kDa. The need for internal calibration to account for sensor drift also limits the use of these devices for extended periods. Performers will focus on novel methods for enhancing sensitivity and lifetime of in vivo nanoplatforms. New approaches to accomplishing this task could include but are not limited to: mixed SAM coatings that include analyte selective and non-fouling components; self- calibrating multianalyte sensors; fluorescent molecular beacons; oligonucleotide modification enabling tissue targeting and nuclease resistance; and analyte/signal amplification via enzymatic or catalytic mechanisms. End of program goals will require 95% accuracy of multiple analytes over a large dynamic range and internal standards that enable an in vivo operating time of 12 months or greater.C. Program MetricsProposed efforts should not exceed 42 months. Proposers should address all of themilestones and metrics listed below (Table 1) to which they are proposing. Continuationof funding over the 42-month period will be contingent on technical progress and 7
    • availability of funding. Initial research should focus on the development of novelnanosensing technologies and techniques; after which the effort should focus on therefinement of these technologies and techniques needed to achieve targeted diagnosticgoals. Specifically excluded are proposals that only incrementally advance the currentstate of practice, as well as those that propose clinical studies for regulatory submissionsor any form of human use protocols. Proposals that aim to integrate existing technologieswill be considered non-responsive.Proposers should identify project-specific milestones that facilitate tracking of theresearch progress towards the overall program goals. Proposers should plan for thetesting and evaluation of their components and/or constructs at each milestone andindicate the milestones and associated cost on the program schedule (Gantt chart).Proposers may select analytes of interest within the broad biomarker categories ofphysiologic monitoring, infectious disease diagnostics/surveillance, and CBRN exposure.Proposers are encouraged to select analytes that demonstrate platform capability to detectsmall molecules, proteins and nucleic acids across wide and clinically relevantconcentrations. Sensing platforms developed in response to this solicitation should beflexible and have the ability to simultaneously test for the presence or absence of multipleanalytes from the same sample.Proposers are encouraged to select a representative application to demonstrate theoperational and medical relevance of their sensing technology. Proposers should definethe application, target analytes, and the organism/tissue/cell in which they will bedetected. The detection of multiple biomarkers (e.g., threat agent exposure,exogenous/pathogen, or endogenous/host-response) could provide the ability to detectpre-symptomatic infectious disease in military populations as well as address diagnosticspecificity for a single disease in an individual warfighter. In vitro analytical performanceof the sensor could be developed using model systems that mimic in vivo environments(e.g., spiked blood, interstitial fluids, cellular systems). Sensor biocompatibility andlifetime should initially be demonstrated in vitro in representative tissue/cells.Subsequent milestone demonstrations should build on in vitro successes and beconducted in small and large animals. The animal and tissue must be relevant to theselected analytes and application. Platform scalability and flexibility are encouraged forwidespread application. THIS SECTION INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK; Table 1. On following page. 8
    • Common key elements are summarized below in Table 1. TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF MILESTONES MILESTONE DATE DESCRIPTION METRICS (after award) Safely demonstrate in vivo  Proposer specified nanoplatform sensor in a limit of detection, dynamic range, and Demonstration #1 12th month living tissue or biologic response time fluid with 1 analyte  75% AUC detection  1 month lifetime  Proposer specified limit of detection, Safely demonstrate dynamic range, and nanoplatform sensor in a response time  Proposed specified th Demonstration #2 24 month small animal with 2 analyte inflammation and detection immunological panels  90% AUC  6 month lifetime  Proposer specified limit of detection, Safely demonstrate dynamic range, and nanoplatform sensor in a response time Demonstration #3 42nd month  Proposed specified large animal with 5 analyte inflammation and detection immunological panels  95% AUC  12 month lifetimeGoals for limit of detection, dynamic range, and response time should be included in eachproposed milestone demonstration. Proposers should note that the metrics of limit ofdetection, dynamic range, and response time are highly dependent on the analyte ofinterest and the compartment in which the analyte is measured (e.g., tissue, fluid, cell,intracellular location). As such, proposers should suggest limits of detection, dynamicrange, and response times for specific analytes in compartments that are clinicallyrelevant and have high predictive value at a pre-symptomatic stage of diseaseprogression. Proposers should also specify goals and methods for evaluating theinflammatory and immunological response at demonstrations 2 and 3. As with all othermetrics, ample supporting information should be provided to justify the claims inpredicted performance of the nanoplatform.As an example of metrics, consider the pathogenesis of Bacillus anthracis (anthrax). Thisprocess begins with endospores introduced into the skin, lungs or intestines. Theendospores are phagocytosed by macrophages and germinate into vegetative bacteria.The bacteria multiply in the lymphatic system, and eventually enter the bloodstream to 9
    • reach concentrations of 107 to 108 organisms per milliliter of blood. If untreated, sepsisand death occur within days to weeks post-exposure. Several biomarkers are presentduring disease progression, such as cytokines at ng/mL concentrations in macrophage anddendritic cells. However, this response is not specific to anthrax exposure and currentmethods to identify infection are often insensitive and/or have limited dynamic range. Apreferred method of detection would be capable of identifying a pathogen-induced hostresponse at low concentration levels in specific compartments prior to systemic releaseinto the bloodstream. Potential strategies for in vivo monitoring could include, but are notlimited to, a multiplexed intradermal tattoo that interrogates interstitial fluid or thecytosol of phagocytes to detect low levels of anthrax related cytokines, proteins andoligonucleotides. The proposed technology development could be justified by theoperational and medical impact associated with the detection of specific analytes, inspecific tissue, at specific times post anthrax exposure. Proposals would include limits ofdetection, dynamic range, and response time metrics for each of the three demonstrationswith appropriate increases in targeted values at each stage.As another example, a nanoplatform could interrogate central nervous systembiomarkers, such as II-spectrin breakdown products (SBDP), in the cerebrospinal fluid(CSF) to diagnose traumatic brain injury. Research has shown that cerebrospinal fluid istransported with the olfactory nerve across the cribriform plate into extracraniallymphatics within the nasal mucosa. Nanoparticles could be functionalized for uptake andpersistence in nasal olfactory or mucosal cells. With traumatic brain injury, SBDP wouldincrease in the CSF and could be associated with an increased signal from opticallyinterrogated nanosensors. Design considerations for the nanoplatform would includetoxicity, biocompatibility, dwell time within target tissue, analytical sensitivity (at leastpM limit of detection required in the case of SBDP), response time and specificity.The above examples are illustrative and should not bias proposers towards specifictechnology, tissue, analyte, or application. THIS SECTION INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK; Table 2. On following page. 10
    • TABLE 2. RELEVANT ATTRIBUTES AND DEFINITIONS ATTRIBUTE DIMENSION DEFINITION The ability of a test to detect a certain level of concentration of an analyte or target of interest. Not Analytical Sensitivity copies/mL to be confused with “clinical sensitivity.” Also referred to as the limit-of-detection (LOD). This is the total area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (see below ROC definition); it is the mathematical definition of clinical accuracy of aArea Under the Curve (AUC) % dichotomous test. A perfect ROC curve would be “L” shaped and have an area of 1.0 (or 100%). The proverbial “coin toss” is a diagonal and has an area of 0.5 (or 50-50 chance). Test positivity in disease; the true positive fraction; ability of a test to correctly identify disease at a particular decision threshold. It tells us something about the relative frequency of “false negative” Clinical Sensitivity % results from a given diagnostic test. This term is often confused with or misused as synonymous with “analytical sensitivity” or “limit-of-detection.” Sometimes referred to as “diagnostic sensitivity.” The range of analyte concentration over which the detector is capable of providing an accurate Dynamic Range logs quantitative measure within a certain statistical confidence. The ability to simultaneously test for the presence or Multiplex Level # absence of multiple analytes from the same sample. Duration of the system without any downtime. Sensor performance (e.g., sensitivity, specificity) Operational Lifetime days must be maintained during the operational lifetime. There should be no observable adverse effects. A graphical description of test performance representing the relationship between the two Receiver Operating adversarial variables of clinical sensitivity and N/ACharacteristic (ROC) Curve specificity. Clinical accuracy of the dichotomous test is therefore displayed for the entire spectrum of decision levels. A time interval that encompasses the entire testing Response Time minutes process to obtain an analytical result. 11
