Initial commit

skills/research-grants/references/darpa_guidelines.md

@@ -0,0 +1,636 @@
+# DARPA (Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency) Grant Writing Guidelines
+
+## Agency Overview
+
+**Mission**: Make pivotal investments in breakthrough technologies for national security
+
+**Tagline**: "Creating breakthrough technologies and capabilities for national security"
+
+**Annual Budget**: ~$4 billion
+
+**Website**: https://www.darpa.mil
+
+**Key Characteristics**:
+- High-risk, high-reward research
+- Focused on revolutionary breakthroughs, not incremental advances
+- Technology transition to military and commercial applications
+- Program managers with broad autonomy
+- ~3-5 year programs with defined end goals
+- Strong emphasis on prototypes and demonstrations
+- "DARPA-hard" problems that others won't or can't tackle
+
+**The DARPA Difference**:
+- NOT basic research (that's ONR, AFOSR, ARO)
+- NOT development and procurement (that's service acquisition)
+- Focused on proof-of-concept to prototype stage
+- Tolerates and expects failure in pursuit of breakthroughs
+- Rapid transition to operational use
+
+## DARPA Organization
+
+### Six Technical Offices
+
+#### 1. BTO (Biological Technologies Office)
+**Focus**: Biology as technology, human-machine interfaces, synthetic biology
+
+**Example Programs**:
+- Neural interfaces and brain-computer interfaces
+- Synthetic biology and living foundries
+- Pandemic prevention and response
+- Human performance enhancement
+- Biotechnology for manufacturing
+
+#### 2. DSO (Defense Sciences Office)
+**Focus**: High-risk, high-payoff research in physical and mathematical sciences
+
+**Example Programs**:
+- Novel materials and chemistry
+- Quantum technologies
+- Electromagnetics and photonics
+- Mathematics and algorithms
+- Fundamental limits of physics
+
+#### 3. I2O (Information Innovation Office)
+**Focus**: Information advantage through computing, communications, and cyber
+
+**Example Programs**:
+- Artificial intelligence and machine learning
+- Cybersecurity and cyber resilience
+- Communications and networking
+- Data analytics and processing
+- Human-computer interaction
+
+#### 4. MTO (Microsystems Technology Office)
+**Focus**: Microelectronics, photonics, and heterogeneous microsystems
+
+**Example Programs**:
+- Advanced electronics and integrated circuits
+- Photonics and optical systems
+- Novel computational architectures
+- RF and millimeter-wave systems
+- MEMS and sensors
+
+#### 5. STO (Strategic Technology Office)
+**Focus**: Technologies for space, air, maritime, and ground systems
+
+**Example Programs**:
+- Autonomous systems (air, ground, sea, space)
+- Advanced propulsion and power
+- Space technologies
+- Electronic warfare
+- Long-range precision fires
+
+#### 6. TTO (Tactical Technology Office)
+**Focus**: Near-term technologies for ground, maritime, and expeditionary forces
+
+**Example Programs**:
+- Tactical autonomy
+- Advanced weapons
+- Urban operations
+- Maneuver and logistics
+- Special operations support
+
+## How DARPA Works
+
+### Program Manager-Centric Model
+
+**Program Managers (PMs)**:
+- ~100 PMs across DARPA
+- Hired on 3-5 year rotations from academia, industry, government labs
+- Have significant autonomy to create and run programs
+- Identify "DARPA-hard" problems and solutions
+- Manage portfolios of 10-20 projects
+
+**PM Lifecycle**:
+1. **Develop vision**: Identify transformative opportunity
+2. **Create program**: Design research thrusts and metrics
+3. **Issue BAA**: Broad Agency Announcement for proposals
+4. **Select teams**: Choose performers and structure program
+5. **Manage program**: Track milestones, adjust course, transition technology
+6. **Transition**: Hand off successful technologies to services or industry
+
+**Implication for Proposers**: 
+- PMs have the vision—your job is to execute it
+- Contact PM before proposing (almost always required)
+- Understand PM's technical vision and goals
+- Build relationship with PM (within ethical bounds)
+
+### The "DARPA-Hard" Test
+
+**Three Questions Every DARPA Program Must Answer**:
+
+1. **What are you trying to do?**
+   - Articulate objectives using absolutely no jargon
+   - Clear, specific technical goal
+
+2. **How is it done today, and what are the limits of current practice?**
+   - What's the current state of the art?
