Notice

Competition Document: Innovative Research Call 2020 for Explosives and Weapons Detection

Updated 22 September 2020

1. Introduction

This Defence and Security Accelerator (DASA) competition is seeking innovative proposals to develop and improve explosives and weapons detection capability.

The Innovative Research Call (IRC) 2020 for Explosives and Weapons Detection is funded and supported by the Home Office, Department for Transport (DfT), Centre for the Protection of National Infrastructure (CPNI), Defence Science and Technology Laboratory (Dstl), the Metropolitan Police Service and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Science and Technology Directorate. This will be the fifth run of the IRC, with successful calls occurring in 2007, 2010, 2013 and 2016.

A total of £2.8 million will be split across two phases, with up to £1 million available in Phase 1 and up to £1.8 million available in Phase 2.

In Phase 1, you will show the proof of concept of your proposed innovation. Projects can be funded up to £70,000 and may last up to 6 months. Applications for Phase 1 projects that require no funding, or minimal funding, to achieve proof of concept will be welcome.

Phase 2 will only be open to applicants that have successfully completed a Phase 1 project. All suppliers participating in Phase 1 will be encouraged to apply for Phase 2. Bids for Phase 2 will be down-selected based upon their Phase 1 deliverables and proposals for Phase 2. In Phase 2, you will develop and evaluate prototypes or demonstrators of your innovation. Phase 2 will have total funding of up to £1.8 million and projects should last up to 2 years.

All funded projects must be completed by September 2023, but may finish before that date.

This competition closes Monday 28 September 2020 at midday BST. Applications submitted after this deadline will not be considered.

2. Competition Scope

2.1 Background

UK Government, our international allies, and security end-users across the private and public sector have a broad range of operational requirements. While there is already a range of excellent equipment and capable solutions commercially available and in service, there remains an enduring requirement to develop and enhance our capabilities in order to stay ahead of the threat and keep pace with the rapid rate of change.

Terrorists and other criminal groups continuously innovate, exploring new methods of attack and ways of operating, leading to a diversification in the nature of the threat. Attacks in recent years have seen a range of methodologies used - ranging from home-made explosives, firearms and bladed weapons – perpetrated by both organised groups and lone actors. As the threat continues to change, exploitation of the latest scientific and technical advances enhances operational capability to respond to the evolving landscape.

The IRC seeks to develop and improve explosives and weapons detection capability across a range of use cases in order to enable earlier detection of terrorist and criminal activity. These span across the system: from preventing the illegal flow of precursor materials and firearms crossing the border; to detecting transport of explosives and weapons by threat actors between locations; and disrupting the use of explosives and weapons to cause harm.

2.2 Scope

The overarching aim of the IRC 2020 is to develop detection technologies and methods that provide good, reliable capability against a significant proportion of current explosives and weapons threats. Where possible, such solutions should have applicability to a range of operational contexts and also have the potential to tackle new threats as they emerge.

The IRC 2020 will be seeking proposals that address the screening of:

• buildings and areas
• goods
• people and / or their possessions
• vehicles

Proposals may focus on developing new detection capabilities to add to end-users’ existing suite of equipment. Projects can either develop original ideas or adapt successful technologies, techniques or processes from other fields. This could include using existing detection capabilities in a wider range of different applications for a broader range of purposes.

Proposals may relate to improving the effectiveness and/or the efficiency of detection. However, we are not looking for minor advancements in current technology, and instead we seek proposals for revolutionary concepts.

Technologies could have a potential dual capability to detect other contraband or threats in addition to the core requirement of explosives and weapons, for example illicit drugs. Where this is the case, proposals should state the potential dual capability, but focus their proposed research and development activity on the core requirement.

Proposals should look to provide tangible technical or operational benefits over the current commercially available state-of-the-art. Examples of benefit may include, but are not limited to:

• improved detection accuracy
• improved range of detectable threats
• reduced detection or screening times, allowing greater throughput
• reduction of cognitive and/or physical burden on the operator

The operational impact of any proposed innovation should be proportionate to the benefits the new capability will potentially bring. All bids must include consideration of the impact of any changes to footprints or logistical burdens (such as systems being portable or handheld), and compliance with all appropriate legal and ethical guidelines. Proposals should consider the size, weight, power and cost implications of their innovation. In addition, consideration should be given to the operational context in which the solution might be deployed (such as end users’ technical ability, staff training requirements, suitability for the environment).