    • Section II. AWARD INFORMATIONMultiple awards are anticipated. The amount of resources made available under this BAAwill depend on the quality of the proposals received and the availability of funds.The Government reserves the right to select for negotiation all, some, one, or none of theproposals received in response to this solicitation, and to make awards withoutdiscussions with proposers. The Government also reserves the right to conductdiscussions if it is later determined to be necessary. If warranted, portions of resultingawards may be segregated into pre-priced options. Additionally, DARPA reserves theright 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 maybe opened with that proposer. The Government reserves the right to fund proposals inphases with options for continued work at the end of one or more of the phases.Awards under this BAA will be made to proposers on the basis of the evaluation criterialisted below (see section labeled “Application Review Information”, Sec. V.), andprogram balance to provide overall value to the Government. Proposals identified fornegotiation may result in a procurement contract, grant, cooperative agreement, or othertransaction depending upon the nature of the work proposed, the required degree ofinteraction between parties, and other factors. The Government reserves the right torequest any additional, necessary documentation once it makes the award instrumentdetermination. Such additional information may include but is not limited toRepresentations and Certifications. The Government reserves the right to removeproposers from award consideration should the parties fail to reach agreement on awardterms, conditions and cost/price within a reasonable time or the proposer fails to timelyprovide requested additional information.As of the date of publication of this BAA, DARPA expects to fund efforts with 6.2 and6.3 dollars. It is possible that responses to Technical Area 1 could be considered‘fundamental research’ i.e., basic and applied research in science and engineering, theresults of which ordinarily are published and shared broadly within the scientificcommunity, as distinguished from proprietary research and from industrial development,design, production, and product utilization the results of which ordinarily are restrictedfor proprietary or national security reasons. Technical Area 2 would not be fundamentalresearch. DARPA will do its best to provide the ideal type of funding to each performerbut is constrained by availability of funds. Therefore, DARPA anticipates restrictions onthe resultant research. Notwithstanding this statement of expectation, DARPA recognizesthat proposed research solutions could be of either a fundamental or restricted nature.Proposers should indicate in their proposal whether they believe the nature of theresearch included in their proposal is fundamental or restricted, with the understandingthat in all cases, the DARPA selected contracting officer shall have sole discretion toselect award instrument type and to negotiate all instrument provisions with selectees.See Section VI.B.4 for further information on fundamental, non-fundamental andrestricted research. 12
    • Section III. ELLIGIBILITY INFORMATIONA. Eligible ApplicantsAll responsible sources capable of satisfying the Governments needs may submit aproposal that shall be considered by DARPA. Historically Black Colleges andUniversities (HBCUs), Small Businesses, Small Disadvantaged Businesses and MinorityInstitutions (MIs) are encouraged to submit proposals and join others in submittingproposals; however, no portion of this announcement will be set aside for theseorganizations’ participation due to the impracticality of reserving discrete or severableareas of this research for exclusive competition among these entities.Federally Funded Research and Development Centers (FFRDCs) and Governmententities (Government/National laboratories, military educational institutions, etc.) aresubject to applicable direct competition limitations and cannot propose to this BAA inany capacity unless they address the following conditions. FFRDCs must clearlydemonstrate that the proposed work is not otherwise available from the private sectorAND must also provide a letter on letterhead from their sponsoring organization citingthe specific authority establishing their eligibility to propose to government solicitationsand compete with industry, and compliance with the associated FFRDC sponsoragreement and terms and conditions. This information is required for FFRDCs proposingto be prime or subcontractors. Government entities must clearly demonstrate that thework is not otherwise available from the private sector and provide writtendocumentation citing the specific statutory authority (as well as, where relevant,contractual authority) establishing their ability to propose to Government solicitations. Atthe present time, DARPA does not consider 15 U.S.C. 3710a to be sufficient legalauthority to show eligibility. While 10 U.S.C. 2539b may be the appropriate statutorystarting point for some entities, specific supporting regulatory guidance, together withevidence of agency approval, will still be required to fully establish eligibility. DARPAwill consider eligibility submissions on a case-by-case basis; however, the burden toprove eligibility for all team members rests solely with the Proposer.B. Procurement Integrity, Standards of Conduct, Ethical Considerations, and Organizational Conflicts of InterestCurrent federal employees are prohibited from participating in particular mattersinvolving conflicting financial, employment, and representational interests (18 USC 203,205, and 208). The DARPA Program Manager for this BAA is Dr. Timothy Broderick.Once the proposals have been received, and prior to the start of proposal evaluations, theGovernment will assess potential conflicts of interest and will promptly notify theProposer if any appear to exist. (Please note, the Government assessment does NOTaffect, offset, or mitigate the Proposer’s own duty to give full notice and plannedmitigation for all potential organizational conflicts, as discussed below.)Without prior approval or a waiver from the DARPA Director, in accordance with FAR9.503, a Contractor cannot simultaneously provide scientific, engineering, technicalassistance (SETA) or similar support and also be a technical performer. Therefore, allProposers as well as proposed subcontractors and consultants must affirm whether they 13
    • (their organizations and individual team members) are providing SETA or similar supportto any DARPA technical office(s) through an active contract or subcontract. Allaffirmations must state which office(s) the Proposer, subcontractor, consultant, orindividual supports and identify the prime contract number(s). Affirmations shall befurnished at the time of proposal submission. All facts relevant to the existence orpotential existence of organizational conflicts of interest (FAR 9.5) must be disclosed.The disclosure must include a description of the action the Proposer has taken orproposes to take to avoid, neutralize, or mitigate such conflict. If in the sole opinion ofthe Government after full consideration of the circumstances, a proposal fails to fullydisclose potential conflicts of interest and/or any identified conflict situation cannot beeffectively mitigated, the proposal will be rejected without technical evaluation andwithdrawn from further consideration for award.If a prospective Proposer believes that any conflict of interest exists or may exist(whether organizational or otherwise) or has questions on what constitutes a conflict ofinterest, the Proposer should promptly raise the issue with DARPA by sending his/hercontact information and a summary of the potential conflict to the BAA mailbox(DARPA-BAA-12-33@darpa.mil) before time and effort are expended in preparing aproposal and mitigation plan.C. Cost Sharing/MatchingCost sharing is not required for this particular program; however, cost sharing will becarefully considered where there is an applicable statutory condition relating to theselected funding instrument (e.g., for any Other Transactions under the authority of 10U.S.C. § 2371). Cost sharing is encouraged where there is a reasonable probability of apotential commercial application related to the proposed research and development effort.D. Other Eligibility CriteriaCollaborative EffortsCollaborative efforts/teaming are encouraged. A teaming website,http://teaming.sysplan.com/BAA-12-33/, has been established to facilitate the formationof teaming arrangements between interested parties. Specific content, communications,networking, and team formation are the sole responsibility of the participants. NeitherDARPA nor the Department of Defense (DOD) endorses the destination web site or theinformation and organizations contained therein, nor does DARPA or the DOD exerciseany responsibility at the destination. This website is provided consistent with the statedpurpose of this BAA.Section IV. APPLICATION AND SUBMISSION PACKAGEA. Address to Request Application PackageThis solicitation contains all information required to submit a proposal. No additionalforms, kits, or other materials are needed. This notice constitutes the total BAA. Noadditional information is available, nor will a formal Request for Proposal (RFP) or 14
    • additional solicitation regarding this announcement be issued. Requests for same will bedisregarded.B. Content and Form of Application Submission1. Security and Proprietary IssuesNOTE: If proposals are classified, the proposals must indicate the classification levelof not only the proposal itself, but also the anticipated award documentclassification level.The Government anticipates proposals submitted under this BAA will be unclassified.However, if a proposal is submitted as “Classified National Security Information” asdefined by Executive Order 13526, then the information must be marked and protected asthough classified at the appropriate classification level and then submitted to DARPA fora final classification determination.Security classification guidance via a DD Form 254, “DoD Contract SecurityClassification Specification,” will not be provided at this time, since DARPA is solicitingideas only. After reviewing the incoming proposals, if a determination is made that theaward instrument may result in access to classified information, a DD Form 254 will beissued and attached as part of the award.Proposers choosing to submit a classified proposal from other classified sources mustfirst receive permission from the respective Original Classification Authority in order touse their information in replying to this BAA. Applicable classification guide(s) shouldalso be submitted to ensure the proposal is protected at the appropriate classificationlevel.Although the Government anticipates proposals submitted under this BAA will beunclassified, classified submissions shall be appropriately and conspicuously markedwith the proposed classification level and declassification date. Submissions requiringDARPA to make a final classification determination shall be marked as follows:CLASSIFICATION DETERMINATION PENDING. Protect as though classified (insertthe recommended classification level: (e.g., Top Secret, Secret or Confidential)Classified submissions shall be in accordance with the following guidance:Confidential and Secret Collateral Information: Use classification and markingguidance provided by previously issued security classification guides, the InformationSecurity Regulation (DoD Manual 5200.01, Volume 1-4, dated 24 February 2012), andthe National Industrial Security Program Operating Manual (DoD 5220.22-M) whenmarking and transmitting information previously classified by another OriginalClassification Authority. Classified information at the Confidential and Secret levelmay be submitted via ONE of the two following methods: 15
    • 1. Hand-carried by an appropriately cleared and authorized courier to the DARPA CDR. Prior to traveling, the courier shall contact the DARPA CDR at 703-526-4052 to coordinate arrival and delivery. OR 2. Mailed via appropriate U.S. Postal Service methods (e.g., (USPS) Registered Mail or USPS Express Mail). All classified information will be enclosed in opaque inner and outer covers and double wrapped. The inner envelope shall be sealed and plainly marked with the assigned classification and addresses of both sender and addressee.The inner envelope shall be addressed to: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency ATTN: (MTO) Reference: (DARPA-BAA-12-33) 675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114The outer envelope shall be sealed with no identification as to the classification of itscontents and addressed to: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Security & Intelligence Directorate, Attn: CDR 675 North Randolph Street Arlington, VA 22203-2114All Top Secret materials: Top Secret information should be hand carried by anappropriately cleared and authorized courier to the DARPA CDR. Prior to traveling, thecourier shall contact the DARPA CDR at 703-526-4052 to coordinate arrival anddelivery.Special Access Program (SAP) Information: SAP information must be transmittedvia approved methods. Prior to transmitting SAP information, contact the DARPASAPCO at 703-526-4052 for instructions.Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI): SCI must be transmitted via approvedmethods. Prior to transmitting SCI, contact the DARPA Special Security Office (SSO)at 703-526-4052 for instructions.Proprietary Data: All proposals containing proprietary data should have the coverpage and each page containing proprietary data clearly marked as containingproprietary data. It is the Proposer’s responsibility to clearly define to the Governmentwhat is considered proprietary data.Proposers must have existing and in-place prior to execution of an award, approvedcapabilities (personnel and facilities) to perform research and development at the 16