+   - Why are current approaches insufficient?
+   - What fundamental barriers exist?
+
+3. **What is new in your approach, and why do you think it will be successful?**
+   - What's the breakthrough insight or capability?
+   - Why hasn't this been done before?
+   - What's changed to make it possible now?
+
+**Additional Considerations**:
+- **Who cares?** (What's the national security impact?)
+- **What if you're right?** (What becomes possible?)
+- **What if you're wrong?** (Is the risk acceptable?)
+- **What if you succeed?** (Is there a transition path?)
+
+**DARPA Seeks**:
+- **High Risk**: 50% chance of failure is acceptable
+- **High Reward**: 10x improvement, not 10% improvement
+- **Measurable**: Clear metrics of success
+- **Transitional**: Path to operational use or commercial adoption
+
+## Types of DARPA Solicitations
+
+### 1. Broad Agency Announcements (BAAs)
+
+**Most Common Mechanism**: Open solicitations for specific program areas
+
+**Characteristics**:
+- Issued by program managers for specific programs
+- Describe technical objectives and research thrusts
+- Multiple submission deadlines or rolling submission
+- Full proposals typically 20-40 pages
+- Often require abstract or white paper first
+
+**Types of BAAs**:
+
+**Program BAAs**: For specific named programs
+- Clear technical objectives and metrics
+- Defined research areas (thrusts)
+- Specified deliverables and milestones
+- Known PM with clear vision
+
+**Office-Wide BAAs**: General solicitations by technical office
+- Broader scope, less prescriptive
+- Looking for transformative ideas
+- More flexibility in approach
+- May have multiple areas of interest
+
+### 2. Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR)
+
+**For Small Businesses**: 
+- **Phase I**: $150K-$250K, 6-9 months (feasibility)
+- **Phase II**: $1M-$2M, 2 years (development)
+- **Phase III**: Non-SBIR funds (commercialization)
+
+### 3. Proposers Days and Special Notices
+
+**Proposers Day**: Pre-solicitation event
+- PM presents program vision and objectives
+- Q&A with potential proposers
+- Networking for team formation
+- Often required or strongly encouraged to attend
+
+**Special Notices**: Requests for Information (RFIs), teaming opportunities
+
+## DARPA Proposal Structure
+
+**Note**: Format varies by BAA. **Always follow the specific BAA instructions precisely.**
+
+### Typical Structure
+
+#### Volume 1: Technical and Management Proposal (20-40 pages)
+
+**Section 1: Executive Summary** (1-2 pages)
+- Overview of proposed research
+- Technical approach and innovation
+- Expected outcomes and deliverables
+- Team qualifications
+- Alignment with BAA objectives
+
+**Section 2: Goals and Impact** (2-3 pages)
+- Statement of the problem
+- Importance and national security relevance
+- Current state of the art and limitations
+- How your work will advance the state of the art
+- Impact if successful (What if true? Who cares?)