Examples of potential research areas could include, but are not limited to:

• novel sensors or materials for threat detection, including adaptation of existing sensor types or techniques from other disciplines
• novel deployment of sensors or detection systems, e.g. atmospheric monitoring or waste water monitoring for explosive trace detection
• methods to screen multiple items or people at once
• enhancing operator decision making, e.g. automated decision making, tools for use with potential multi-input processes
• visualisation of chemicals to detect trace residues of explosives or illicit drugs on surfaces
• measurement techniques which could allow identification of objects concealed inside other objects
• production of reliable sources for in-field or laboratory assurance of equipment
• studies to inform how screening processes could be enhanced e.g. through simulation and modelling analysis, automation or integration of existing processes
• human and behavioural factors which could be used to improve the overall security screening system

3. Competition Challenges

The competition is split into four challenges:

• buildings and areas
• goods
• people and / or their possessions
• vehicles

Proposals must address at least one of the four challenges, though some solutions may be applicable to more than one challenge (which should be made clear in your proposal).

Across all challenges, proposals are not expected to address all elements described. Solutions which apply to only one element of a specific challenge may still be of significant benefit when used to augment current detection capabilities.

The primary focus of this competition is to detect explosives and weapons. Depending upon the challenge, this could extend to related items or materials such as: explosive precursors, improvised explosive devices, and component parts. A glossary is included in the Annex to define these terms and others. All proposals must address the competition’s primary focus.

If your proposal has the potential to detect additional contraband or threats in addition to the primary focus, please indicate this, as this may be of interest to IRC 2020 stakeholders.

Proposals should demonstrate an understanding of the challenges that follow. For those new to the area, or wishing to further build on their understanding, the following publications are recommended:

Publication title	Link
CONTEST Strategy 2018	https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/counter-terrorism-strategy-contest-2018
NaCTSO	https://www.gov.uk/government/organisations/national-counter-terrorism-security-office
College of Policing – Tackling Knife Crime (including Knife Crime: Evidence Briefing)	https://whatworks.college.police.uk/About/News/Pages/Knife-crime.aspx
Serious and Organised Crime Strategy 2018	https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/serious-and-organised-crime-strategy-2018

3.1 Challenge One – Buildings and areas

This challenge area refers to the detection of explosives, improvised explosive devices (IEDs) and weapons, and their component parts, which have been hidden or left within a building or area. This could include items hidden within a building’s structure (e.g. walls, floor), furniture, or its immediate surroundings (e.g. gardens), or concealed within a large open area where people may gather. In addition, threats hidden on routes to and from venues (such as inside street furniture) are within the scope of this challenge, as are rubble environments such as those caused by building collapse.

For search requirements, the type of location to be searched can have a significant impact on the operational scenario – particularly the level of control those conducting the search have over the location and the time available for the search activity. Factors affecting these could be:

• the scale of the location to be screened
• if any structures are permanent or temporary
• whether the location is generally occupied or typically empty

The requirement for buildings and areas can be broadly split into two forms of search:

• Defensive searches for explosives and weapons in a location which may be a target due to the people that visit, the nature of events that take place there, or the building as an iconic location. These could be routine and the likelihood of a threat being hidden could be low
• Offensive searches in a location after a crime has taken place to collect and find evidence, or following directed intelligence that explosives and weapons may be present. These could be one-off searches with high expectation of finding a threat

As a specific example, conducting a defensive search of a large political conference may involve the screening of multiple sites (such as hotels, conference centre and breakout venues). This could involve an ‘island site’ being created where all non-accredited personnel leave the conference location while the search takes place and the boundaries are secured. Typically, this search scenario is conducted by specially trained police officers or military personnel, and subsequently any individuals, vehicles or goods brought into the site are searched at a checkpoint. For this type of scenario, there may be the requirement to carry out route searches to allow safe passage to and from the venues for VIP delegates. Route searches could take place across a range of terrain types, including urban environments and rural settings.