    • classification level they propose. It is the policy of DARPA to treat all proposals ascompetitive information, and to disclose their contents only for the purpose ofevaluation. Proposals will not be returned. The original of each proposal received willbe retained at DARPA and all other non-required copies destroyed. A certification ofdestruction may be requested, provided the formal request is received at this officewithin 5 days after unsuccessful notification.For All Proposers:All administrative correspondence and questions on this solicitation, including requestsfor information on how to submit an abstract or full proposal to this BAA, should bedirected to the administrative address below; e-mail is preferred. DARPA-BAA-12-33@darpa.mil. DARPA intends to use electronic mail for correspondence regardingDARPA-BAA-12-33. Abstracts will not be submitted by fax or e-mail; any so sentwill be disregarded. DARPA encourages use of the Internet for retrieving the BAA andany other related information that may subsequently be provided.2. Abstract Submission InformationProposers are strongly encouraged to submit a proposal abstract in advance of a fullproposal. This informal procedure is intended to minimize unnecessary effort in proposalpreparation and review; no funding will be awarded for proposal abstract submissions.The time and date for submission of abstracts is specified in Section 6 (page 28) below.DARPA will acknowledge receipt of the submission and assign a control number thatshould be used in all further correspondence regarding the abstract.Proposal abstracts sent in response to DARPA-BAA-12-33 shall be submitted through T-FIMS. DO NOT SUBMIT PROPOSAL ABSTRACTS TO GRANTS.GOV OR VIAMAIL. See http://baat.darpa.mil for more information on how to request an account,upload proposal abstracts, and use the T-FIMS tool. Because proposers using T-FIMSmay encounter heavy traffic on the web server, and T-FIMS requires a registration andcertificate installation for all proposers, proposers should not wait until the day theproposal abstract is due to create an account in T-FIMS and submit the proposal.Upon review of the proposal abstract, DARPA will provide written feedback on thelikelihood of a full proposal being selected and the time and date for submission of a fullproposal, which may differ from the originally published date below.3. Abstract FormatAbstracts are strongly encouraged in advance of full proposals in order to providepotential proposers with a rapid response to minimize unnecessary effort. Abstractsshould follow the same general format as described for Volume I under PROPOSALFORMAT (see below), but include ONLY Sections I and II with significant focus ontechnical approach, key personnel, program metrics, and milestones. Abstracts shouldinclude enough detail to provide a representative overview of the proposed effort. Thecover sheet should be clearly marked “ABSTRACT” and the total length should notexceed 10 pages, excluding cover page. All pages shall be printed on 8-1/2 by 11 inch 17
    • paper with type not smaller than 12 point. Smaller font may be used for figures, tablesand charts. The page limitation for abstracts includes all figures, tables, and charts. Noformal transmittal letter is required for proposal abstracts. All abstracts must be written inEnglish.DARPA will respond to abstracts with a statement as to whether DARPA is interested inthe idea. DARPA will attempt to reply to abstracts via letter within thirty (30) calendardays of receipt. Should a proposer be discouraged from submitting a full proposal, theletter must contain feedback for the proposer regarding the rationale for the decision notto recommend a full proposal be submitted. Abstracts will be reviewed in the order theyare received. Early submissions of abstracts and full proposals are strongly encouragedbecause selections may be made at any time during the period of solicitation. Regardlessof DARPA’s response to an abstract, proposers may submit a full proposal. DARPA willreview all full proposals submitted using the published evaluation criteria and withoutregard to any comments resulting from the review of an abstract.4. Proposal Submission InformationProposers are required to submit proposals by the time and date specified in the BAA inorder to be considered during selections. Proposals shall not be submitted by fax or e-mail; any so sent will be disregarded. Proposals received after the date and timespecified in the BAA will be considered late, and as such, will not be evaluated.The typical proposal should express a consolidated effort in support of one or morerelated technical concepts or ideas. Disjointed efforts should not be included into a singleproposal.Restrictive notices notwithstanding, proposals may be handled, for administrativepurposes only, by a support contractor. This support contractor is prohibited fromcompetition in DARPA technical research and is bound by appropriate nondisclosurerequirements.Proposals not meeting the format described in this BAA may not be reviewed.For Proposer’s Requesting a Contract or Other Transaction Award InstrumentProposals sent in response to DARPA-BAA-12-33 must be submitted through T-FIMS(not including those who require a Grant). See http://baat.darpa.mil for more informationon how to request an account, upload proposals, and use the T-FIMS tool. Becauseproposers using T-FIMS may encounter heavy traffic on the web server, and T-FIMSrequires a registration and certificate installation for all proposers, proposers should notwait until the day the proposal is due to create an account in T-FIMS and submit theproposal. 18
    • For Proposers Requesting an Assistance Instrument (Grant or CooperativeAgreement):Grant or cooperative agreement proposals may only be submitted to DARPA throughGrants.gov or in hard-copy. Grant or cooperative agreement proposals will not besubmitted through any other means (including T-FIMS and other comparable systems). Ifproposers intend to use Grants.gov as their means of submission, then they must submittheir entire proposal through Grants.gov; applications cannot be submitted in part toGrants.gov and in part as a hard-copy. Proposers using the Grants.gov APPLY do notsubmit paper proposals in addition to the Grants.gov APPLY electronic submission.Proposers must complete the following steps in the order listed below before submittingproposals on Grants.gov (these steps are also detailed atwww.grants.gov/applicants/get_registered.jsp):  Proposers must obtain a DUNS number  Proposers must register their organization in the Central Contractor Registration (CCR): https://www.bpn.gov/ccr/default.aspx  Proposers must register the Authorized Organization Representative (AOR) in Grants.gov  Proposers must have the organization’s E-BIZ point of contact authorize the AOR to submit applications.Once Grants.gov has received a proposal submission, Grants.gov will send two emailmessages to advise proposers as to whether or not their proposals have been validated orrejected by the system; IT MAY TAKE UP TO TWO DAYS TO RECEIVE THESEEMAILS. The first email will confirm receipt of the proposal by the Grants.gov system;this email only confirms receipt, not acceptance, of the proposal. The second will indicatethat the application has been successfully validated by the system prior to transmission tothe grantor agency or has been rejected due to errors. If the proposal is validated, then theproposer has successfully submitted their proposal. If the proposal is rejected, theproposer will have to resubmit their proposal. Once the proposal is retrieved by DARPA,the proposer will receive a third email from Grants.gov. To avoid missing deadlines,proposers should submit their proposals in advance of the final proposal due date withsufficient time to receive confirmations and correct any errors in the submission processthrough Grants.gov. For more information on submitting proposals to Grants.gov, visitthe Grants.gov submissions page at: http://grants.gov/applicants/apply_for_grants.jsp.Proposers electing to submit grant or cooperative agreement proposals via grants.govmust complete the SF 424 R&R form (Application for Federal Assistance, Research andRelated) and the SF-LLL (if required). Please use the Attachments Form and upload, astwo separate documents, Volume I, Technical and Management Proposal and Volume II,the Cost Proposal, as well as any other documents require by the BAA (i.e., subcontractproposals). No other Grants.gov forms are required. Please note that Grants.gov does notaccept zipped or encrypted documents uploaded at attachments. Please follow thedocument made available on grants.gov as part of the solicitation entitled “Instructions 19
    • for Using Grants.gov to Apply for a Grant or Agreement from DARPA (Short Form),”dated 20 October 2011, for more information.If submitting hard-copy, an original and (4) copies of the proposal and (4) electroniccopies of the proposal on a CD-ROM shall be submitted to DARPA/MTO, 675 NorthRandolph Street, Arlington, VA 22203-2114 (Attn: DARPA-BAA-12-33) no later thantime and date specified in Section IV.7 Submission Dates and Times.Technical support for Grants.gov submissions may be reached at 1-800-518-4726 orsupport@grants.gov.5. Full Proposal FormatAll full proposals must be in the format given below. Nonconforming proposals may berejected without review. Proposals shall consist of only two volumes; additional files willnot be reviewed. All pages shall be printed on 8-1/2 by 11 inch paper with type notsmaller than 12 point. Smaller font may be used for figures, tables and charts. The pagelimitation for full proposals includes all figures, tables, and charts. Volume I, Technicaland Management Proposal, may include an attached bibliography of relevant technicalpapers or research notes (published and unpublished) which document the technical ideasand approach upon which the proposal is based. Copies of not more than three (3)relevant papers can be included with the submission as part of Volume I. Thebibliography and attached papers are not included in the page counts given below. Thesubmission of other supporting materials along with the proposals is strongly discouragedand will not be considered for review. Volume I shall not exceed 35 pages, excludingthe bibliography. Do not submit multiple documents for Volume I; combine Volume I,bibliography and relevant papers into one document for submission. All full proposalsmust be written in English. Volume I, Technical and Management ProposalSection I. AdministrativeA. Cover sheet to include: (1) BAA number (2) Technical area (3) Lead Organization submitting proposal (4) Type of business, selected among the following categories: “LARGE BUSINESS”, “SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS”, “OTHER SMALL BUSINESS”, “HBCU”, “MI”, “OTHER EDUCATIONAL”, OR “OTHER NONPROFIT” (5) Contractor’s reference number (if any) (6) Other team members (if applicable) and type of business for each (7) Proposal title 20
