Guidance

Novel Disruptive Science Impacting Future Defence and Security: Assessment Criteria

Updated 8 March 2024

Proposals for this competition are assessed against multiple criteria that fall under three categories. Assessors will give each proposal a numerical score (1-10) and supporting comments as justification for the following cateorgies.

1. Desirable

DASA funds innovations that solve Defence and Security challenges. You should look out for things like the proposal’s alignment with a strategic need or challenge and who would benefit from the innovation. Ideas that are useful for both Defence and Security should be acknowledged.

1.1 Defence compatibility

• the proposed idea shows potential impact across a range of relevant future defence scenarios
• the proposal identifies and justifies appropriately area(s) of defence which could be impacted by successful development of the idea

1.2 Disruptive potential

• the technological challenge or future scenario (opportunity or threat) driving the innovation is clear and worthwhile pursuing
• the proposal successfully describes how/ why the impact for Defence and/or Security could be significantly disruptive or game changing

2. Feasible

You are asked to consider whether the proposal is scientifically, technically and practically feasible within reason, how novel the idea is, and how it compares with potential alternatives. Relevant expertise, capability and appropriate resources needs to be present.

2.1 Technical approach

• the proposed idea has a theoretical basis which is supported by reasoned explanation
• the proposed approach to develop the idea is scientifically, technically and practically feasible
• the proposed approach to develop the idea is predominantly through experimentation, modelling or simulation (it is not solely a literature review)

2.2 Innovation and risk

• the proposal successfully explains why the idea is novel compared to existing approaches and gives justification for this
• the proposal highlights scientific and technical risks and uncertainties and where possible provides mitigations. (It is noted that this call expects to fund projects that are high scientific and technical risk – but expects suppliers to explain the level of risk and what they can do in their approach to maximise the potential of a successful outcome)

2.3 Expertise

• the proposal provides evidence of the team’s relevant expertise and experience in relation to the proposed novel research idea
• the proposal includes information on similar research and projects completed

3. Viable

You should assess for evidence that the idea can be delivered within the project scope and timelines.

Look for evidence of a robust project plan which identifies any links or dependencies between work packages and milestones, and which clearly identifies measurable deliverables. We are looking at overall costs and value for money.

3.1 Project delivery

• the proposal has a project plan in sufficient detail which is realistic
• the proposal provides evidence of the resources available to deliver the project including facilities and labour
• the proposal identifies any project risks or dependencies and has identified appropriate mitigations

3.2 Costs and value for money

• the proposal demonstrates that the work undertaken provides good value for money
• the proposal describes any wider benefits of successfully persuing the idea, including wider value to the UK economy

3.3 Plan beyond the project

• the proposal describes how the level of understanding and degree of certainty in the future impact of the idea/ concept will be improved through the work
• the proposal explains what would be necessary to take the idea forward further on completion of the project
• the proposal considers how the outcomes could be integrated into future systems and capabilities