For some defensive search scenarios, it may not be possible to create an ‘island site’ and limit access to the location to only accredited personnel. Sports events at a stadium or festivals could require searches of both private and public areas and those where constant access is needed. There may be significant time restrictions on completing the search in order to minimise disruption. Depending on the site, searches may be undertaken by private security staff.

In contrast, an offensive search could involve a scenario where intelligence indicates that a weapon is hidden in a house. This type of search can be much more targeted than the previous examples and takes place over a considerably smaller area. Offensive searches are likely to be carried out to a higher resolution as threats may be smaller (or deconstructed) and hidden in complex hides.

Proposed detection methods for this challenge should specifically consider the implications of environments for deployment, including potential exposure to different weather conditions or terrain. In addition, solutions may involve technology that is hand-held while in-use, portable between locations but static while in-use, or could be installed within a venue as part of fixed infrastructure.

3.2 Challenge Two – Goods

This challenge area refers to the detection of explosives, improvised explosive devices, and weapons that are located or concealed within goods. Proposals can consider screening for component parts of improvised explosive devices and firearms, and explosive precursors (see materials listed under the Poisons Act), however this should not be the primary focus of research proposals under this challenge.

The term ‘goods’ can refer to almost anything, but for the purposes of this challenge should be considered as referring to any items or materials being transported between locations. This does not include people and their associated baggage / personal items.

Examples of goods could include:

• electronics / electrical items
• foodstuffs
• raw materials
• manufacturing components
• books / magazines / newspapers
• flowers / horticultural products

Goods screening activities could take place at many different environments, including:

• entrances to controlled zones, such as at ports, or private premises
• parcel distribution hubs
• checkpoints or borders
• within mail rooms
• in temporary locations for specific events

Within these environments, there can often be requirements to screen goods within a bound time in order to avoid adversely impacting on normal operations or creating backlogs. In addition, threats may need to be detected in environments which may be subject to considerable background complexity which screening technologies may need to filter out – for example, additional electrical fields generated by powered conveyor belts.

Goods are often consolidated within larger consignments to reduce overall shipping costs, which means they often require unloading from a delivery vehicle and breaking down into component parts to screen effectively. To minimise delays this needs a large team of people, which is both expensive and inefficient.

Consolidated goods can be a wide variety of sizes, but typical examples include:

• Pallets: 1 x 1 x 2.5 m
• ULD (Unit Load Devices): 5 - 14 cubic m in volume
• ISO Containers: Various sizes, up to 75 cubic m in volume

As the term “goods” can encompass sizes from letters to ISO shipping containers, the suggested area of focus for proposals should be on individual packets and parcels, potentially demonstrating an ability to scale solutions up to larger consignments described above and then those in a delivery vehicle.

Proposals should consider the operational environment in which their potential solutions might be deployed. Given the variety of items that can form goods and that these can be combined into diverse consignments, solutions may have to screen both high-density and low-density items individually or combined into consignments. In addition, particular goods types may pose additional complications or handling considerations, such as multiple examples of different organic materials.

Where proposals are considering solutions for automated environments, they should consider if they can operate at “flow of commerce” speeds. Proposals being considered for insertion into the postal or courier “flow of commerce” should be aware that conveyor belts can operate at speeds around 30 metres per minute. In addition, some postal or parcel operators may include some level of pre-processing of items before screening takes place – for example, in the UK, postal items above 2.25 kg are processed in a different distribution centre.

For this particular challenge, in addition to the benefits outlined in the Scope section, projects could address one or more of the following:

• screening individual letters, packets and parcels without the need for further opening
• screening a whole consignment without removing it from the delivery vehicle
• screening densely loaded vehicles or pallets without breaking the contents down into smaller parts

3.3 Challenge Three – People and/or their possessions

This challenge refers to screening people and/or their possessions to detect explosives, improvised explosive devices, and weapons outside of aviation security applications.