    • (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), total funds requested from DARPA, and the amount of cost share (if any) AND (10) Date proposal was submitted. (11) Total funds requested. Then break down total request by Phase and Performer (include sub breakdown too) and Phase duration (i.e. Phase I, XX months, $X.XX). The phase/performer totals added together should equal the total funds requested. B. Official transmittal letter. (Note: An official transmittal letter is not required when submitting a Proposal Abstract.)Section II. Summary of ProposalThis section provides an overview of the proposed work as well as an introduction to theassociated technical and management issues. Further elaboration will be provided inSection III. A. For the overall proposal, present a single executive summary that conveys the goal of the effort being proposed as well as the relevance of the work to the DARPA mission and its efforts to serve the needs of the DOD. B. For each Technical Area being proposed, provide an executive summary of innovative claims that briefly outlines the overall scientific and engineering merit of the technical approaches in comparison with existing technology and related on-going research. C. For each Technical Area being proposed, present a summary of the program schedule, milestones, and costs for each task and each year of the effort. (Note: Measurable milestones should capture key development points in tasks and should be clearly articulated and defined in time relative to start of effort). As applicable, the presented information must be delineated by the prime and major subcontractors, unique capabilities of team members, task responsibilities of team members, teaming strategy, total costs, and company cost share.Section III. Detailed Proposal InformationThis section provides the detailed discussion of the proposed work necessary to enable anin-depth review of the specific technical and managerial issues. Specific attention mustbe given to addressing both risk and payoff of the proposed work that make it desirable toDARPA. 21
    • A. Statement of Work (SOW): In this section of the proposal, the respondents must clearly define, in plain English and without proprietary information, all technical tasks and subtasks to be performed. The SOW must be structured so that each phase (if multiple phases are proposed) of each Technical Area is defined separately. The SOW must include, for each phase (if multiple phases are proposed) of each Technical Area, a table defining the program metrics to be achieved. There should be a direct correspondence between the structure and organization of the SOW and the program schedule. The following must be provided for each subtask defined in the SOW:  General description of the objective (for each defined task/activity);  Identification by name of the organizations and individuals contributing to and responsible for subtask execution, including sub-task lead investigator, team members, subcontractors, and consultants (this information should directly correspond to that shown in the program organizational chart provided in Section D);  Duration and start date relative to program kick-off (this information should directly correspond to that shown in the program schedule provided);  Completion criteria, such as a milestone, event, or product that defines its completion (this information should directly correspond to that shown in the program schedule provided)  Clearly defined deliverables (experimental results, analyses, reports, software, etc.) to be provided to the Government (this information should directly correspond to that shown in the program schedule provided)B. Innovative Claims, Technical Rationale and Approach: This section is the centerpiece of the proposal. For each Technical Area, proposers should succinctly respond to the following: (1) state clearly what you propose to do without using any jargon; (2) thoroughly and quantitatively describe, compare, and contrast all prior work (i.e., proposers must demonstrate a clear understanding of the present state-of-the-art); (3) identify what is new about your proposed approach along with the quantitative improvements expected over the existing state-of-the-art approaches (e.g., within the context of all prior work, indicate all advantages and disadvantages); (4) assuming program success, describe specific and significant DOD-related impacts or benefits. Sufficient technical detail must be provided in order to permit complete evaluation of the proposed technology and to assess its feasibility. The proposal must enumerate a clear set of metrics and assessment parameters associated with demonstrable quantitative measures of performance. The ultimate quantitative goals of the proposed work, which are achievable during the funded period, must also be identified. In this section, the proposers should also address mitigation of life-cycle and sustainment risks associated with transitioning intellectual property for the U.S. military applications, if applicable. See also Section VIII “Intellectual Property”. 22
    • C. Program Plan & Risk Assessment: In this section of the proposal, the respondents must clearly describe a detailed plan for accomplishing the goals of the BAA using the innovative approach(es) described in Section III-A. In addition, this section must include a thoughtful and thorough risk-assessment, in which the major risks associated with the proposed work are articulated. The program plan and the risk assessment must be prepared and presented separately for each Technical Area proposed. The program plan must: (1) provide a specific test plan which includes a through description of performance metrics and assessment parameters and how performance of each will be accurately demonstrated and measured using, (2) clearly state the proposed number and duration of each phase, (3) include a comprehensive timeline, (4) identify expected intermediate progress time points and values for all quantitative metrics and assessment parameters, and (5) identify all milestones. Proposals should clearly explain the technical approaches that will be employed to avoid major risk factors. Ample justification of the feasibility of these approaches must be included. All risk assessments must: (1) identify all major technical risks specific to the proposed approaches, (2) estimate the relative magnitude of the risks, (3) identify which milestones are subject to each risk, and (4) describe specific plans to mitigate each risk. For proposals that involve animal use this section must include a description of plans for Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) review and approval (see Section VI.B.3 below).D. Teaming and Management Plan: In this section of the proposal, the respondents must present separate comprehensive organization charts and plan for the program team. Each chart must clearly convey the following information for every person in each Technical Area proposed: (1) name, (2) affiliation, (3) abbreviated listing of all technical-area tasks they will work on with roles, responsibilities, and percent time indicated, (4) keywords identifying relevant expertise and/or unique capabilities. In addition, a narrative for each Technical Area must be provided that more thoroughly describes the programmatic relationship between investigators and the rationale for choosing this teaming strategy.E. Capabilities: In this section of the proposal, the respondents must identify the equipment and facilities required to achieve the final goals of each Technical Area separately. The respondents must also clearly identify which of the equipment and facilities are presently available to the team and which are not. If the equipment and facilities are presently available to the team, the respondents must identify their location, identify which investigator or facility is providing them, and describe their specifications and/or qualifications. If the equipment and facilities are not presently available to the team, the respondents must justify why this is the case and the expected cost to acquire them.F. Costs, Schedule, and Milestones: In this section of the proposal, the respondents must provide, for each Technical Area individually, a thorough description of the work schedule, milestones, and cost estimates of the proposed work. This information must be consistent with, and directly correspond to, that provided in 23
    • the SOW, the organization chart, the summary slides, and the full cost proposal. The cost of each task in each Technical Area must be delineated by the prime and subcontractor for each year of effort. The dependences and relationship between scheduled tasks and sub-tasks must also be made clear. For each task and sub- task, the lead investigator and major subcontractors involved in each must also be identified. The measurable milestones used to capture key development points for the proposed work, must clearly articulate and define interim quantitative targets at time points relative to start of the effort and not use proprietary information. Where the effort within a given Technical Area consists of multiple portions that could reasonably be partitioned for purposes of funding, these should be identified as options with separate cost estimates for each. G. Summary Slides: In this section of the proposal, the respondents must provide a set of four PowerPoint-type slides (i.e., landscape formatted for presentation) for each Technical Area. The slides should convey all information in a manner suitable for presentation to the senior management of DARPA. These slides should contain: Slide 1: Executive summary chart depicting: (1) main goal(s) of the effort, (2) proposed approach, (3) expected outcome, (4) total proposal cost. Slide 2: Quantitatively assess the state-of-the-art (i.e., what are the present methods and approaches to address the identified problems) and identify specific limitations and inadequacies. White-space charts that use two well-chosen axes to plot quantitative data from the literature are particularly powerful at identifying technical barriers, opportunities, and goals. Slide 3: Describe what is new and innovative about the proposed approach(es) and why they are likely to be successful. Identify program metrics and assessment parameters that will be used to measure progress. Slide 4: Identify specific risks and technical challenges that must be overcome in order to solve the problems being addressed using your approach(es).Section IV. Additional InformationA brief bibliography of relevant technical papers and research notes (published andunpublished) which document the technical ideas upon which the proposal is based.Copies of not more than three (3) relevant papers can be included in the submission. Thedocuments must be part of Volume I, not submitted as separate files. Volume II, Cost Proposal – {No Page Limit}A. Cover sheet to include: (1) BAA number; (2) Technical area; 24