+- Alignment with DARPA program goals
+
+**Section 3: Technical Approach and Innovation** (10-20 pages)
+- Detailed technical plan organized by phase or thrust
+- Novel approaches and why they will work
+- Technical risks and mitigation strategies
+- Preliminary results or proof-of-concept data
+- Technical barriers and how to overcome them
+- Innovation and differentiation from existing work
+
+**Organized by Phase** (typical):
+
+**Phase 1 (Feasibility)**: 12-18 months
+- Technical objectives and milestones
+- Approach and methodology
+- Expected outcomes
+- Metrics for success
+- Go/no-go criteria for Phase 2
+
+**Phase 2 (Development)**: 18-24 months
+- Building on Phase 1 results
+- System integration and optimization
+- Testing and validation
+- Prototype development
+- Metrics and evaluation
+
+**Phase 3 (Demonstration)**: 12-18 months (if applicable)
+- Field testing or operational demonstration
+- Transition activities
+- Handoff to transition partner
+
+**Section 4: Capabilities and Resources** (2-3 pages)
+- Team qualifications and expertise
+- Facilities and equipment
+- Relevant prior work and publications
+- Subcontractor and collaborator roles
+- Organizational structure
+
+**Section 5: Statement of Work (SOW)** (3-5 pages)
+- Detailed task breakdown
+- Deliverables for each task
+- Milestones and metrics
+- Timeline (Gantt chart)
+- Dependencies and critical path
+- Government furnished property or information (if applicable)
+
+**Section 6: Schedule and Milestones** (1-2 pages)
+- Integrated master schedule
+- Key decision points
+- Deliverable schedule
+- Go/no-go criteria
+- Reporting and meeting schedule
+
+**Section 7: Technology Transition Plan** (2-3 pages)
+- Potential transition partners (military services, industry)
+- Pathway to operational use or commercialization
+- Market or operational analysis
+- Transition activities during the program
+- IP and licensing strategy (if applicable)
+
+#### Volume 2: Cost Proposal (separate)
+
+**Detailed Budget**:
+- Costs by phase, task, and year
+- Labor (personnel, hours, rates)
+- Materials and supplies
+- Equipment
+- Travel
+- Subcontracts
+- Other direct costs
+- Indirect costs (overhead, G&A)
+- Fee or profit (for industry)
+
+**Cost Narrative**:
+- Justification for each cost element
+- Labor categories and rates
+- Basis of estimate
+- Cost realism analysis
+- Supporting documentation
+
+**Supporting Documentation**:
+- Cost accounting standards
+- Approved indirect rate agreements
+- Subcontractor quotes or cost proposals
+
+#### Additional Volumes (if required)
+
+**Attachments**:
+- Quad charts (1-slide summary)
+- Relevant publications or technical papers
+- Letters of commitment from collaborators
+- Facilities descriptions
+- Equipment lists
+
+## Review Criteria
+
+### DARPA Evaluation Factors (Typical)
+
+**Primary Criteria** (usually equal weight):
+
+1. **Overall Scientific and Technical Merit**
+   - Technical soundness and feasibility
+   - Innovation and novelty
+   - Likelihood of achieving objectives
+   - Technical approach and methodology
+   - Understanding of problem and prior art
+   - Risk and risk mitigation
+
+2. **Potential Contribution and Relevance to DARPA Mission**
+   - Alignment with program objectives
+   - National security impact
+   - Advancement over state of the art
+   - Potential for revolutionary breakthrough
+   - "What if true? Who cares?" test
+
+3. **Cost Realism and Reasonableness**
+   - Budget aligned with technical plan
+   - Costs justified and realistic
+   - Value for investment
+   - Cost versus benefit analysis
+
+4. **Capabilities and Related Experience**
+   - Team qualifications and track record
+   - Facilities and resources adequate
+   - Relevant prior work
+   - Ability to deliver on time and on budget
+   - Management approach
+
+5. **Technology Transition**
+   - Pathway to operational use or market
+   - Transition partnerships
+   - Market analysis (if applicable)
+   - Plans for follow-on development
+   - IP strategy supporting transition
+
+### The "Heilmeier Catechism"
+
+**DARPA uses this set of questions** (created by former DARPA director George Heilmeier):
+
+1. What are you trying to do? Articulate your objectives using absolutely no jargon.
+2. How is it done today, and what are the limits of current practice?
+3. What is new in your approach and why do you think it will be successful?
+4. Who cares? If you succeed, what difference will it make?
+5. What are the risks?
+6. How much will it cost?
+7. How long will it take?
+8. What are the mid-term and final "exams" to check for success?
+
+**Your proposal should clearly answer all eight questions.**
+
+## DARPA Proposing Strategy
+
+### Before Writing
+
+**1. Contact the Program Manager**
+- Email PM to introduce yourself and idea
+- Request call to discuss fit with program
+- Attend Proposers Day if available
+- Ask clarifying questions about BAA
+
+**2. Form a Strong Team**
+- DARPA values multidisciplinary teams
+- Include complementary expertise
+- Mix of academia, industry, government labs
+- Clearly defined roles
+- Prior collaboration history (if possible)
+
+**3. Understand the Vision**
+- What is the PM trying to achieve?
+- What technical barriers need to be overcome?
+- What does success look like?
+- What are the program metrics?
+
+**4. Identify Transition Path**
+- Who will use the technology?
+- What's the path from prototype to product?
+- Who are potential transition partners?
+- What's the market or operational need?