This challenge area consists of three strands:

• screening people – we want to find threats concealed on a person who could be standing, sitting or moving
• screening people’s possessions – we want to find threats concealed in people’s carried possessions (for example: carried bags, rucksacks, pulled luggage) which are likely to be in motion
• screening people with their possessions – the ‘ideal’ capability that we are progressing towards

Screening people and their possessions is typically undertaken at entry points to buildings and areas, and can help reduce the likelihood of threats being brought into the location. Operational screening of people and their possessions generally takes place in one of three scenarios:

• free flowing where there is no interference with the crowd flow and not everyone is screened, for example on the concourse of a train station
• constrained where there is exploitation of existing pinch points and a greater proportion of people are screened, for example visitors directed through a temporary corridor at an entertainment venue or spectators going through turnstiles at a stadium
• controlled where there is control over the throughput and everyone is screened, for example a fast lane screening process at the entrance to an exhibition hall

Current practices generally focus on screening people and their possessions (coats, pocket contents, bags) separately rather than screening both together. This is not ideal as it can be impractical (often requires more space), inefficient and time-consuming. This challenge requires solutions in which everybody is screened for the things that matter most and the impact and frequency of false and nuisance alarms is minimised. Solutions could be permanent or temporary, but must consider wider operational constraints.

Screening people and/or their possessions is often challenging as part-time or casual workforces with minimal training often operate the screening equipment, so ease of use is important. Site operators are expected to deliver cost effective, proportional screening operations, sometimes with high throughputs, whilst maintaining positive visitor experiences. It is important to consider that space may be limited in some settings, such as private venues. People often arrive ‘just in time’ for an event which adds pressure to the security operation to screen everyone effectively and efficiently. Other venues have a steady flow of visitors throughout the day.

For this particular challenge, in addition to the benefits outlined in the Scope section, projects could address one or more of the following:

• screening individuals without the need for removal of outer clothing or personal items (for example, watches, jewellery, wallets and mobile phones)
• minimising the time possessions are required to be separated from individuals to be screened
• screening individuals with their possessions without impeding their flow (for example, screening which does not require individuals to slow down below walking speed)

Proposals addressing screening people or people with their possessions challenges should not incorporate any ionising radiation techniques. Additionally, it is necessary to consider privacy and data protection issues that may arise with use of your innovation/solution.

3.4 Challenge Four – Vehicles

This challenge refers to operational security scenarios in which vehicles require screening for threat materials, such as explosives, improvised explosive devices and weapons. Such scenarios include searches of suspect vehicles, at either fixed or mobile locations, or at checkpoints for vehicles entering protected spaces. The ability to clearly and quickly determine whether a threat item is concealed inside the vehicle (whether inside a storage compartment such as the boot of a car or concealed inside the panels of the vehicle) is critical in all scenarios.

Current practices for screening vehicles for the threats listed above generally require the vehicle to be stationary, with no occupants. For many of the scenarios in which vehicles are screened this is impractical, inefficient and time-consuming. Vehicles should initially be considered to be cars or vans with a view to scaling up to full-size HGV cabs in the longer term.

Solutions could be temporary, portable or fixed installations. In the event that fixed installations are proposed, consideration should be made to how the solution could be integrated with existing urban infrastructure or checkpoints, for example using existing traffic control or calming features to slow vehicles to enable screening. For all proposals, the impact of the proposed solution on the flow of traffic should be considered (and minimised).

For this particular challenge, in addition to the benefits outlined in the Scope section, projects could address one or more of the following:

• screening vehicles for large explosive threats or large / multiple weapons without stopping for long periods of time
• increasing the overall volume of screened vehicles
• screening while occupants remain inside the vehicle
• rapid screening of stationary vehicles, with the long-term aspiration of screening moving vehicles

Proposals designed to detect vehicles used as a weapon are not in the scope of this call.