    • (3) Lead Organization submitting proposal; (4) Type of business, selected among the following categories: “LARGE BUSINESS”, “SMALL DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS”, “OTHER SMALL BUSINESS”, “HBCU”, “MI”, “OTHER EDUCATIONAL”, OR “OTHER NONPROFIT”; (5) Contractor’s reference number (if any); (6) Other team members (if applicable) and type of business 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), and electronic mail (if available); (10) Award instrument requested: cost-plus-fixed-free (CPFF), cost-contract- no fee, cost sharing contract – no fee, or other type of procurement contract (specify), grant, cooperative agreement, or other transaction; (11) Place(s) and period(s) of performance; (12) Total proposed cost separated by basic award and option(s) (if any); (13) Name, address, and telephone number of the proposer’s cognizant Defense Contract Management Agency (DCMA) administration office (if known); (14) Name, address, and telephone number of the proposer’s cognizant Defense Contract Audit Agency (DCAA) audit office (if known); (15) Date proposal was prepared; (16) DUNS number; (17) TIN number; and (18) Cage Code; (19) Subcontractor Information; (20) Proposal validity period; and (21) Any Forward Pricing Rate Agreement, other such approved rate information, or such documentation that may assist in expediting negotiations (if available).B. Cost Proposal Summary Checklist (Attachment 1).C. Detailed Cost Proposal.The proposers’, to include eligible FFRDCs, cost volume shall provide cost and pricinginformation (See Note 1), or other than cost or pricing information if the total price isunder $700,000, in sufficient detail to substantiate the program price proposed (e.g.,realism and reasonableness). In doing so, the proposer shall provide a summary costbreakdown by Technical Area and a detailed cost breakdown by phase (if multiple phasesare proposed), by technical task/sub-task, and by month for each technical area proposed.The breakdown, for each proposed Technical Area, shall include, at a minimum, thefollowing major cost item along with associated backup documentation: 25
    • a. Direct Labor – a breakout clearly identifying the individual labor categories with associated labor hours and direct labor rates, as well as a detailed Basis- of-Estimate (BOE) narrative description of the methods used to estimate labor costs;b. Indirect Costs (See Note 2) – Including Fringe Benefits, Overhead, General and Administrative Expense, Cost of Money, Fee, etc. (must show base amount and rate);c. Travel – Provide the purpose of the trip, number of trips, number of days per trip, departure and arrival destinations, number of people, etc.;d. Other Direct Costs – Itemized with costs; Back-up documentation is to be submitted to support proposed costs;e. Material/Equipment – A priced Bill-of-Material (BOM) clearly identifying, for each item proposed, the quantity, unit price, the source of the unit price (i.e., vendor quote, engineering estimate, etc.), the type of property (i.e., material, equipment, special test equipment, information technology, etc.), and a cross-reference to the Statement of Work (SOW) task/s that require the item/s. At time of proposal submission, any item that exceeds $5,000 must be supported with basis-of-estimate (BOE) documentation such as a copy of catalog price lists, vendor quotes or a written engineering estimate (additional documentation may be required during negotiations, if selected). If seeking a procurement contract and items of Contractor Acquired Property are proposed, exclusive of material, the proposer shall clearly demonstrate that the inclusion of such items as Government Property is in keeping with the requirements of FAR Part 45.102.f. Consultants – If consultants are to be used, proposer must provide a copy of the consultant’s proposed SOW as well as a signed consultant agreement or other document which verifies the proposed loaded daily / hourly rate and any other proposed consultant costs (e.g. travel);g. Subcontracts – Itemization of all subcontracts. Additionally, the prime contractor is responsible for compiling and providing, as part of its proposal submission to the Government, subcontractor proposals prepared at the same level of detail as that required by the prime. Subcontractor proposals include Interdivisional Work Transfer Agreements (ITWA) or similar arrangements. If seeking a procurement contract, the prime contractor shall provide a cost reasonableness analysis of proposed subcontractor cost/prices. Such analysis shall indicate the extent to which the prime contractor has negotiated subcontract cost/prices and whether any such subcontracts are to be placed on a sole-source basis. All proprietary subcontractor proposal documentation which cannot be uploaded to TFIMS or Grants.gov as part of the proposer’s submission, shall be made immediately available to the Government, upon request, under separate cover (i.e., mail, electronic/email, etc.), either by the proposer or by the subcontractor organization – this does not relieve the proposer from the requirement to include , as part of their TFIMS submission, subcontract proposals that do not include proprietary pricing information (rates, factors, etc.); andh. Cost-Sharing – The source, nature, and amount of any industry cost-sharing; 26
    • i. Written justification required per Section VI(B)(4) pertaining to subcontracted effort being considered Contracted Fundamental Research.Proposers are encouraged to provide the aforementioned cost breakdown as an editableMS Excel spreadsheet, inclusive of calculations formulae, with tabs (material, travel,ODC’s) provided as necessary. The Government also requests and recommends that theCost Proposal include MS Excel file(s) that provide traceability between the Bases ofEstimate (BOEs) and the proposed costs across all elements and phases. This includes thecalculations and adjustments that are utilized to generate the Summary Costs from thesource labor hours, labor costs, material costs, etc. input data. It is requested that the costsand Subcontractor proposals be readily traceable to the Prime Cost Proposal in theprovided MS Excel file(s); however, this is not a requirement.Where the effort consists of multiple portions that could reasonably be partitioned forpurposes of funding, these should be identified as options with separate cost estimates.NOTE: for IT and equipment purchases, include a letter stating why the proposer cannotprovide the requested resources from its own funding.The cost proposal should include identification of pricing assumptions of which mayrequire incorporation into the resulting award instrument (i.e., use of GovernmentFurnished Property/Facilities/Information, access to Government Subject Matter Experts,etc.).Supporting cost and pricing information in sufficient detail to substantiate the summarycost estimates in B. above. Include a description of the method used to estimate costs andsupporting documentation.Note 1: “cost or pricing data” as defined in FAR Subpart 15.4 shall be required if theproposer is seeking a procurement contract award of $700,000 or greater unless theproposer requests an exception from the requirement to submit cost or pricing data. “Costor pricing data” are not required if the proposer proposes an award instrument other thana procurement contract (e.g., a grant, cooperative agreement, or other transaction.) Thoseproposing a grant or cooperative agreement may follow/use the applicationinstructions/form templates (i.e., DARPA BAA Form Package) provided as part of theBAA posting to grants.gov; however, the costing details requested above should beprovided to the maximum extent possible.PLEASE NOTE, PROPOSERS ARE CAUTIONED THAT EVALUATION RATINGSMAY BE LOWERED AND/OR PROPOSALS REJECTED IF PROPOSALPREPARATION (PROPOSAL FORMAT, CONTENT, ETC.) AND/OR SUBMITTALINSTRUCTIONS ARE NOT FOLLOWED. 27
    • Submission Dates and Times6. Proposal Abstract Due DateThe proposal abstract shall be submitted to DARPA/MTO via T-FIMS (see instructionsabove) on or before 3:00 p.m., local time (Eastern Standard), April 18, 2012. Proposalabstracts received after this deadline WILL NOT be reviewed. Any proposal abstractssubmitted via fax, e-mail, or mailed in hard copy will be disregarded.7. Full Proposal Due DateThe full proposal shall be submitted (see instructions above) to DARPA on or before3:00 p.m. local time (Eastern Standard), June 28, 2012. Proposals received after thisdeadline WILL NOT be reviewed.DARPA will post a consolidated Question and Answer document (FAQ) onhttp://www.darpa.mil/Opportunities/Solicitations/MTO_Solicitations.aspx; The link willdirect you to the IVN:Dx overview page and the FAQ will be posted in a PDF accessibledocument under the “Important Links” section. In order to allow the Governmentadequate time to provide a response to questions prior to the proposal due date, proposersare encouraged to submit their questions to DARPA-BAA-12-33@darpa.mil no later thanJune 14, 2012.DARPA will acknowledge receipt of complete submissions via email and assign controlnumbers that should be used in all further correspondence regarding proposals.8. Intergovernmental ReviewNot Applicable.9. Funding RestrictionsAwards will allow reimbursement of pre award costs.10. Other Submission RequirementsSection V. APPLICATION REVIEW INFORMATIONA. Evaluation CriteriaProposals will be evaluated using the following criteria, listed in descending order ofimportance: (a) Overall Scientific and Technical Merit; (b) Potential Contribution andRelevance to the DARPA Mission; (c) Realism of Proposed Schedule; (d) Proposer’sCapabilities and/or Related Experience; (e) Plans and Capabilities to AccomplishTechnology Transition; and (f) Cost Realism(a) Overall Scientific and Technical MeritThe proposed technical approach is feasible, achievable, complete and supported by aproposed technical team that has the expertise and experience to accomplish the proposed 28
    • tasks. Task descriptions and associated technical elements provided are complete and in alogical sequence with all proposed deliverables clearly defined such that a final outcomethat achieves the goal can be expected as a result of award. The proposal identifies majortechnical risks and planned mitigation efforts are clearly defined and feasible.(b) Potential Contribution and Relevance to the DARPA MissionThe potential contributions of the proposed effort with relevance to the nationaltechnology base will be evaluated. Specifically, DARPA’s mission is to maintain thetechnological superiority of the U.S. military and prevent technological surprise fromharming our national security by sponsoring revolutionary, high-payoff research thatbridges the gap between fundamental discoveries and their application.(c) Realism of Proposed ScheduleThe proposer’s abilities to aggressively pursue performance metrics in the shortesttimeframe and to accurately account for that timeframe will be evaluated, as well asproposer’s ability to understand, identify, and mitigate any potential risk in schedule.(d) Proposer’s Capabilities and/or Related ExperienceThe proposers prior experience in similar efforts must clearly demonstrate an ability todeliver products that meet the proposed technical performance within the proposedbudget and schedule. The proposed team has the expertise to manage the cost andschedule. Similar efforts completed/ongoing by the proposer in this area are fullydescribed including identification of other Government sponsors.(e) Plans and Capability to Accomplish Technology Transition The proposer will be evaluated on their capability to transition the technology to theresearch, industrial, and/or operational military communities in such a way as to enhanceU.S. defense. In addition, the evaluation will take into consideration the extent to whichthe proposed intellectual property (IP) rights will potentially impact the Government’sability to transition the technology.(f) Cost RealismThe objective of this criterion is to establish that the proposed costs are realistic for thetechnical and management approach offered, as well as to determine the proposer’spractical understanding of the effort. The proposal will be reviewed to determine if thecosts proposed are based on realistic assumptions, reflect a sufficient understanding ofthe technical goals and objectives of the BAA, and are consistent with the proposer’stechnical approach (to include the proposed Statement of Work). At a minimum, this willinvolve review, at the prime and subcontract level, of the type and number of labor hoursproposed per task as well as the types and kinds of materials, equipment and fabricationcosts proposed. It is expected that the effort will leverage all available relevant priorresearch in order to obtain the maximum benefit from the available funding. For effortswith a likelihood of commercial application, appropriate direct cost sharing may be a 29