+
+### Writing the Proposal
+
+**Lead with Impact**:
+- Open with the "so what?"
+- National security or economic impact
+- What becomes possible if you succeed?
+
+**Be Concrete and Specific**:
+- Clear technical objectives with metrics
+- Measurable milestones
+- Quantitative targets (10x improvement, not "better")
+- Specific deliverables
+
+**Demonstrate Innovation**:
+- What's the breakthrough?
+- Why hasn't this been done before?
+- What's changed to make it possible now?
+- How is this different from evolutionary approaches?
+
+**Address Risk Head-On**:
+- Identify technical risks explicitly
+- Explain mitigation strategies
+- Show that you've thought through failure modes
+- DARPA expects risk—don't hide it, manage it
+
+**Show You Can Execute**:
+- Detailed project plan with milestones
+- Team with relevant track record
+- Realistic schedule and budget
+- Go/no-go decision points
+- Management approach for complex programs
+
+**Emphasize Transition**:
+- Who will use the results?
+- Path to operationalization or commercialization
+- Engagement with potential users during program
+- IP strategy that enables transition
+
+### Common Mistakes
+
+1. **Incremental Research**: Proposing 10% improvement instead of 10x
+2. **Academic Focus**: Pure research without application focus
+3. **No Transition Plan**: No pathway to use or commercialization
+4. **Ignoring PM Vision**: Not aligned with program objectives
+5. **Vague Metrics**: "Improve" or "enhance" instead of quantitative targets
+6. **Underestimating Risk**: Claiming low risk (DARPA wants high risk, high reward)
+7. **Weak Team**: Insufficient expertise or poorly defined roles
+8. **No Differentiation**: Similar to existing efforts without clear advantage
+9. **Ignoring BAA**: Not following proposal format or requirements
+10. **Late Contact with PM**: Waiting until proposal due date to engage
+
+## DARPA Contracting and Performance
+
+### Award Types
+
+**Procurement Contracts**: Most common for industry
+- Firm Fixed Price (FFP)
+- Cost Plus Fixed Fee (CPFF)
+- Cost Plus Incentive Fee (CPIF)
+
+**Grants and Cooperative Agreements**: For universities and nonprofits
+- Grants: Minimal government involvement
+- Cooperative Agreements: Substantial government involvement
+
+**Other Transaction Agreements (OTAs)**: Flexible arrangements
+- For research not requiring FAR compliance
+- Faster, more flexible terms
+- Common for consortia and partnerships
+
+### Program Execution
+
+**Kickoff Meeting**: Program launch with all performers
+- PM presents program vision and goals
+- Performers present approaches
+- Technical exchange and collaboration
+
+**Quarterly Reviews**: Progress reviews (virtual or in-person)
+- Technical progress against milestones
+- Challenges and solutions
+- Path forward
+- PM feedback and course corrections
+
+**Annual or Phase Reviews**: Major assessment points
+- Comprehensive technical review
+- Go/no-go decisions
+- Budget and schedule adjustments
+
+**Site Visits**: PM and team visit performer sites
+- See technical work firsthand
+- Deep dive on specific areas
+- Team building and collaboration
+
+**Technical Interchange Meetings (TIMs)**: Deep dives on technical topics
+- Cross-performer collaboration
+- Sharing of results and approaches
+- Problem-solving sessions
+
+### Deliverables and Reporting
+
+**Monthly Reports**: Brief progress updates
+- Technical progress
+- Budget status
+- Issues and concerns
+
+**Quarterly Reports**: Detailed technical reporting
+- Accomplishments against milestones
+- Data and results
+- Upcoming activities
+- Publications and IP
+
+**Final Report**: Comprehensive program summary
+- Technical achievements
+- Lessons learned
+- Transition activities
+- Future directions
+
+**Technical Data and Prototypes**: Specified in contract
+- Software and code
+- Hardware prototypes
+- Data sets
+- Documentation
+
+## DARPA Culture and Expectations
+
+### High Risk is Expected
+
+- DARPA programs should have ~50% probability of failure
+- Failure is acceptable if lessons are learned
+- "Fail fast" to redirect resources
+- Transparency about challenges valued
+
+### Rapid Pivots
+
+- PM may redirect program based on results