3.5 Clarification of what we want

Your proposal should include evidence of:

• an improvement in current capability
• theoretical development, methodological advancement or proof of concept research which can demonstrate potential for transition to practical demonstration in a later phase
• an innovative or creative approach
• anticipated end user operation, including interfaces, GUI and how the technology would sit within existing processes
• an estimation of cost, size, through-life support
• demonstration of exploitation potential
• the potential for an end user to work with the developments

3.6 Clarification of what we do not want

For this competition we are not interested in proposals that:

• are identical resubmissions of a previous bid into IRC calls without significant modification
• constitute consultancy or literature reviews which summarise the existing literature or state of the art without any development
• offer no, or only incremental improvements to existing technological solutions (in terms of effectiveness and/or efficiency)
• are primarily focused on scanning or detecting items outside the scope of these challenges
• technologies focused on detection of chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) materials (please note that ‘chemical’ does not include explosives)
• screening and/or detection technologies designed specifically to be used in an aviation context. Suppliers with relevant technologies are advised to engage with the Future of Aviation Security Screening (FASS) programme, details of which can be found here.
• offer extremely niche or unsustainable solutions with no real or long-term application of integration ability to security capabilities

4. Exploitation

It is important that over the lifetime of DASA competitions, ideas are matured and accelerated towards appropriate end users to enhance capability. How long this takes will be dependent on the nature and starting point of the innovation. Early identification and appropriate engagement with potential end users during the competition are essential.

All proposals to DASA should articulate the expected development in Technology Readiness Level (TRL) of the potential solution over the lifetime of the proposal and how this relates to improved operational capability against the current known (or presumed) baseline. Your deliverables should be designed to evidence these aspects with the aim of making it as easy as possible for potential collaborators to identify the innovative elements of your proposal in order to consider routes for exploitation. DASA Innovation Partners are available to support you with the development of your proposal.

You may wish to include some of the following information, where known and dependent on the maturity of your proposed solution, to help the assessors understand your approach to exploitation:

• the intended security users of your final product and whether you have previously engaged with them, their procurement arm or their research and development arm
• awareness of, and alignment to, any existing end user procurement programmes
• the anticipated benefits (for example, in cost, time, improved capability) that your solution will provide to the user
• whether it is likely to be a standalone product or integrated with other technologies or platforms
• expected additional work required beyond the end of the contract to develop an operationally deployable commercial product (for example, ‘scaling up’ for manufacture, cyber security, integration with existing technologies, environmental operating conditions)
• additional future applications and wider markets for exploitation
• wider collaborations and networks you have already developed or any additional relationships you see as a requirement to support exploitation
• how your product could be tested in a representative environment
• any specific legal, ethical, commercial or regulatory considerations for exploitation

DASA will engage with successful suppliers to support the development of the project exploitation plan.

5. How to apply

Potential bidders are able to submit clarification questions until the 31st August 2020. These questions should seek to clarify elements of this competition document and not be about potential proposals. Responses to these questions will be published on the Defence and Security Accelerator website on the 4th September 2020. Questions should be submitted to accelerator@dstl.gov.uk with the title ‘IRC2020 Clarification Question’.

You may wish to submit an innovation outline in advance of a full proposal. Innovation outlines will be sent to your regional DASA Innovation Partner, who will support you through the competition process. Innovation outlines are not mandatory.

Both innovation outlines and full proposals must be submitted via the DASA submission service, for which you will be required to register.

5.1 Full proposal

Full proposals must be submitted by midday (BST), Monday 28 September.

The estimated funding pot of £2.8 million is expected to fund a number of Framework Agreements. Initial Tasks(s) under Phase 1 will be awarded for a maximum duration of 6 months initially via an individual Work Package/Task (as described in the Framework Terms and Conditions). In accordance with DEFCON 630 the Authority shall not be bound to place any follow-on Tasks thereafter.

When submitting a proposal, you must complete all sections of the online form, including an appropriate level of technical information to allow assessment of the bid and a completed finances section. If you do not wish to bid for any follow on work beyond the initial period please add ‘N/A’ to the ‘Potential future tasking’ section.