    • positive factor in the evaluation. The evaluation criterion recognizes that undue emphasison cost may motivate proposers to offer low-risk ideas with minimum uncertainty and tostaff the effort with junior personnel in order to be in a more competitive posture.DARPA discourages such cost strategies.B. Review and Selection ProcessEvaluation of proposals will be accomplished through a scientific/technical review ofeach proposal. Proposals will not be evaluated against each other since they are notsubmitted in accordance with a common work statement. DARPA’s intent is to reviewproposals as soon as possible after they arrive; however, proposals may be reviewedperiodically for administrative reasons.Award(s) will be made to proposers whose proposals are determined to be the mostadvantageous to the Government, all factors considered, including the potentialcontributions of the proposed work to the overall research program and the availabilityof funding for the effort. DARPA’s intent is to review proposals as soon as possibleafter they arrive; however, proposals may be reviewed periodically for administrativereasons.It is the policy of DARPA to ensure impartial, equitable, comprehensive proposalevaluations and to select the source (or sources) whose offer meets the Governmentstechnical, policy, and programmatic goals. Pursuant to FAR 35.016, the primary basis forselecting proposals for acceptance shall be technical, importance to agency programs, andfund availability. In order to provide the desired evaluation, qualified Governmentpersonnel will conduct reviews and (if necessary) convene panels of experts in theappropriate areas.Proposals will not be evaluated against each other since they are not submitted inaccordance with a common work statement. For evaluation purposes, a proposal is thedocument described in “Proposal Information”, Section IV.B.. Other supporting orbackground materials submitted with the proposal will be considered for the reviewersconvenience only and not considered as part of the proposal.Restrictive notices notwithstanding, proposals may be handled for administrativepurposes by support contractors. These support contractors are prohibited fromcompetition in DARPA technical research and are bound by appropriate non-disclosurerequirements.Subject to the restrictions set forth in FAR 37.203(d), input on technical aspects of theproposals may be solicited by DARPA from non-Government consultants /experts whoare strictly bound by the appropriate non-disclosure requirements.It is the policy of DARPA to treat all proposals as competitive information and todisclose their contents only for the purpose of evaluation. No proposals will be returned.After proposals have been evaluated and selections made, the original of each proposalreceived will be retained at DARPA and all other copies will be destroyed. 30
    • Section VI. AWARD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATIONA. Selection NoticesAs soon as the evaluation of a proposal is complete, the proposer will be notified that 1)the proposal has been selected for funding pending contract negotiations, or 2) theproposal has not been selected. These official notifications will be sent via e-mail to theTechnical POC identified on the proposal coversheet.B. Administrative and National Policy Requirements1. Meeting and Travel RequirementsThere will be a program kickoff meeting and all key participants are required to attendand anticipate a registration fee. Performers should also anticipate regular program-widePI Meetings and periodic site visits at the Program Manager’s discretion.2. Human UseDARPA does not anticipate the need for human subjects as a result of this BAA. Allresearch involving human subjects, to include use of human biological specimens andhuman data, selected for funding must comply with the federal regulations for humansubject protection. Further, research involving human subjects that is conducted orsupported by the DoD must comply with 32 CFR 219, Protection of Human Subjectshttp://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_07/32cfr219_07.html) and DoD Directive3216.02, Protection of Human Subjects and Adherence to Ethical Standards in DoD-Supported Research (http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/pdf/321602p.pdf).Institutions awarded funding for research involving human subjects must providedocumentation of a current Assurance of Compliance with Federal regulations for humansubject protection, for example a Department of Health and Human Services, Office ofHuman Research Protection Federal Wide Assurance (http://www.hhs.gov/ohrp). Allinstitutions engaged in human subject research, to include subcontractors, must also havea valid Assurance. In addition, personnel involved in human subjects research mustprovide documentation of completing appropriate training for the protection of humansubjects.For all proposed research that will involve human subjects in the first year or phase of theproject, the institution must provide evidence of or a plan for review by an InstitutionalReview Board (IRB) upon final proposal submission to DARPA. The IRB conducting thereview must be the IRB identified on the institution’s Assurance. The protocol, separatefrom the proposal, must include a detailed description of the research plan, studypopulation, risks and benefits of study participation, recruitment and consent process,data collection, and data analysis. Consult the designated IRB for guidance on writing theprotocol. The informed consent document must comply with federal regulations (32 CFR219.116). A valid Assurance along with evidence of appropriate training all investigatorsshould all accompany the protocol for review by the IRB.In addition to a local IRB approval, a headquarters-level human subjects regulatoryreview and approval is required for all research conducted or supported by the DoD. The 31
    • Army, Navy, or Air Force office responsible for managing the award can provideguidance and information about their component’s headquarters-level review process.Note that confirmation of a current Assurance and appropriate human subjects protectiontraining is required before headquarters-level approval can be issued.The amount of time required to complete the IRB review/approval process may varydepending on the complexity of the research and/or the level of risk to study participants.Ample time should be allotted to complete the approval process. The IRB approvalprocess can last between one to three months, followed by a DoD review that could lastbetween three to six months. No DoD/DARPA funding can be used towards humansubjects research until ALL approvals are granted.3. Animal UseAny Recipient performing research, experimentation, or testing involving the use ofanimals shall comply with the rules on animal acquisition, transport, care, handling, anduse in: (i) 9 CFR parts 1-4, Department of Agriculture rules that implement theLaboratory Animal Welfare Act of 1966, as amended, (7 U.S.C. 2131-2159); (ii) theguidelines described in National Institutes of Health Publication No. 86-23, "Guide forthe Care and Use of Laboratory Animals"; (iii) DoD Directive 3216.01, “Use ofLaboratory Animals in DoD Program.”For submissions containing animal use, proposals should briefly describe plans forInstitutional Animal Care and Use Committee (IACUC) review and approval. Animalstudies in the program will be expected to comply with the PHS Policy on Humane Careand Use of Laboratory Animals, available at http://grants.nih.gov/grants/olaw/olaw.htm.All Recipients must receive approval by a DoD certified veterinarian, in addition to anIACUC approval. No animal studies may be conducted using DoD/DARPA funding untilthe USAMRMC Animal Care and Use Review Office (ACURO) or other appropriateDoD veterinary office(s) grant approval. As a part of this secondary review process, theRecipient will be required to complete and submit an ACURO Animal Use Appendix,which may be found at:https://mrmc-www.army.mil/index.cfm?pageid=Research_Protections.acuro&rn=1.4. Publication ApprovalIt is the policy of the Department of Defense that the publication of products offundamental research will remain unrestricted to the maximum extent possible. Thedefinition of Contracted Fundamental Research is: “Contracted Fundamental Research includes [research performed under] grants and contracts that are (a) funded by budget category 6.1 (Basic Research), whether performed by universities or industry or (b) funded by budget category 6.2 (Applied Research) and performed on-campus at a university. The research shall not be considered fundamental in those rare and exceptional circumstances where the applied research effort presents a high likelihood of disclosing performance characteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies 32
    • that are unique and critical to defense, and where agreement on restrictions have been recorded in the contract or grant.” Such research is referred to by DARPA as “Restricted Research.”Pursuant to DoD policy, research performed under grants and contracts that are (a)funded by budget category 6.2 (Applied Research) and NOT performed on-campus at auniversity or (b) funded by budget category 6.3 (Advanced Research) does not meet thedefinition of fundamental research. Publication restrictions will be placed on all suchresearch.It is anticipated that awards for both Fundamental Research (Phase 1, UniversityPerformers) and Non-Fundamental Research (Phase 2, all performers) may bemade as a result of this BAA. Appropriate clauses will be included in resultant awardsfor Non-fundamental Research to prescribe publication requirements and otherrestrictions, as appropriate. DARPA does not anticipate applying publication restrictionsof any kind to Fundamental Research to each individual award that may result from thisBAA.Proposers are advised if they propose grants or cooperative agreements, DARPA mayelect to award other award instruments due to the need to apply publication or otherrestrictions. DARPA will make this election if it determines that the research resultingfrom the proposed program will present a high likelihood of disclosing performancecharacteristics of military systems or manufacturing technologies that are unique andcritical to defense. Any award resulting from such a determination will include arequirement for DARPA permission before publishing any information or results on theprogram and will be considered Restricted Research.For certain research projects, it may be possible that although the research beingperformed by the Prime Contractor is Restricted Research, a subcontractor may beconducting Contracted Fundamental Research. In those cases, it is the Prime Contractor’sresponsibility to explain in their proposal why its subcontractor’s effort is ContractedFundamental Research.The following same or similar provision will be incorporated into any resultant RestrictedResearch or Non-Fundamental Research procurement contract or other transaction: There shall be no dissemination or publication, except within and between the Contractor and any subcontractors, of information developed under this contract or contained in the reports to be furnished pursuant to this contract without prior written approval of DARPA’s Public Release Center (DARPA/PRC). All technical reports will be given proper review by appropriate authority to determine which Distribution Statement is to be applied prior to the initial distribution of these reports by the Contractor. With regard to subcontractor proposals for Contracted Fundamental Research, papers resulting from unclassified contracted fundamental research are exempt from prepublication controls and this review requirement, pursuant to DoD Instruction 5230.27 dated October 6, 1987. 33