+- Flexibility to pursue unexpected opportunities
+- Willingness to stop unproductive efforts
+- Adaptability is key
+
+### Transition Focus
+
+- Technology must have a path to use
+- Engagement with transition partners during program
+- Demonstrate prototypes and capabilities
+- Handoff to services or industry
+
+### Collaboration and Teaming
+
+- Performers expected to collaborate
+- Share results and insights (within IP bounds)
+- Attend all program meetings
+- Support overall program goals, not just own project
+
+## Recent DARPA Priorities and Programs
+
+### Key Technology Areas (2024-2025)
+
+**Artificial Intelligence and Autonomy**:
+- Trustworthy AI
+- AI reasoning and understanding
+- Human-AI teaming
+- Autonomous systems across domains
+
+**Quantum Technologies**:
+- Quantum computing and algorithms
+- Quantum sensing and metrology
+- Quantum communications
+- Post-quantum cryptography
+
+**Biotechnology**:
+- Pandemic prevention and response
+- Synthetic biology
+- Human performance
+- Bio-manufacturing
+
+**Microelectronics and Computing**:
+- Advanced chip design and manufacturing
+- Novel computing architectures
+- 3D heterogeneous integration
+- RF and millimeter-wave systems
+
+**Hypersonics and Advanced Materials**:
+- Hypersonic weapons and defense
+- Advanced materials and manufacturing
+- Thermal management
+- Propulsion
+
+**Space Technologies**:
+- Space domain awareness
+- On-orbit servicing and manufacturing
+- Small satellite technologies
+- Space-based intelligence
+
+**Network Technologies**:
+- Secure communications
+- Resilient networks
+- Spectrum dominance
+- Cyber defense
+
+## Tips for Competitive DARPA Proposals
+
+### Do's
+
+✅ **Contact PM early** - Before writing, discuss your idea
+✅ **Attend Proposers Day** - Essential for understanding program
+✅ **Form strong team** - Complementary expertise, clear roles
+✅ **Be bold and ambitious** - 10x goals, not 10% improvements
+✅ **Quantify everything** - Specific metrics and targets
+✅ **Address transition** - Clear path to operational use
+✅ **Identify risks explicitly** - And explain mitigation
+✅ **Show preliminary results** - Proof of concept or feasibility
+✅ **Follow BAA exactly** - Format, page limits, content requirements
+✅ **Emphasize innovation** - What's revolutionary about your approach?
+
+### Don'ts
+
+❌ **Don't propose incremental research** - DARPA wants breakthroughs
+❌ **Don't ignore national security relevance** - "Who cares?" matters
+❌ **Don't be vague** - Specific objectives, metrics, deliverables
+❌ **Don't hide risk** - DARPA expects and values high-risk research
+❌ **Don't forget transition** - Technology must have path to use
+❌ **Don't propose basic research** - That's for ONR, AFOSR, ARO
+❌ **Don't exceed page limits** - Automatic rejection
+❌ **Don't ignore PM feedback** - They're setting the direction
+❌ **Don't propose alone if team needed** - DARPA values strong teams
+❌ **Don't submit without PM contact** - Critical to gauge fit
+
+## Resources
+
+- **DARPA Website**: https://www.darpa.mil
+- **DARPA Opportunities**: https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/opportunities
+- **BAA Listings**: https://beta.sam.gov (search "DARPA")
+- **DARPA Social Media**: Twitter @DARPA (PMs often announce programs)
+- **SBIR/STTR**: https://www.darpa.mil/work-with-us/for-small-businesses
+- **Heilmeier Catechism**: https://www.darpa.mil/about-us/timeline/heilmeier-catechism
+
+### Key Contacts
+
+- **DARPA Contracting**: via BAA points of contact
+- **Program Managers**: Contact info in BAAs and program pages
+- **SBIR/STTR Office**: sbir@darpa.mil
+
+---
+
+**Key Takeaway**: DARPA seeks revolutionary breakthroughs that advance national security, not incremental research. Successful proposals articulate clear, measurable objectives (answering "what if true?"), demonstrate innovative approaches to "DARPA-hard" problems, include strong multidisciplinary teams, proactively address technical risks, and provide realistic paths to transition. Early engagement with the Program Manager is essential—DARPA is a PM-driven agency where understanding the vision is critical to success.
+