Please include your Firm Rates (Schedule 10 of ISC Terms and Conditions, under ‘schedules’ in 5.4) for Phase 2 as specified in the IRC Terms (clause 21, sub section Tasking Process for additional Tasks), as an attachment to your proposal.

For the first period of 6 months (or less) of funding, your proposal must be fully costed and a project plan with clear milestones and deliverables must be provided. These deliverables must be well defined and designed to provide evidence of progress against the project plan; they must include a final report. The total value of all work proposed for the initial period of up to 6 months must be included in the ‘Finance and delivery’ section of your bid; the maximum limit of liability for the contract will be based on this value.

Any proposed additional work beyond the initial period of up to 6 months should be outlined within the full proposal under the ‘Innovation details’ - ‘Potential future tasking’ section to include approximate timings, costs and deliverables. Note, costings for additional work should not be inserted into the ‘Finance and delivery’ section but must be covered within the ‘Innovation detail’s section under ‘Potential future tasking’. All deliverables must complete by September 2023.

A resourcing plan must also be provided that identifies, where possible, the nationalities of those proposed research workers that you intend to work on this project. In the event of proposals being recommended for funding, DASA reserves the right to undertake due diligence checks including the clearance of proposed research workers. Please note that this process will take as long as necessary and could take up to 6 weeks in some cases for non-UK nationals.

You must identify any ethical / legal / regulatory factors within your proposal and how the associated risks will be managed, including break points in the project if approvals are not received. Ministry of Defence Research and Ethics Committee (MODREC) approvals can take up to 5 months therefore you should plan your work programme accordingly. Further details are available in the DASA guidance. If you are unsure if your proposal will need to apply for (MODREC) approval, then please contact DASA for further guidance.

In addition, requirements for access to Government Furnished Assets (GFA) should be included in your proposal. It should not be assumed that test data sets from government will be provided as part of this competition so proposals must be able to demonstrate the effectiveness of the technology through your own resources or costed as part of the proposal.

Your proposal must complete all activities and deliverables within the timescales set. Proposals with any deliverables (including final report) outside the agreed timeline will be rejected as non-compliant.

On completion of the initial contract, consideration will be given to the following to decide whether a further package of work will be requested to develop your solution further:

• successful completion of the previous stage of the work including completion of all deliverables
• provision of a detailed project plan, deliverables and financial breakdown to support the next stage of the work
• case for why the project should continue to be funded, including, but not limited to evidence of the following: * where the project has reached against the original milestones * next steps * risks and issues * end user benefits * advancement in security capability * exploitation route and plans

A project stage review meeting between the supplier, the technical partner, IRC Programme and DASA will be used to review this evidence. The IRC team in conjunction with the technical partner and DASA will base the decision on this meeting and other relevant information.

Additional work packages will be funded under individual framework agreements, allowing further tasking requests to be made which will continue development from your initial contracted work.

Full proposals must include costed participation at the following DASA events:

• Phase 1 kick-off / initiation meeting
• Phase 1 project stage review meeting
• Phase 2 kick off / initiation meeting
• Phase 2 project stage review meetings (minimum 2)
• Phase 2 close down meeting
• End of Phase 2 demonstration

Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, some of these events may take place online. Any physical events that take place will be held in the UK.

Failure to provide any of the above will automatically render your proposal non-compliant.

5.2 Public facing information

When submitting your full proposal, you will be required to include a proposal title and a short abstract. If your proposal is funded, the title and abstract you provide will be used by DASA, and other government departments as appropriate, to describe the project and its intended outcomes and benefits. It will be used for inclusion at DASA events and be included in documentation such as brochures for the event. This proposal title will also be published in the DASA transparency data on gov.uk, along with your company name, organisation type e.g. SME and the amount of funding received.

5.3 How your proposal will be assessed

All full proposals will be checked for compliance with the competition document and may be rejected before full assessment if they do not comply. Only those full proposals which demonstrate their compliance against the competition scope and DASA criteria will be taken forward to full assessment.