    • When submitting material for written approval for open publication, the Contractor/Awardee must submit a request for public release to the PRC and include the following information: 1) Document Information: document title, document author, short plain-language description of technology discussed in the material (approx. 30 words), number of pages (or minutes of video) and document type (briefing, report, abstract, article, or paper); 2) Event Information: event type (conference, principle investigator meeting, article or paper), event date, desired date for DARPAs approval; 3) DARPA Sponsor: DARPA Program Manager, DARPA office, and contract number; and 4) Contractor/Awardees Information: POC name, e-mail and phone. Allow four weeks for processing; due dates under four weeks require a justification. Unusual electronic file formats may require additional processing time. Requests can be sent either via e-mail to prc@darpa.mil or telephone (571) 218-4235. Refer to: http://www.darpa.mil/NewsEvents/Public_Release_Center/Public_Release_Cente r.aspx for information about DARPAs public release process.5. Export ControlThe following clause will be included in all procurement contracts, and may be includedin Other Transactions as deemed appropriate:(a) Definition. “Export-controlled items,” as used in this clause, means items subject to the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) (15 CFR Parts 730-774) or the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) (22 CFR Parts 120-130). The term includes: (1) “Defense items,” defined in the Arms Export Control Act, 22 U.S.C. 2778(j)(4)(A), as defense articles, defense services, and related technical data, and further defined in the ITAR, 22 CFR Part 120. (2) “Items,” defined in the EAR as “commodities”, “software”, and “technology,” terms that are also defined in the EAR, 15 CFR 772.1.(b) The Contractor shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations regarding export-controlled items, including, but not limited to, the requirement for contractors to register with the Department of State in accordance with the ITAR. The Contractor shall consult with the Department of State regarding any questions relating to compliance with the ITAR and shall consult with the Department of Commerce regarding any questions relating to compliance with the EAR.(c) The Contractors responsibility to comply with all applicable laws and regulations regarding export-controlled items exists independent of, and is not established or limited by, the information provided by this clause.(d) Nothing in the terms of this contract adds, changes, supersedes, or waives any of the requirements of applicable Federal laws, Executive orders, and regulations, including but not limited to: 34
    • (1) The Export Administration Act of 1979, as amended (50 U.S.C. App. 2401, et seq.); (2) The Arms Export Control Act (22 U.S.C. 2751, et seq.); (3) The International Emergency Economic Powers Act (50 U.S.C. 1701, et seq.); (4) The Export Administration Regulations (15 CFR Parts 730-774); (5) The International Traffic in Arms Regulations (22 CFR Parts 120-130); (6) (6) Executive Order 13222, as extended;(e) The Contractor shall include the substance of this clause, including this paragraph (e), in all subcontracts.6. SubcontractingPursuant to Section 8(d) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(d)), it is the policy ofthe Government to enable small business and small disadvantaged business concerns tobe considered fairly as subcontractors to contractors performing work or renderingservices as prime contractors or subcontractors under Government contracts, and toassure that prime contractors and subcontractors carry out this policy. Each proposer whosubmits a contract proposal and includes subcontractors is required to submit asubcontracting plan in accordance with FAR 19.702(a) (1) and (2) should do so with theirproposal. The plan format is outlined in FAR 19.704.7. Electronic and Information TechnologyIn compliance with Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. 794d) and FARSubpart 39.2, if it is anticipated that this BAA will be used to procure electronic orinformation (EIT) technology, and the exceptions listed in FAR Subpart 39.204 do notapply, the following language must be included in the BAA:All electronic and information technology acquired through this solicitation must satisfythe accessibility requirements of Section 508 of the Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. 794d)and FAR Subpart 39.2. Each proposer who submits a proposal involving the creation orinclusion of electronic and information technology must ensure that Federal employeeswith disabilities will have access to and use of information that is comparable to theaccess and use by Federal employees who are not individuals with disabilities andmembers of the public with disabilities seeking information or services from DARPAwill have access to and use of information and data that is comparable to the access anduse of information and data by members of the public who are not individuals withdisabilities.8. Employment Eligibility VerificationAs per FAR 22.1802, recipients of FAR-based procurement contracts must enroll asFederal Contractors in E-verify and use E-Verify to verify employment eligibility of allemployees assigned to the award. All resultant contracts from this solicitation willinclude FAR 52.222-54, “Employment Eligibility Verification.” This clause will not beincluded in grants, cooperative agreements, or Other Transactions. 35
    • 9. Central Contractor Registration (CCR) and Universal Identifier RequirementsUnless the proposer is exempt from this requirement, as per FAR 4.1102 or 2 CFR25.110 as applicable, all proposers must be registered in the Central ContractorRegistration (CCR) and have a valid Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS) numberprior to submitting a proposal. Information on CCR registration is available athttp://www.ccr.gov. All proposers must maintain an active CCR registration with currentinformation at all times during which they have an active Federal award or proposalunder consideration by DARPA. All proposers must provide the DUNS number in eachproposal they submit.DARPA cannot make an assistance award to a proposer until the proposer has provided avalid DUNS number and has maintained an active CCR registration with currentinformation.10. Reporting Executive Compensation and First-Tier Subcontract AwardsThe FAR clause 52.204-10, “Reporting Executive Compensation and First-TierSubcontract Awards,” will be used in all procurement contracts valued at $25,000 ormore. A similar award term will be used in all grants and cooperative agreements.11. Updates of Information Regarding Responsibility MattersFAR clause 52.209-9, Updates of Publicly Available Information RegardingResponsibility Matter, will be included in all contracts valued at $500,000 where thecontractor has current active Federal contracts and grants with total value greater than$10,000,000.12. Representation by Corporations Regarding Unpaid Delinquent Tax Liability or a Felony Conviction Under Any Federal Law Each proposer must complete and return the representations in paragraph (b) below with their proposal submission.(a) In accordance with sections 8124 and 8125 of Division A of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2012 (Pub. L. 112-74) none of the funds made available by that Act may be used to enter into a contract with any corporation that – (1) Has any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all judicial and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority responsible for collecting the tax liability, unless the agency has considered suspension or debarment of the corporation and made a determination that this further action is not necessary to protect the interests of the Government. (2) Was convicted of a felony criminal violation under any Federal law within the preceding 24 months, where the awarding agency is aware of the conviction, 36
    • unless the agency has considered suspension or debarment of the corporation and made a determination that this action is not necessary to protect the interests of the Government.(b) The Offeror represents that – (1) It is [ ] is not [ ] a corporation that has any unpaid Federal tax liability that has been assessed, for which all judicial and administrative remedies have been exhausted or have lapsed, and that is not being paid in a timely manner pursuant to an agreement with the authority responsible for collecting the tax liability, (2) It is [ ] is not [ ] a corporation that was convicted of a felony criminal violated under Federal law within the preceding 24 months.13. Cost Accounting Standards Notices and Certification (Deviation 2012-00003 (JAN 2012)As per FAR 52.230-2, amended by Deviation 2012-00003 (JAN 2012), any procurementcontract in excess of $700,000 resulting from this solicitation will be subject to therequirements of the Cost Accounting Standards Board (48 CFR Chapter 99), except thosecontracts which are exempt as specified in 48 CFR 9903.201-1. Any offeror submitting aproposal which, if accepted, will result in a cost accounting standards (CAS) compliantcontract, must submit representations and a Disclosure Statement as required by 48 CFR9903.202 detailed in FAR 52.230-2.C. ReportingThe number and types of reports will be specified in the award document, but willinclude as a minimum quarterly financial status reports. The reports shall be prepared andsubmitted in accordance with the procedures contained in the award document andmutually agreed on before award. Reports and briefing material will also be required asappropriate to document progress in accomplishing program metrics. A Final Report thatsummarizes the project and tasks will be required at the conclusion of the performanceperiod for the award, notwithstanding the fact that the research may be continued under afollow-on vehicle.D. Electronic Systems1. Representations and CertificationsIn accordance with FAR 4.1201, prospective proposers shall complete electronic annualrepresentations and certifications at http://orca.bpn.gov2. Wide Area Work Flow (WAWF)Unless using another approved electronic invoicing system, performers will be requiredto submit invoices for payment directly via the Internet/WAWF at http://wawf.eb.mil.Registration to WAWF will be required prior to any award under this BAA. 37