Mandatory Criteria

The proposal outlines how it meets the scope of the competition.	Within scope (Pass) / Out of scope (Fail)
The proposal fully explains in all sections of the DASA submission service how it meets the DASA criteria	Pass / Fail
The proposal clearly details a financial plan, a project plan and a resourcing plan to complete the work for the initial period of up to 6 months	Pass / Fail
The proposal identifies the need (or not) for MODREC approval	Pass / Fail
The proposal identifies any GFA required	Pass / Fail
The maximum duration (including delivery of a report) does not exceed 6 months	Pass / Fail
The proposal confirms Unqualified Acceptance of the Framework Agreement Terms and Conditions	Pass / Fail
The proposal details Firm Rates (Schedule 10 of ISC Terms and Conditions, under ‘schedules’ in 5.4) for Phase 2 as specified in the ISC Terms (clause 21, sub section Tasking Process for additional Tasks)	Pass/Fail

Proposals will then be assessed against the standard DASA assessment criteria by subject matter experts from Dstl, DfT, HO, DHS, Metropolitan Police and other government departments. You will not have the opportunity to comment on assessors comments.

DASA reserves the right to disclose on a confidential basis any information it receives from you during the procurement process to any third party engaged by DASA for the specific purpose of evaluating or assisting DASA in the evaluation of your proposal. For the specific purposes of considering additional funding for a competition and onward exploitation opportunities, DASA also reserves the right to share information in your proposal in-confidence with any UK Government Department. In providing such information you consent to such disclosure. Appropriate confidentiality agreements will be put in place.

Further guidance on how your proposal is assessed is available on the DASA website.

After assessment, proposals will be discussed internally at a Decision Conference where, based on the assessments, budget and wider strategic considerations, a decision will be made on the proposals that are recommended for funding.

Proposals that are unsuccessful will receive brief feedback after the Decision Conference.

5.4 Things you should know about DASA contracts

Please read the DASA terms and conditions which contain important information for suppliers. For this competition we will be using a bespoke framework contract and schedules (ISC Terms and Schedules). For the avoidance of doubt, this competition will not use the DASA short-form Contract.

Funded projects will be allocated a technical partner as a technical point of contact. In addition, the DASA team will work with you to support delivery and exploitation.

We will use deliverables from DASA contracts in accordance with our rights detailed in the contract terms and conditions.

For this phase/competition, £1 million currently available to fund proposals. There may be occasions where additional funding from other funding lines may subsequently become available to allow us to revisit those proposals deemed suitable for funding, but where limitations on funding at the time prevented DASA from awarding a subsequent contract. In such situations, DASA reserves the right to keep such proposals in reserve. In the event that additional funding subsequently becomes available, DASA may ask whether you would still be prepared to undertake the work outlined in your proposal under the same terms.

6. Dates

Deadline for bidders to submit clarification questions	31 August 2020
Publication of responses to clarification questions	4 September 2020
Competition closes	Midday 28 September 2020
Contracting	December 2020

6.1 Supporting events

A kick-off meeting where you will give a presentation on your project to key stakeholders, detailing your solution and the deliverables you will provide. You will be provided with the template exploitation plan ahead of this date and are expected to attend the kick-off meeting with a provisional draft to support discussion.

In Stage review meetings bidders will discuss the progress of projects against the deliverables, highlighting any risks and issues to delivery.

At end of Phase 2 close down meetings, bidders you will discuss with the funding customers the delivery of your project against the contract. This meeting will consider the next steps on your exploitation plan.

An end of Phase 2 demonstration event will enable the funding customers to review the final output; this may align with the close down meeting or be held as a separate activity to enable wider stakeholders to consider the potential benefit to their operational capability.

7. Help

DASA has a network of regionally based Innovation Partners who are available to provide guidance to suppliers on submitting to a competition. If you would like guidance on process, application, technical, commercial and intellectual property aspects, please contact us via the DASA website. This will be sent to an Innovation Partner who will contact you within ten working days to discuss.

While all reasonable efforts will be made to answer queries, DASA reserves the right to impose management controls if volumes of queries restrict fair access of information to all potential suppliers.

If you are experiencing technical difficulties with the submission service, please contact accelerator@dstl.gov.uk.