    • 3. i-EdisonThe award document for each proposal selected for funding will contain a mandatoryrequirement for patent reports and notifications to be submitted electronically through i-Edison (http://s-edison.info.nih.gov/iEdison)Section VII. AGENCY CONTACTSThe preferred method of communication is e-mail.Administrative, technical or contractual questions should be sent via e-mail to DARPA-BAA-12-33@darpa.mil. All requests must include the name, email address, and phonenumber of a point of contact. The technical POC for this solicitation/ is: Dr. Timothy Broderick, Program Manager DARPA/MTO DARPA-BAA-12-33@darpa.mil The BAA Coordinator for this effort can be reached at electronic mail: DARPA-BAA-12-33@darpa.milSection VIII. OTHER INFORMATIONA. Intellectual Property Procurement Contract Proposers1. Noncommercial Items (Technical Data and Computer Software)Proposers responding to this BAA requesting a procurement contract to be issued underthe FAR/DFARS shall identify all noncommercial technical data and noncommercialcomputer software that it plans to generate, develop, and/or deliver under any proposedaward instrument in which the Government will acquire less than unlimited rights, and toassert specific restrictions on those deliverables. Proposers shall follow the format underDFARS 252.227-7017 for this stated purpose. In the event that proposers do not submitthe list, the Government will assume that it automatically has “unlimited rights” to allnoncommercial technical data and noncommercial computer software generated,developed, and/or delivered under any award instrument, unless it is substantiated thatdevelopment of the noncommercial technical data and noncommercial computer softwareoccurred with mixed funding. If mixed funding is anticipated in the development ofnoncommercial technical data and noncommercial computer software generated,developed, and/or delivered under any award instrument, then proposers should identifythe data and software in question, as subject to Government Purpose Rights (GPR). Inaccordance with DFARS 252.227-7013 Rights in Technical Data - NoncommercialItems, and DFARS 252.227-7014 Rights in Noncommercial Computer Software andNoncommercial Computer Software Documentation, the Government will automaticallyassume that any such GPR restriction is limited to a period of five (5) years in accordancewith the applicable DFARS clauses, at which time the Government will acquire“unlimited rights” unless the parties agree otherwise. Proposers are admonished that theGovernment will use the list during the evaluation process to evaluate the impact of any 38
    • identified restrictions and may request additional information from the proposer, as may be necessary, to evaluate the proposer’s assertions. If no restrictions are intended, then the proposer should state “NONE.” It is noted an assertion of “NONE” indicates that the Government has “unlimited rights” to all noncommercial technical data and noncommercial computer software delivered under the award instrument, in accordance with the DFARS provisions cited above. Failure to provide full information may result in a determination that the proposal is not compliant with the BAA – resulting in nonselectability of the proposal. A sample list for complying with this request is as follows: NONCOMMERCIAL Technical Data Summary of Basis for Assertion Asserted Rights Name of Person AssertingComputer Software To Intended Use in the Category Restrictions be Furnished With Conduct of the Restrictions Research (LIST) (NARRATIVE) (LIST) (LIST) (LIST) 2. Commercial Items (Technical Data and Computer Software) Proposers responding to this BAA requesting a procurement contract to be issued under the FAR/DFARS shall identify all commercial technical data and commercial computer software that may be embedded in any noncommercial deliverables contemplated under the research effort, along with any applicable restrictions on the Government’s use of such commercial technical data and/or commercial computer software. In the event that proposers do not submit the list, the Government will assume that there are no restrictions on the Government’s use of such commercial items. The Government may use the list during the evaluation process to evaluate the impact of any identified restrictions and may request additional information from the proposer, as may be necessary, to evaluate the proposer’s assertions. If no restrictions are intended, then the proposer should state “NONE.” Failure to provide full information may result in a determination that the proposal is not compliant with the BAA – resulting in nonselectability of the proposal. A sample list for complying with this request is as follows: COMMERCIAL Technical Data Summary of Basis for Assertion Asserted Rights Name of Person AssertingComputer Software To Intended Use in the Category Restrictions be Furnished With Conduct of the Restrictions Research (LIST) (NARRATIVE) (LIST) (LIST) (LIST) 39
    • B. Non-Procurement Contract Proposers – Noncommercial and Commercial Items (Technical Data and Computer Software)Proposers responding to this BAA requesting a Grant, Cooperative Agreement,Technology Investment Agreement, or Other Transaction for Prototype shall follow theapplicable rules and regulations governing these various award instruments, but in allcases should appropriately identify any potential restrictions on the Government’s use ofany Intellectual Property contemplated under those award instruments in question. Thisincludes both Noncommercial Items and Commercial Items. Although not required,proposers may use a format similar to that described in Paragraphs 1.a and 1.b above. TheGovernment may use the list during the evaluation process to evaluate the impact of anyidentified restrictions, and may request additional information from the proposer, as maybe necessary, to evaluate the proposer’s assertions. If no restrictions are intended, thenthe proposer should state “NONE.” Failure to provide full information may result in adetermination that the proposal is not compliant with the BAA – resulting innonselectability of the proposal.C. All Proposers – PatentsInclude documentation proving your ownership of or possession of appropriate licensingrights to all patented inventions (or inventions for which a patent application has beenfiled) that will be utilized under your proposal for the DARPA program. If a patentapplication has been filed for an invention that your proposal utilizes, but the applicationhas not yet been made publicly available and contains proprietary information, you mayprovide only the patent number, inventor name(s), assignee names (if any), filing date,filing date of any related provisional application, and a summary of the patent title,together with either: 1) a representation that you own the invention, or 2) proof ofpossession of appropriate licensing rights in the invention.All Proposers – Intellectual Property RepresentationsProvide a good faith representation that you either own or possess appropriate licensingrights to all other intellectual property that will be utilized under your proposal for theDARPA program. Additionally, proposers shall provide a short summary for each itemasserted with less than unlimited rights that describes the nature of the restriction and theintended use of the intellectual property in the conduct of the proposed researchD. Other TransactionsDARPA is able to obtain its research support through a variety of legal instruments andflexible arrangements, to include use of Other Transaction Agreements (OTAs). OTAsare potentially applicable to a wide variety of DARPA programs. They are likely to beparticularly applicable to support dual-use technologies (those with commercialnonmilitary potential as well as potential military applications), consortia or multi-partyagreements, and work supported by multiple funding sources. Because OTAs are nottraditional procurement contracts, DARPA is not required to include the traditional FARand DFARS clauses in these agreements, but is free to negotiate provisions that aremutually agreeable to both the Government and the consortium of companies entering 40
    • into the agreement. Proposals may, but need not, state that an OTA rather than a contractor grant is desired. Furthermore, DARPA does not enter into OTAs when a contract orgrant is feasible or appropriate. See FAR 35.003 for Government-wide policy on use ofcontracts for research and development. Potential proposers are encouraged to visit theDARPA Contracts Management Office home page ( http://www.darpa.mil/cmo/ ) formore information regarding the use of OTAs. Included at this site is a web version of theInstitute for Defense Analyses study, “Participant Views of Advanced Research ProjectsAgency ‘Other Transactions” ( http://www.darpa.mil/body/d1793/index.html ). Thisstudy was published in November 1995, and released in January 1996. It presents theresults of a survey of organizations that have participated in DARPA research projectsconducted with "other transactions."There are two types of commonly used OTAs awarded pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 2371: OtherTransactions for Research and Other Transactions for Prototype Projects (a.k.a “845s”).Of these two types of OTAs, the one most pertinent to this BAA is referred to as aTechnology Investment Agreement (TIA) and is issued in accordance with Part 37 of theDepartment of Defense Grant and Agreement Regulations (DODGARs)( http://www.dtic.mil/whs/directives/corres/html/321006r.htm ). TIAs are assistanceinstruments used to stimulate or support research designed to: (a) reduce barriers tocommercial firm’s participation in defense research, to give the Department of Defenserelationships among performers in both the defense and commercial sectors of thattechnology and industrial base; and (c) stimulate performers to develop, use, anddisseminate improved practices. As a matter of DOD policy, a TIA may be awarded onlywhen one or more for-profit firms are to be involved either in the (1) performance of theresearch project; or (2) the commercial application of the research results (e.g.commercial transition partner). Also of importance is the requirement that, to themaximum extent practicable, the non-Federal parties carrying out a research projectunder a TIA are to provide at least half of the costs of the project – this being a statutorycondition for any TIA, or Other Transaction Agreement in general, issued under theauthority of 10 U.S.C. 2371. Such instruments can involve a single performer or multipleperformers participating as a consortium (which are not required to operate as a separatelegal entity) and the Generally Accepted Accounting Principle (GAAP) applies ratherthan the FAR or DFARS cost principles.For information on 845 Other Transaction Authority for Prototypes (OTA) agreements,refer to http://www.darpa.mil/cmo/other_trans.html. All proposers requesting an 845Other Transaction Authority for Prototypes (OTA) agreement must include a detailed listof milestones. Each such milestone must include the following: milestone description,completion criteria, due date, payment/funding schedule (to include, if cost share isproposed, contractor and Government share amounts). It is noted that, at a minimum,such milestones should relate directly to accomplishment of program technical metrics asdefined in the BAA and/or the proposer’s proposal. Agreement type, fixed price orexpenditure based, will be subject to negotiation by the Agreements Officer; however, itis noted that the Government prefers use of fixed price milestones with apayment/funding schedule to the maximum extent possible. Do not include proprietary 41
    • data. If the proposer requests award of an 845 OTA agreement as a nontraditional defensecontractor, as so defined in the OSD guide entitled “Other Transactions (OT) Guide ForPrototype Projects” dated January 2001 (as amended)(http://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/Docs/otguide.doc), information must be included in thecost proposal to support the claim. Additionally, if the proposer plans requests award ofan 845 OTA agreement, without the required one-third (1/3) cost share, information mustbe included in the cost proposal supporting that there is at least one non-traditionaldefense contractor participating to a significant extent in the proposed prototype project. 42